Jump to content

JSnipes

Members
  • Posts

    255
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JSnipes

  1. 2 hours ago, ShlyKBMT said:

    At 120 students I would expect an appeal to be approved. The school was actually under the impression they would be in 2A when applying to the UIL. If they're not approved I wouldn't expect them to play in the UIL. No reason to put their kids through that.

    That belief is a bit interesting because they are already assigned to District 24-4A this year for track and field. However, I do hope the appeal is approved. It would be the best decision for the kids involved in the current situation. I also understand that if you move them down to 2A it only takes a few transfers and they are immediately a powerhouse. 

  2. seems like UIL would pull HJ and move over with Liberty, Huffman, Tarkington and Cleveland. Put Ozen in with the Beaumont area group and be good. 

    I could see that happening but I believe it would create two 7 team districts (I think they used to try and keep it even numbers but I don't know if that matters anymore). 

    Liberty, Huffman, Tarkington, Cleveland, Livingston, HJ, Shepherd

    LCM, BC, HF, OF, WOS, Ozen, and Silsbee, but Ozen is staying 5a. 

    So I guess we will now see Liberty, Huffman, Tarkington, Cleveland, Livingston, and Shepherd? 

  3. That's true with every sport. Some districts are just stronger than others. It's part of it.

    Agreed but that is supposed to be the point of Area, to make sure the top athletes are getting there.

     

    Last year Panhandle went 1-2-3 at state in the Boys shot put. That would not have happened had UIL not added the ninth qualifier. One of those three boys would have been sitting at home and they finished 1-2-3. I understand the back in the day argument (when I was in school it was top 2 to regionals), but the point of the new rules is to make sure the best athletes get through. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with the new rule because it doesn't matter, the rule is in place. The best overall athletes will never advance until Area is mandatory. 

  4. I am a local head track coach and I really liked the idea of Area when it first came about. The idea was to make Regionals better because you don't always get the top 3 in each race from each district because some of those athletes will be dropped from individual races and put on relays. You also have some districts that are tremendous in some events and it's very possible that the #4 in that district is good enough to make the Regional finals.

     

    With that said, the idea of Area is good but I agree that it should become mandatory. If our Area meet gets rained out it will be very unfortunate for many athletes. For example, our top 5 shot put throwers trumped our neighboring districts first place throw. You also see the same results in the 300mH. Our top 6 were better than their first place finish. You can look at the results and see this in numerous events, some they win and some we win. Obviously this doesn't mean it will happen again when the districts meet up. You don't know the conditions each district was facing and how hard some athletes had to push to win their event. The purpose of Area was to benefit the athletes and get the best athletes through to Regionals. The only way to make this happen is to make it mandatory.

  5. More 24-4A Results

     

    http://tx.milesplit.com/meets/202989/results/363549

     

    Freshman girls dominated the distance races finishing top 3 in both the 1600m and 3200m.

    Those three girls will be very fun to watch over the next three years. I also had a Sophomore that went 13:05 and 5:53 the first two weeks of the season but was out with mono. There are at least three 8th graders coming up that can run as well. Two from HF and one from OF, I don't know about LCM as they are in a different MS district. The distance races next year should be extremely fast.

×
×
  • Create New...