UIL's looming switch to pre-set sites could mean larger crowds

[IndianFan]

UIL's looming switch to pre-set sites could mean larger crowds for football title games

12:00 AM CST on Tuesday, December 1, 2009

The record attendance for a Texas high school football game has stood for 32 years. That's how huge the crowd of 49,950 was for the Plano vs. Port Neches-Groves game in 1977.

But an even bigger crowd could be coming to a state championship game soon. Maybe even next year, when the University Interscholastic League begins using predetermined sites for all its championship games.

Imagine the Class 4A Division I and II championship games on a Friday and a 5A championship doubleheader the following day at the same site. Could the crowd be bigger than 50,000?

"There is no doubt," Lovejoy coach Jim Bob Puckett said. "If they got the right teams together, you bet."

Those teams could come together next season when the UIL, which has held its 5A football title games at predetermined sites since 2006, expands that to levels 1A through 4A. Currently, championship sites for games below 5A are selected by the coaches involved.

"I always hate to see anything that's taken out of the hands of the coach, but my experience with the UIL is that they've done everything first class," said Prosper coach Kent Scott, whose team won the 3A Division I title last year. "I think there are positives and negatives."

One negative is that predetermined sites can mean extra travel for schools that aren't near the site. Had all of last year's title games been played at the 5A site, Reliant Stadium in Houston, it would have added to travel for teams such as Prosper and Waco La Vega, which played for the 3A Division I title at Texas Stadium. And it would have been a 590-mile, all-day trip to Houston for Canadian, the Panhandle school that won a 2A Division II title in 2007 and the 1A Division I title last year. Canadian played those title games in Wichita Falls and Brownwood, which were a much more reasonable drive.

As for the positives, there is one for the coaches. Puckett, whose team plays Saturday for a spot in the 3A Division I title game, sees that right now as he takes time from this week's preparation to look into possible sites for the championship.

"You never want to look past an opponent, but you have to because you need to look at venues," he said. "That would be one less headache going into the final week."

The biggest positive, however, would be for fans. The decision to predetermine the championship sites does not mean that all the games would be played at only one or two sites, but it would be likely. UIL spokesman Chris Schmidt said that discussion won't begin until after this season ends, but he also said that the UIL is interested in packaging the games for television.

For that, the biggest games need to be at one site. And if the biggest games are at one site, you can expect the biggest crowds of the season.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/columnists/mwixon/stories/DN-hswixoncol_01spo.ART.State.Edition2.4b5c6b1.html

 

[OldEagle]

Is larger crowds the reason a team plays for a championship? I don't see that many positives for having pre-set sites especially if more than one game is held at one site - hotel rooms, restaurants crowds, etc.

 

[NDNTime]

Why commercialize something so pure as high school football?

 

[bandkid]

UIL's looming switch to pre-set sites could mean larger crowds for football title games

12:00 AM CST on Tuesday, December 1, 2009

The record attendance for a Texas high school football game has stood for 32 years. That's how huge the crowd of 49,950 was for the Plano vs. Port Neches-Groves game in 1977.

But an even bigger crowd could be coming to a state championship game soon. Maybe even next year, when the University Interscholastic League begins using predetermined sites for all its championship games.

Imagine the Class 4A Division I and II championship games on a Friday and a 5A championship doubleheader the following day at the same site. Could the crowd be bigger than 50,000?

"There is no doubt," Lovejoy coach Jim Bob Puckett said. "If they got the right teams together, you bet."

Those teams could come together next season when the UIL, which has held its 5A football title games at predetermined sites since 2006, expands that to levels 1A through 4A. Currently, championship sites for games below 5A are selected by the coaches involved.

"I always hate to see anything that's taken out of the hands of the coach, but my experience with the UIL is that they've done everything first class," said Prosper coach Kent Scott, whose team won the 3A Division I title last year. "I think there are positives and negatives."

One negative is that predetermined sites can mean extra travel for schools that aren't near the site. Had all of last year's title games been played at the 5A site, Reliant Stadium in Houston, it would have added to travel for teams such as Prosper and Waco La Vega, which played for the 3A Division I title at Texas Stadium. And it would have been a 590-mile, all-day trip to Houston for Canadian, the Panhandle school that won a 2A Division II title in 2007 and the 1A Division I title last year. Canadian played those title games in Wichita Falls and Brownwood, which were a much more reasonable drive.

As for the positives, there is one for the coaches. Puckett, whose team plays Saturday for a spot in the 3A Division I title game, sees that right now as he takes time from this week's preparation to look into possible sites for the championship.

"You never want to look past an opponent, but you have to because you need to look at venues," he said. "That would be one less headache going into the final week."

The biggest positive, however, would be for fans. The decision to predetermine the championship sites does not mean that all the games would be played at only one or two sites, but it would be likely. UIL spokesman Chris Schmidt said that discussion won't begin until after this season ends, but he also said that the UIL is interested in packaging the games for television.

For that, the biggest games need to be at one site. And if the biggest games are at one site, you can expect the biggest crowds of the season.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/columnists/mwixon/stories/DN-hswixoncol_01spo.ART.State.Edition2.4b5c6b1.html

Somehow, I think we're one of those teams.

 

[PNG NDN Fan]

Well if they are going to go a to a double-header format those attendance records should be kept in a different category.

 

[badndn]

Why do this?
One answer...MONEY. This will allow for Televised championships across the board.

"Imagine the Class 4A Division I and II championship games on a Friday and a 5A championship doubleheader the following day at the same site. Could the crowd be bigger than 50,000?"

Doubt it! Remember who played before PNG in 1999. The Red Sea of Katy and even they only had about 25,000 for that game. So the two best traveling teams in Texas played back to back and you didn't break the record, then I don't see the record ever being broken. One thing to remember is that Most 5A schools don't travel all that well because they are a part of a larger community with multiple schools. Katy and Plano don't travel as well as they did now that they have split those towns into 5 or 6 schools. Your best bet to break that record would be something like PNG or Nederland against Lake Travis in Austin or maybe SA. Because the MC schools would bring 25K-35K and LT being so close to home would get some of the Austin crowd (non LT residents) maybe 20K.

 

[Starfire]

I could understand the pros and cons of set sites for ball games:

Pros:

• You know where you will be playing, so there is no team trying to gain an advantage by doing a coin flip when both teams disagree. George West chose a crappy field in 1996 in order to try and gain an advantage over two-time defending champ Sealy, and still lost, but hurt players in the process.
• Money and television potential

Cons:

• Distance for the teams, as ironically it can put a team at a disadvantage if the area isn't equal distance. The Houston Astros/Chicago Cubs game in 2008 where they went to "Neutral" Milwaukee is a clear example - too close to the Cubs' home and at a field whose team was trying to make playoffs and was in the same division.
• Hotel bookings and the like - I need to find out how far away hotels get sold out when they play in San Marcos for volleyball. Additionally, four hotels usually are booked immediately because the final four teams (mind you, volleyball and based on going to state in 1996) stay in separate hotels.

It's pretty equal really, but I'd say that they need to have a pre-set area (I think it's being tested this year as everyone says "Road to San Antonio" right now around town), if only so they know on the playing field it's equal. The team that's further away can easily spend a night before (or two) before the actual game if distance fatigue is an issue.

 

[NDN06]

I could understand the pros and cons of set sites for ball games:

Pros:

• You know where you will be playing, so there is no team trying to gain an advantage by doing a coin flip when both teams disagree. George West chose a crappy field in 1996 in order to try and gain an advantage over two-time defending champ Sealy, and still lost, but hurt players in the process.
• Money and television potential

Cons:

• Distance for the teams, as ironically it can put a team at a disadvantage if the area isn't equal distance. The Houston Astros/Chicago Cubs game in 2008 where they went to "Neutral" Milwaukee is a clear example - too close to the Cubs' home and at a field whose team was trying to make playoffs and was in the same division.
• Hotel bookings and the like - I need to find out how far away hotels get sold out when they play in San Marcos for volleyball. Additionally, four hotels usually are booked immediately because the final four teams (mind you, volleyball and based on going to state in 1996) stay in separate hotels.

It's pretty equal really, but I'd say that they need to have a pre-set area (I think it's being tested this year as everyone says "Road to San Antonio" right now around town), if only so they know on the playing field it's equal. The team that's further away can easily spend a night before (or two) before the actual game if distance fatigue is an issue.

It's only easy if the district has the extra money to spend on an extra night's stay out of town, and quite honestly I don't think ANYONE has extra money these days.

 

[Starfire]

It's only easy if the district has the extra money to spend on an extra night's stay out of town, and quite honestly I don't think ANYONE has extra money these days.

You're right, but even in Sealy's heyday, when need be, they had to do fund-raisers and the like. Wasn't popular, but the love of the sport outweighed it. Fact, the fans pretty much are the ones now who chip in for the chartered buses for students (most places I know of), and if they can't do that, they help with the hotel.

I may be wrong here, but I think UIL paid for the overnight stay for the state playoffs in volleyball (again - when I went it was Austin, so there was no shortage of hotels to block off rows of rooms). So... maybe they will have to be willing to pay for one night's stay for the teams so all of them can get there they day before so they can rest.

Given too they intentionally made 4 and 5A where four teams could make the playoffs to increase funds in the hopper, changed the medals again at state (probably to reduce costs - I really don't like them now), I don't see why they can't fork over a little bit on that side.

Of course, this is UIL, which has had some weird ideas IMHO to begin with from the get-go.