Consider competitiveness in realignment
The board still needs to consider making some major changes.
Before I get to the issue that's bothered me so far during this process, let me first say that I'm not downplaying the issues that some of the schools have presented in the realignment hearings with the board of trustees. I understand how costly travel has become. Shoot, I get annoyed when I fill up my gas tank. If I had to pay the fuel bills for entire districts that are filling up yellow school buses right now, I'd probably have a heart attack.
That being said, the thing that's curious to me — and it was one of my fears when the realignment process started — is why isn't the competitiveness of individual schools being factored into the realignment process this time around?
I think that the board of trustees sent a loud and clear message in its first realignment draft that it just doesn't seem to care how competitive sports programs are right now while deciding where to place schools for 2009-13. How else can you explain moving Granger, Cyprus and West up from 4A to 5A, and Ogden and Uintah up from 3A to 4A, when they aren't exactly tearing up the competition in their respective classifications?
That's a mistake, in my opinion.
Fortunately, I did get some hope in the final moments of Tuesday's hearings, and shortly after it, that competitiveness will be brought up before realignment is finalized. For schools like Hillcrest, Uintah, Ogden, Granger and Cyprus, their ability to compete in sports from 2009-13 are hinging on the final decisions of the board.
"I hope some things change," said Teresa Theurer, the Utah State Board of Education's representative on the UHSAA's board of trustees. "It seems to me like a lot of people (board members) are pretty satisfied with how things currently stand. I hope that we can look at some individual schools that have concerns that are specific to their school, and would love for us to be able to help them build their sports programs and become more competitive."
Don't mistake the context in how she used the term "help." It isn't the board of trustees' responsibility to make sure that schools and coaches are doing all it takes to make their sports programs competitive. Keeping schools from being in classifications where they have almost no chance of being competitive, in this case, is helping.
Theurer has grown-up children who excelled in sports when they were in high school. She has seen how that success has impacted their lives. For her, giving other kids that chance, and trying to make the playing field as even as possible, is something she hopes her board can work out.
"They all can't have it (the success my kids enjoyed)," she said. "You look at some situations and wonder, is it possible for them to even have that opportunity? That's a sad thing to me. I don't think I can fix that, or that we can fix that on a whole. But can we do something to help?"
Steve Park, the Riverton principal who represents the 5A principals on the board of trustees, seems to have similar concerns. He used the example of one of the 4A schools being moved up to 5A in the previous realignment drafts. He said the school isn't competing in 4A and couldn't understand why it is being moved to 5A.
The school isn't winning in most sports now, so he could see it constantly getting throttled in a larger classification. He understands how consistently being routed in most sports would impact a school.
"It kills the culture in the school, and it kills the pride in a school," Park said.
Plenty of people believe that classifications should be decided on enrollment numbers alone. I disagree. As Theurer said, realignment should be about evening the playing field. The board of trustees, in its responsibility to its member schools, must acknowledge the current competitive state of sports programs when it makes its final decisions on June 10.
To me, that's simple, common sense.
E-mail: aaragon@desnews.com
Recent comments
I am a recent newcomer from another state and have served on activities...
Old Fan | May 11, 2008 at 12:15 a.m.
don't talk about bingham when you know nothing about the program...
to: prk | May 9, 2008 at 7:35 p.m.
In California they nipped this problem in the bottom. It is based...
California | May 9, 2008 at 3:26 p.m.
