Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
burnstweeter

Realignment Process Delayed...NC Seeks to Add 5A in 2021

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

https://www.highschoolot.com/nchsaa...s3ORjHIliSoRZ8Cobs4WZuPE2K-GOg9uQYs3RAVe87_NA

The next realignment process has been delayed a year. The new conferences will still go into effect in the 2021-2022 school year, this just eliminates the “lame duck year.” I like this because enrollment fluctuates and a school may be 3A size when the realignment figures come out, however when the new conferences actually start 2 years later, enrollment may have dropped to 2A size and they are stuck in 3A for at least 2 years...usually 4. Case in point...Burns...thankfully we were able to move down this year but I digress. Now this might just be a one off...because they are looking to add 5A. They basically already have...but are just calling it “4AA” for now. They have to change the bylaws. But sounds like it’s gonna happen. Just not sure how the classifications are gonna be divided up, or how the playoffs are going to work yet. Should be interesting. The football coaches and AD’s are just going to have to hit the ground running on the scheduling for 2021 and 2022 because of the process being postponed. That’s the only downside to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is with 1A and 4A having such an enrollment gap between the smallest and largest schools in the classification when the classification is set with a straight 20% or 25% breakdown.  I think we will see offset classification numbers again.  1A and 4AA having a small amount and 2A, 3A, and 4A may be splitting the remainder of the schools evenly.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Mitchell county mountie said:

I wonder if other states have to talk about realignment as much as we do...

 

They do. I follow HSFB all around the country. Some states are just better organized than others. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SCHSL (the Association our neighbors to the south) were sued by a few member schools last year.  It is a big deal in most states with a lot of thoughts and networking as the plans go back and forth.

I applaud the NCHSAA for thinking outside the box and looking at changing things up.  It is needed but the schools have to get on board.  The realignment prior to the one currently in place saw the NCHSAA put several options out  fir discussion including some that were way out of the norm but none got traction.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes their thinking outside the box ends up making them look like they have no idea what they are doing. Case in point is the pod system for the playoffs as well as the 20/30/30/20 playoff system. The spring practice with no contact is another. I will give them credit on the 5 classification system (if it ever happens) which should have been done years ago. You have more confidence in them than I do. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pod system was terrible.  Many states have a true sectional to district style playoff and that is what the pod system basically was.  1A schools fought for it and a lot of schools got onboard due to travel costs at the time but soon were against the “conference tournament.”  In the old days when NC used the district and sectional style only one, sometimes two, teams from a conference qualified so it the teams were not playing the same opponents from the regular season.

I had been a proponent of a realignment with different number of teams in two of the classes but I thought the larger number should be with 1A and 4A.  Allow them to subdivide and due to tightness of enrollment numbers and less teams 2A and 3A would not subdivide.  (I was more for an approximate 32/18/18/32 split). That is the most likely plan with five classes.

The football guy in me wants contact and more out of season practice but I am not sure I support full contact spring practice or how much although some form of contact is needed especially for linemen.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I DON'T like  full contact during Spring Practice.....By that I mean taking another player to the ground.....Just my opinion....

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The football guy in me wants contact and more out of season practice but I am not sure I support full contact spring practice or how much although some form of contact is needed especially for linemen.

I thought that you were one of the guys on NC Preps who use to imply that until NC did like SC, GA, FL, etc. (allowing full contact and a spring game) they would always be behind those states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Glenn said:

The football guy in me wants contact and more out of season practice but I am not sure I support full contact spring practice or how much although some form of contact is needed especially for linemen.

I thought that you were one of the guys on NC Preps who use to imply that until NC did like SC, GA, FL, etc. (allowing full contact and a spring game) they would always be behind those states.

No.  I have never supported a full spring game and have always been on the fence regarding full contact.  I have always felt our offensive lineman are at a greater disadvantage than any other position due to no contact and that has been my complaint.  Do not think you need full contact to improve that.  I have always supported opening up football practices to more than 21 and the ability to do more in the winter and spring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I DON'T like  full contact during Spring Practice.....By that I mean taking another player to the ground.....Just my opinion....

I agree to a certain point. I don't think a spring game is necessary. Full tackling taking a person to the ground is not necessary. I do think it is necessary to allow some forms of contact. For example you cannot have form tackling drills unless you place a hand shield (or other padding) between the tackler and the player being tackled (tacklee?). This is very awkward and unproductive. You cannot work on blocking unless the defensive player is holding a hand shield or a bag.  You cannot teach defensive technique unless the offensive player uses a hand shield or bag. While this is better than not being allowed to do anything at all, it does not allow us to teach proper hand technique or simulate doing it against a person. After all they do not use hand shields or bags in a game. We use bags and shields enough during the season, but it would be more beneficial to me personally to be able to work on technique against a body instead of a bag in these drills. After all the players have on shoulder pads and helmets and are well protected. Even during the season when we have team offensive drills we tell the D that this is an Offensive Drill and the defensive players allow the offensive players to block them with no resistance. In other words give ground.

It is almost like these NCHSAA rule makers do not think we coaches have enough common sense to make sure we do not do things to insure safety. I can see them making a rule of no live full speed contact of any sort, scrimmaging, full contact tackling or full contact drills like an Oklahoma Drill, but to me they are micro managing us too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.  I have never supported a full spring game and have always been on the fence regarding full contact.  I have always felt our offensive lineman are at a greater disadvantage than any other position due to no contact and that has been my complaint.  Do not think you need full contact to improve that.  I have always supported opening up football practices to more than 21 and the ability to do more in the winter and spring.

OK. Another point you and I agree on. I do remember many people on that site who did have that opinion. As I stated in my reply to raider1 in the precious post that I do think we do need to make some changes. In the NCHSAA rule makers defense I think that they punish those of us who do things the right way because of those coaches who do not. I really would like the pad rules to be removed. I can teach head on tackling much easier if these bags were not used. It is easier for a player to get hurt doing an angle tackling drill (we use the Seattle Seahawks method of tackling) using a bag than teaching head up form tackling without a pad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×