Emerson1
04-13-2007, 07:42 PM
UIL plans dramatic shuffle for football
Web Posted: 04/12/2007 11:40 PM CDT
Dan McCarney
Express-News
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA041307.01A.FBH_uil-football.3555d91.html
The classification system that long has arranged Texas high school football programs by enrollment size for the purpose of competitive parity may be on the verge of its most radical alteration ever.
University Interscholastic League athletic director Dr. Charles Breithaupt said his organization's legislative council will be presented in June with a formal proposal that would carve all UIL classifications into two divisions for football competition only.
The proposal, Breithaupt said, would achieve an even higher degree of competitive balance by grouping more school of similar size together.
"I think this plan has a lot of merit," Breithaupt said. "There might be problems we haven't seen or thought of. But it looks pretty solid at this point. It just makes more sense to put teams into the same division at the beginning of the year instead of the end."
Upon approval, the "split-division system" would receive further scrutiny over the summer. With enough support from superintendents and coaches, the proposal's fate would then be decided by an official vote of the UIL Legislative Council in October, with a chance that it could be implemented as soon as the 2008-09 school year.
The UIL, the state's governing body for public school extracurricular activities, began splitting the Class 5A postseason into two divisions in 1991.
Under that plan, which grew to include classes 4A, 3A, 2A and A, of the three teams in each district qualifying for the playoffs, the largest school was placed in one division, while the other two were placed in a second.
The 5A playoff field was expanded last year to include four teams per district, with the largest two schools entering Division I and the smaller two in Division II.
The cause of considerable head-scratching over the years, the format was designed to prevent smaller schools from competing against opponents with significantly larger enrollments.
The plan
The plan aligns each UIL classification into two divisions in football, splitting each class in half, with the largest-enrollment schools going into a Division I and the smaller schools in Division II.
Each division would comprise 16 districts, with the top four teams in each district advancing to the playoffs (under the current system, only Class 5A sends four to the postseason).
An official presentation of the proposal will be made to the UIL Legislative Council in June. If the proposal has enough support, it will continue to be studied over the summer. The council then could vote in October to implement the plan as early as the 2008 football season.
But results have been mixed. Last season, for example, the "small-school" champion, Cedar Hill, actually had a larger enrollment than "big-school" winner Southlake Carroll.
Under the new proposal, each class will be split into two 16-district divisions before the start of the season.
"No matter how you divide the schools, you're always going to have teams in the bottom range who are not going to be happy," Breithaupt said. "But if you look at it globally, we think it's pretty good."
The model is derived from a system applied last year at the six-player level. After initially bombarding the UIL with complaints, the six-player community has embraced the scheme.
"I thought it worked out great, and so does everyone I've talked to," Calvert coach Coylin Grimes said. "Any time you have something new, people are going to reject it. But they told us it was going to be great for the smaller schools, and they were right."
It might take an adjustment period in San Antonio, where longtime rivalries and inter-district pairings could suffer.
According to a hypothetical alignment drawn up by state football pollster Carl Padilla, it's likely that the North East and Northside districts will be splintered.
Northside Superintendent John Folks, a member of the UIL Legislative Council, said he would wait for further discussion before passing judgment.
"I have not heard one thing about this," he said. "I'd like to take a good look at this and see what our coaches say. If it's better for the kids, and the competition is more (evenly) distributed, that would be great."
Smithson Valley coach Larry Hill and Warren coach Bryan Dausin were on hand for the presentation Breithaupt made last month to the Texas High School Coaches Association board of directors. While citing concerns for the possibility of increased travel, particularly in remote parts of the state, both were cautiously optimistic.
"This is new, and they might not have worked out all the kinks yet," Hill said. "But I think they really want to do this. They've obviously spent a lot of time on it."
"I think it has a good chance of happening," Dausin said.
Web Posted: 04/12/2007 11:40 PM CDT
Dan McCarney
Express-News
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA041307.01A.FBH_uil-football.3555d91.html
The classification system that long has arranged Texas high school football programs by enrollment size for the purpose of competitive parity may be on the verge of its most radical alteration ever.
University Interscholastic League athletic director Dr. Charles Breithaupt said his organization's legislative council will be presented in June with a formal proposal that would carve all UIL classifications into two divisions for football competition only.
The proposal, Breithaupt said, would achieve an even higher degree of competitive balance by grouping more school of similar size together.
"I think this plan has a lot of merit," Breithaupt said. "There might be problems we haven't seen or thought of. But it looks pretty solid at this point. It just makes more sense to put teams into the same division at the beginning of the year instead of the end."
Upon approval, the "split-division system" would receive further scrutiny over the summer. With enough support from superintendents and coaches, the proposal's fate would then be decided by an official vote of the UIL Legislative Council in October, with a chance that it could be implemented as soon as the 2008-09 school year.
The UIL, the state's governing body for public school extracurricular activities, began splitting the Class 5A postseason into two divisions in 1991.
Under that plan, which grew to include classes 4A, 3A, 2A and A, of the three teams in each district qualifying for the playoffs, the largest school was placed in one division, while the other two were placed in a second.
The 5A playoff field was expanded last year to include four teams per district, with the largest two schools entering Division I and the smaller two in Division II.
The cause of considerable head-scratching over the years, the format was designed to prevent smaller schools from competing against opponents with significantly larger enrollments.
The plan
The plan aligns each UIL classification into two divisions in football, splitting each class in half, with the largest-enrollment schools going into a Division I and the smaller schools in Division II.
Each division would comprise 16 districts, with the top four teams in each district advancing to the playoffs (under the current system, only Class 5A sends four to the postseason).
An official presentation of the proposal will be made to the UIL Legislative Council in June. If the proposal has enough support, it will continue to be studied over the summer. The council then could vote in October to implement the plan as early as the 2008 football season.
But results have been mixed. Last season, for example, the "small-school" champion, Cedar Hill, actually had a larger enrollment than "big-school" winner Southlake Carroll.
Under the new proposal, each class will be split into two 16-district divisions before the start of the season.
"No matter how you divide the schools, you're always going to have teams in the bottom range who are not going to be happy," Breithaupt said. "But if you look at it globally, we think it's pretty good."
The model is derived from a system applied last year at the six-player level. After initially bombarding the UIL with complaints, the six-player community has embraced the scheme.
"I thought it worked out great, and so does everyone I've talked to," Calvert coach Coylin Grimes said. "Any time you have something new, people are going to reject it. But they told us it was going to be great for the smaller schools, and they were right."
It might take an adjustment period in San Antonio, where longtime rivalries and inter-district pairings could suffer.
According to a hypothetical alignment drawn up by state football pollster Carl Padilla, it's likely that the North East and Northside districts will be splintered.
Northside Superintendent John Folks, a member of the UIL Legislative Council, said he would wait for further discussion before passing judgment.
"I have not heard one thing about this," he said. "I'd like to take a good look at this and see what our coaches say. If it's better for the kids, and the competition is more (evenly) distributed, that would be great."
Smithson Valley coach Larry Hill and Warren coach Bryan Dausin were on hand for the presentation Breithaupt made last month to the Texas High School Coaches Association board of directors. While citing concerns for the possibility of increased travel, particularly in remote parts of the state, both were cautiously optimistic.
"This is new, and they might not have worked out all the kinks yet," Hill said. "But I think they really want to do this. They've obviously spent a lot of time on it."
"I think it has a good chance of happening," Dausin said.