Jump to content

Realignment


oldschool2

Recommended Posts

On 10/16/2017 at 4:32 PM, TradenupBH said:

Maybe, depends on what numbers they turn in. I also think bottom number raises to around 1200, which might effect Lumberton and couple of others. Of course this just chopping it up, who knows what the UIL will actually do. I do think there'sgoing to be alot of shaking up and more travel than this part of the state is use to.

The number I was just showed at the Central high school Goals Night was 1184...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jag Insider said:

The number I was just showed at the Central high school Goals Night was 1187...

Are you talking about enrollment numbers for Central?

 

On 10/14/2017 at 2:41 AM, BearEssentials97 said:

They're a bunch of new schools coming in Houston and Dallas, the cutoff number for 5A is going up not down. Cleveland is making the jump. The only way Ozen stays up is if BISD keeps them there. Lumberton will be interesting do they have an alternative school? If so they stay up.

All these schools we used to think of as small that are northeast of Houston (Cleveland Splendora etc) are going to be 6A in a few years because everyone is moving to be near I69 since its so convenient to downtown. Even Livingston will become a big 5A in the next few years.

Beaumont seem like its the only place in Texas not growing. It's so sad.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2017 at 4:34 PM, TradenupBH said:

Which will possibly make them one of the smallest 6a schools next realignment. BISD needs to do some rezoning and have all 3 5a schools.

But the Powers That Be won't,...so don't be surprised if you see 1 6A West Brook and 2 4A's Central and Ozen unless they combine Central and Ozen which would be a 5A school...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, expirate20 said:

So with this year's realignment, Will the football district be the same as all the other sports or is only football going Big school/small school districts?

As with the other classifications, Division I and II will only be done in football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, expirate20 said:

Does anyone else think this will be a scheduling nightmare.  Football has this district and everyone else has another..... I just don't understand why football get two state champions in each classification and every other sport only get one.  Kinda waters down football doesn't it?

NCAA is the same way.  You have teams like McNeese that are in a different football division, yet when basketball and baseball season roll around, they have to compete with the UT's and LSU's.  I'm not saying it's right....I've always thought the colleges should have a different division for the other sports as well just like football, but I guess they haven't figured out how much more money they could make having different divisions.  The biggest puzzle is that those schools (as well as the ones in high school) STILL have the same number of kids to choose from in basketball and baseball as they do in football.  It makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2017 at 11:50 AM, PlayActionPass said:

Hearing Nacogdoches, Livingston, Cleveland, Splendora and Huffman in the same 5A Div II district. 

Montgomery is adding a new high school for the 2018 season.  Lake Creek is expected to open as a 5A Div II, Montgomery a 5A Div I.  Could end up Livingston, Cleveland, Splendora, Lake Creek, Brenham, New Caney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RanchHand said:

NCAA is the same way.  You have teams like McNeese that are in a different football division, yet when basketball and baseball season roll around, they have to compete with the UT's and LSU's.  I'm not saying it's right....I've always thought the colleges should have a different division for the other sports as well just like football, but I guess they haven't figured out how much more money they could make having different divisions.  The biggest puzzle is that those schools (as well as the ones in high school) STILL have the same number of kids to choose from in basketball and baseball as they do in football.  It makes no sense.

Just look at how Silsbee basketball is able to compete, and beat, most schools 2-3x their enrollment.  But they can't do it in football. Why?  There is your answer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, AthleticSupporter - Jock said:

Just look at how Silsbee basketball is able to compete, and beat, most schools 2-3x their enrollment.  But they can't do it in football. Why?  There is your answer. 

Because basketball is more important?  Not sure what you mean by that being an answer.  There are definitely exceptions in cases of a school being more successful in one sport than the other, but it doesn't take away the statement that the schools are playing with the same enrollment in the other sports that they are playing with in football.  The question was why are they separating football and not the other sports?  Maybe the physicality of football compared to the others and the beating that it takes on the body?  Maybe somebody knows the reasons why the NCAA has the division and why the UIL followed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,935
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined



  • Posts

    • Diboll - 1  Central Heights- 0
    • Just to expound a little further, so you are not confused...I, along with so many others, are laughing at your desperation. You are working overtime, nay, double even triple time, trying to convince normal people Trump was bad for the country. His policies provided for peace all over the world, low gas prices, low food prices, energy independence, closed border, low inflation, record low unemployment, and on and on and on. You try to counter this narrative by saying unemployment skyrocketed on his watch. You said this knowing full well the unemployment rate went up due to Covid. Your narrative is just so laughable, to the point of side-splitting hilarity. Who would even attempt this asinine narrative? Now, even if you get past the utter stupidity of that MSNBC talking point, you provide another side-splitting hilarious tidbit of evidence to back your claim of Trump being bad for the country. You actually tried to tie the stock market going down to Trump...after Covid. You, I, and everybody else knows the stock market was flourishing under Trump...until Covid hit. This argument is just as bad as the other one. Again, who would even attempt this narrative? The only thing you could remotely muster that had any sliver of truthfulness, is that spending increased. Sure, Trump rebuilt the military and gave them a deserved raise. But he also had to shut down the government due to Democrats demanding an even more, and very detrimental, increase in spending. And in a true extremely exaggerated fashion, you proclaim that spending "skyrocketed". Again, who would even attempt this narrative? I think I can smell the desperation. Do you have any other whoppers to contribute?
    • He was injured but has returned and he decided not to play baseball this year.
    • There's some truth to that.......some.
    • The AD's job is to win in football. Everything else is window dressing. If the football team is winning the rest can go up in smoke. 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...