How about 1 state champ?

[trojan37]

The topic of playoffs came up on another board that I'm a member of and they asked what everyone's opinion's were of the playoff format- do you like the 3 teams going, did you like it better with two from each district, etc. Since so many teams go now and you have 2 champs in each class I always thought it would be nice to settle it between the DI and DII champs for an outright champ in each class. Does anyone know if the UIL has ever discussed this or do you think this could happen in the future?

[jambo67]

I bet there will be a DIII Championship in a few years.
The more bracketts the more games, the more games the more money. I'd spend the money to see more play-off games and the UIL has some big pockets.

[trojan37]

I agree the more playoff games the more money, and this would be one more playoff game. There could be some awesome matchups if something like this were to happen. I just think it would be cool to see.

[Matthew328]

Two teams was perfect but it won't go back to that....I'd rather have 4 go than 3

[Stownhorse]

Thats getting ridiculous. Then no one would ever know who the best team in the state would be.

[LH Panther Mom]

Originally posted by Stownhorse
Then no one would ever know who the best team in the state would be.
Sure they would. :devil: :devil:

[navscanmaster]

I think they should add the fourth playoff team to 3A like it is in 4A and 5A. That way, division I gets one more round. I also think it would be good for the division I winner to meet the division II winner, but in more or less an exhibition game capacity. The problem we run into is playing high school football into the Christmas break. That is yet another potential for athletes to get injured, especially after the fatigue of 16 games.

[STANG RED]

I agree with the 4 teams per district myself. Sure it would water down some of the first round games, but it would actually do a better job of doing what the UIL set out to do by creating the DI DII system to begin with. Still lots of big schools getting into the DII brackets the way it is now. Adding the second largest in each district to the DI bracket would solve at least some of that.
Having an extra round in DI to match the DII bracket isnt going hurt anything. Most of the really weak teams are gone after the 1st round anyway.

[swstangs001]

Originally posted by STANG RED
I agree with the 4 teams per district myself. Sure it would water down some of the first round games, but it would actually do a better job of doing what the UIL set out to do by creating the DI DII system to begin with. Still lots of big schools getting into the DII brackets the way it is now. Adding the second largest in each district to the DI bracket would solve at least some of that.
Having an extra round in DI to match the DII bracket isnt going hurt anything. Most of the really weak teams are gone after the 1st round anyway.


I don't 4 teams....then we would have to listen to brownwood poster blabbing during the playofss:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[trojandad]

off the subject a little, but when i spent one yr in little rock, ark, the state championship teams in each class played each other after they each won state in their own classes.....first class b champ would play class a champ, then that winner would play class aa champ, and so on.....my junior year we won 4a state champ (you won district then the next game was state championship, so it wasnt too tough, lol), and the team that made it up to play us was the class b team, they spanked everyone with a 6'10" team that went to missouri, kid knocked me three rows up, ANYWAY....

i always wondered if each class champ could play each other, say, after the holidays....i know the negtives, too many games for players, running into basketball, etc, but what a format for all time upsets....shades of "go hickory"....lol

[OldNavy]

I think if they keep 3 teams it should be the 2 larger schools go big school bracket and the smallest school from each district goes small school. It seems funny that the smaller schools with less depth (presumably) have to play more games than the big schools. Also, it seems there are several districts where there are 2 really big schools, 900 plus enrollment, where one goes large and the other small with just a few students difference.

Does anyone know what the thought process was to Div 2 playing more games than Div 1?

[Buckweed]

Why add a 4th team....then we would just have to watch teams like cuero and LH play another preseason game....it's like watching Michigan play Appalachian State.....wait that's a bad example??:thinking:

[Phil C]

We are fast becoming like CA as far as state championships in football are concerned. It is about the money . That is why Division 1 football refuses a real playoff even though the coaches, players and fans want one.

[Phil C]

Originally posted by Phil C
We are fast becoming like CA as far as state championships in football are concerned. It is about the money . That is why Division 1 football refuses a real playoff even though the coaches, players and fans want one.

Heck even Chess has a real playoff system for the world championship now.

[Old Dog]

The UIL is following the lead of the NCAA, make it as confusing as possible. I've ranted several times about how the play-offs have turned into just a "money making scheme for the UIL".

Good W-L records and district championships don't mean squat any more. All these teams that crow about making the playoffs 15 straight times means nil; how many district titles do you have in a row............now that means something!!!!!!!!! It's "little league" all over again....everybody gets a trophy!

AND, don't hand me that crap about building youngsters esteem, when you have to "explain" how your team was in the playoffs with a 5-5 record, nuff said