Will is a lifelong resident of the Sac-Joaquin Section. He graduated from Hughson High School in 1990, where he played on the school's inaugural soccer team as well as running for the cross country and track and field teams. His athletic claim to fame with the Huskies was scoring a goal during the Loma Prieta Earthquake; his teammates still say the quake and its distraction is the only reason he scored. He moved on to the Modesto Bee newspaper, where he covered high school sports from 1992-2009. During his time at The Bee, Will won state and national awards for his coverage, including multiple citations by California Newspaper Publishers Association and Associated Press Sports Editors as well as the prestigious James Madison Freedom of Information Act Award. He joined the SJS in 2009 as its first Director of Communications and was promoted to Assistant Commissioner in 2017. He serves on the CIF State Editorial Committee and it is his pleasure to serve for our member schools. Two of the sports that he is responsible for are cross-country and track.
1.
1. What were the major reasons for such a drastic
realignment proposal?
Over
the last eight years – two previous realignments – the vast majority of our
schools have brought up that they would like to see football-only leagues.
Football is generally the sport that drives the realignment bus, and sometimes
schools were placed in leagues because of a strong football program and all of
their other sports struggled. Conversely, you don’t want to put a school in the
opposite situation, either, where the football team is winning every game via
running clock but its other sports are in a competitive situation. By expanding
the number of schools within a league and splitting into two tiers, it
hopefully puts both sides into a more competitive situation.
2. 2. Some leagues have been in existence and
seemingly thriving for many, many, years such as the TVL. Was any consideration
given to keeping those leagues together? And what was the rationale for
breaking it up?
Not
going to lie, it’s personally upsetting to me that some of the leagues that
were eliminated were some with some of the longest and proudest histories in
the Sac-Joaquin Section. I grew up competing in the TVL and I’ve always enjoyed
watching games of any sport between teams in the TVL. The decision was made in
our office to use a more numbers-based system to determine where schools go,
and that, in combinations with the expansion of the remaining leagues, meant some
leagues were eliminated and some long-time league rivalries were eliminated.
Had we gone with the traditional league format, there were still some probably
changes to be made; certainly Orestimba has struggled there, but there could
have been a possibility that one of the larger TVL schools such as Ripon could
have been moved up. The specific structure that was chosen certainly works a
little better in the north than the south in the sense that there are a lot
more schools in the north to spread the leagues out a little more. In the
south, some of the more competitive schools, regardless of enrollment, are in
the TVL. Once the leagues expanded, the smaller schools in the south that are
highly competitive – the TVL – were going to be placed with schools that are
larger.
Plus,
realignment has always been a bit of a different animal in the two regions. The
South has fewer schools and fewer leagues, so the adjustments in the south
(Lodi-Merced) are usually more fine-tuning adjustments. In the north, much
larger adjustments are made and it’s somewhat rare for a school to be in the
same league for a decade. There’s always a lot more movement in the north than
the south.
As this
being said, the leagues can name themselves whatever they wish. We’ve already
heard that most of the TCAL wants to be named the SJAA and it wouldn’t surprise
me if there were a couple changes like that.
3.
3. I believe that on the video it was stated that
the “All Sport %” numbers was the primary figure used when grouping teams into leagues
and then separating the league into two different tiers (Capital-higher and
Valley-lower)…is my understanding of this concept correct?
This is
correct. In football-only, the Capital tier is stronger than the Valley tier,
while in some leagues, the Capital and Valley were more split by location.
Travel plays a larger role in the all-sports side vs. the football-only side,
because there are quite a few more contests.
4a. I believe
the video said after a year if league members agreed there could be a shuffle
between Capital and Valley tiers (ie if Buhach dominated the Valley and Ripon
Christian struggled in the Capital they could swap tiers)…am I understanding
that correctly?
This is
correct. Schools can apply to make changes between tiers at the two-year point.
4b. I have heard
coaches call this two-tier system the “conference model.” They say the the CCS
uses this model, but they (the CCS) shuffle tiers by sport every year (or so I
am told). Would any shuffling in the SJS be for all non-football sports together
or each sport individually? Why?
Fair
statement. The SJS proposed a conference model last year that included
conferences of 24-40 schools and they determine how tier leagues within would
be separated. This was voted down. These are larger leagues with two tiers
within said leagues, but I totally get the sentiment. We’re keeping all
non-football sports together, with a couple of exceptions, because our schools
did not want to be in different leagues for every sport. They were willing to
do it for football because that particular sport brings some unique challenges,
and being in the wrong league for football can be dangerous for a team. But there
were too many moving parts to separate for every sport. The exceptions I
mentioned earlier are for sports such as water polo and tennis. Only some of
our schools play water polo, so we’ll have to put those leagues together
separately (as we do now). And some of our schools play girls tennis in the
fall and boys in the spring, while our smaller schools play coed tennis in the
spring. We’ll have to make sure the tennis leagues have the same format.
5a. There was
a new qualification model for track that began last year in the SJS. Leagues
are assigned a division that in the past was loosely based on enrollment. And
then athletes qualify from the league championship meets to the divisional
meet…Do you see this process continuing?
I do. In
general, people seemed to like the new postseason setup. Was it perfect? No.
But we’ll improve on what was a pretty fun (and long) divisional championship
meet at Hughes Stadium. We will assign divisions to each tier and the
qualification format will be similar. We don’t know what those divisions are
yet, because this realignment proposal isn’t final. Schools are currently
making proposals for changes and we have public meetings to address these
proposals in December. Once realignment for 2028-32 is finalized, we start
working on things like track divisions.
5b. If this
process continues, what division do you see a league tier like VOL Valley
comprised of (Downey D1, Enochs D1, Patterson D2, Escalon D4, Hughson D4, Ripon
D4, and Sonora D4) fitting into?
It really
depends on the other tiers and how they look. These will loosely be based on
enrollment, so my first thought would be D3. But schools that are currently D3
might be in D2 or D4, so assigning a division now is tricky because it really
depends on who else is in that division.
6. I have
some very specific questions/suggested changes in the existing plan—please rationalize
why the suggested plan is better than my changes…
a. Central
Catholic (63.4) swapped with Mountain House (61.3). They have comparable All-Sport
% and it would be a better geographic fit for both teams. The biggest complaint
I have heard from VOL Capital teams is transportation time to MH. If football
is the over-riding issue, then could something be done like with Modesto
Christian where CC is in TCAL and MH in the VOL for only football ?
We’re
trying to go away from all one-offs as much as we can. It would take a very
special case for a school’s programs to be in different leagues. Modesto
Christian’s boys basketball program is one of the strongest boys basketball
programs in all of California. And its other sports compete in the Southern
League. That’s a huge difference. It isn’t the same with Central Catholic/Mountain
House. But if there were? Yeah, that would be something to consider.
b. Ripon
Christian (61.7) swapped with Patterson (64.7). I have heard almost every CCC
coach I have spoken to say “poor RC.” The swap would put Patterson back with
CCC teams that it was with prior to the last realignment and RC back with 4 of
its current TVL teams (keeping a core of the TVL together).
Fair
statement. I don’t love that placement, either. The travel alone is a bear.
Some justification would be that Patterson compiled that score while playing in
the D3 VOL while RC is competing in the D5 TVL. But both of those leagues are
really great leagues. I remember way back when I was on the other side covering
realignment, and a Section official told me that “realignment is a giant puzzle
and sometimes, all the pieces don’t exactly fit.” I would not be surprised to
see some proposals involving Ripon Christian in this particular realignment.
c. Delhi
(131.4) and Denair (120.5) swapped in the MLL with BVC (93.3) and Riverbank
(112.4). This would take the two weakest teams in the MLL Capital and exchange
them with two stronger teams in the MLL Valley. It also keeps more of the
current MLL together and more of the current SAL together. To an outsider like
me it looks like these teams were mixed just for the sake of having them mixed
and with no consideration of the All-Sport %.
Another
fair statement. The thinking there was Denair and Delhi were the most
highly-competitive schools in the Southern League while Riverbank and Big
Valley were 5th and 6th in the MLL. But yeah, personally,
I would have flipped those schools. I wouldn’t be surprised that a proposal
comes for that.
d. Hughson
(79.1) compared to Hilmar (77.4)…it appears to me that Hughson was put into a tougher
league (with bigger enrollment schools anyway) and Hilmar was put into a league
of smaller schools…but at face value Hilmar has a slightly better all-sport %.
Is this a case of football being the major factor?
That
was the gap. As it turned out, one school was going to the VOL while the other
was going to be in the MLL. You look at everything there, and Hughson had a
much stronger football score (26.7-47.0). What’s the better position there?
Hilmar is currently in a league where it’s potentially going to winning a lot
of league titles, but not as prepared for the postseason as a school facing
tough challenges throughout the second half of the season. Meanwhile, Hughson
is in an all-sports tier with three current TVL rivals as well as Patterson –
who used to be in the TVL back in the day – and two Modesto schools who don’t
appear to be poised to run away with that tier.
I want to
finish by saying I appreciate that none of this proposal was done without a lot
of consideration. It is a seismic shift from the way things have been done forever.
Although I am not a big change kind of guy, I realize that much of what I see
could really work. And the only real change in much of it is the name of the league
or tier. CCC Valley is still mostly the WAC, CCC Capital is still mostly the
CCC, (with my switches) MLL Capital would be the MLL and MLL Valley would be
the SAL. VOL is more of an issue…if RC was swapped with Patterson then VOL
Valley would mostly be TVL…
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
