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…
No comments:
Post a Comment