VonG Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 49 minutes ago, MattStepp said: Google maps doesn't though That's where I got my information from. It's definitely not the same as where JT is placed now for football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoboFan07 Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 Makes the most sense to have Longview/JT go with Lancaster, Red Oak, Highland Park and West Mesquite tbh. If they want to throw Midlothian in with us, so be it. Just don’t want HP being the one that decides things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTFAN99 Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 I think some of the problems can be solved if they stop letting schools opt up...for reasons other than extreme travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattStepp Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 9 hours ago, VonG said: That's where I got my information from. It's definitely not the same as where JT is placed now for football. My bad, for John Tyler yes its more noticeable...for Longview the difference is is like 20-30 min on most trips..for JT its more like 45 min to an hour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattStepp Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 9 hours ago, ANTI said: Reason why I was always against pre-split in top two classes. Peeps wanting 'fairness' but never stopped to think about the travel. Longview to Houston for a district game is pretty damn insane. Dallas is nothing but Houston? Look man I have a B.S. in Geography, I can easily come help them figure this stuff out without making it rocket science lol Travel in football is relative, schools are willing to sacrifice travel for more equitable competition because its football only and its every other year..in the grand scheme of things were talking 2 or 3 trips not Tuesday night volleyball or anything.....also remember we aren't taking about Longview going into Houston..we are talking about a straight shot down 59 to New Caney or a a trip on Grand Parkway over to Magnolia..not downtown Houston traffic... This could all be a waste of time and Longview and JT as I predicted goes into a DFW district...but over the past week I've definitely heard more chatter from coaches about it and its perked my ears up... Just remember in UIL realignment someone ALWAYS gets the short end of the stick....its impossible to make everyone happy and someone is always going to be ####... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTI Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 11 hours ago, LoboFan07 said: Just don’t want HP being the one that decides things. Especially since they should probably be playing a class up. Keeping it along I-20 would work wonders. Some variation of LV, JT, WM, Lancaster, Red Oak, Midlothian and Mansfield ISD. Actually hoping for this scenario. But heck if not... they can keep the district the same...and just replace Texas High and Poteet with LV and Lancaster. Throw in Red Oak if they wanna make it 8 teams (because I really don't see Lancaster and Red Oak in two seperate districts). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattStepp Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champ1000 Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 Longview will be successful no matter what District they're in. I kinda am rooting for the outer Houston District with namely JT and Lufkin pairing with them. Lobos don't ususally go south and would make for a better District against teams that they normally do not play .Then again I would love too see Longview whip Highland Park so I go for the District that best prepares for the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagleborn Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 On 1/4/2020 at 7:30 PM, MattStepp said: 1968-1969 realignment The ol years of Tatums uniforms being orange. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champ1000 Posted January 19, 2020 Share Posted January 19, 2020 9 hours ago, Eagleborn said: The ol years of Tatums uniforms being orange. Lol Was that your original color? Like Laneville or EF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alyssaB Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 On 1/18/2020 at 5:27 PM, MattStepp said: In this '74-'75 I can't find Denison and I thought it was in 13-4A with Plano, Sherman, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattStepp Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 1 hour ago, alyssaB said: In this '74-'75 I can't find Denison and I thought it was in 13-4A with Plano, Sherman, etc. Just a typo..its fixed now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, MattStepp said: Just a typo..its fixed now Thank you for posting all of these..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattStepp Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KildogDad Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 On 1/14/2020 at 7:14 PM, alyssaB said: 9-0-1 teams had missed playoffs in the past. One example: Plano tied #1 Sherman in '77, 14-14. Sherman 9-0-1 stayed home and Plano won state. My brother played on that Sherman team. The official score showed Sherman and Plano were tied on penetrations, but the official scorer missed one Sherman possession where they got inside Plano's 20 yard line then lost yardage to outside the 20 the very next play. Plano won on the next tiebreaker which was either first downs or total yardage. That Sherman team was stout, too. Off the top of my head, four of the seniors went to play at Houston, Arkansas, OU, and UCLA. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alyssaB Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 (edited) 13 hours ago, KildogDad said: My brother played on that Sherman team. The official score showed Sherman and Plano were tied on penetrations, but the official scorer missed one Sherman possession where they got inside Plano's 20 yard line then lost yardage to outside the 20 the very next play. Plano won on the next tiebreaker which was either first downs or total yardage. That Sherman team was stout, too. Off the top of my head, four of the seniors went to play at Houston, Arkansas, OU, and UCLA. Hi KildogDad! Yeah, those were fun times. I earlier told a bit about Plano beating Temple at Texas Stadium in 1980 on the "Who Shot J.R.?" night. It's interesting to know that story you told here. It came down to First Downs. Plano was known for not really having any great single players like you mentioning 4 Cats going to big programs to play. Plano had a slow start to the season losing game one in the new Clark stadium to South Garland 25-13. And Sherman had a fast start to the year. They played each other in game 5 and the 3rd district game. From Plano I have: "Sherman came to Plano having averaged 40 points and 400 yards a game. During the Plano vs. Sherman game, neither team moved well and had to rely on the other's mistakes. Sherman finally scored in the fourth quarter to break the 7-7 deadlock. With less than four minutes left, the Wildcats drove 60 yards to make it 14-13. A coaches' conference was called as the coaches and refs discussed the penetrations. An apparent tie in penetrations caused Plano to kick for a tie game. Plano was declared the leader in first downs and would represent district 13-AAAAin the playoffs." From Sherman I have: "Missing Penetration Knocks Out Bearcats 4A Championship" "The Cats received their only blemish of the season when Plano came from behind to knot the score at 14 all. It was a windy night and the Cats were severely hampered trying to pass. Sherman was forced to run and tough Plano defense met the challenge. This tie kept the Cats out of the playoffs because Plano had more downs." I used to know the downs right off the top of my head but I don't think so anymore. Edited January 21, 2020 by alyssaB spelling 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattStepp Posted January 21, 2020 Share Posted January 21, 2020 So glad we dont decide games like that any longer....my sophomore year of HS was the last year games were decided like that...1995 and we tied in the area playoffs and Seagoville advanced on first downs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattStepp Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoe09 Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 Below are all the teams from their respective districts that will be returning to 3A DI in 2020. The second post includes all the numbers from teams that will be moving in. I will be releasing my preseason top 20 rankings just after realignment on the 3rd of February. 1-3A Denver City (10-2/3-0) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 55-14 to Brock) # of seniors lost: 16 # of all-district players lost: 2 Defensive MVPs; Utility MVP; 4 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 6 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: District MVP; Offensive MVP; 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 3 1st team defense; 5 2nd team defense Brownfield (4-7/2-1) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 41-12 to Slaton) # of seniors lost: 15 # of all-district players lost: Utility MVP: 2 1st team offense; 5 2nd team offense; 3 1st team defense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 4 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 5 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense Kermit (2-7/1-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 46-23 to Shallowater) # of seniors lost: 10 # of all-district players lost: 4 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 1st team defense # of all-district players returning: Newcomer of the Year; 2 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense 2-3A Bushland (12-1/5-0) Playoff Finish: Regional Semifinalist (L 20-17 to Brock) # of seniors lost: 11 # of all-district players lost: District MVP; Offensive MVP; Defensive MVP; 5 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 6 1st team defense; # of all-district players returning: 3 2nd team offense; 1 1st team defense; 3 2nd team defense Shallowater (7-5/4-1) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 35-20 to Wall) # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 4 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 4 2nd team offense River Road (4-7/2-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 55-22 to Denver City) # of seniors lost: 16 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 1st team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense Slaton (6-6/2-3) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 51-0 to Pilot Point) # of seniors lost: 5 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 3 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense Littlefield (4-6/2-3) Playoff Finish: None # of all-district players lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense Muleshoe (0-10/0-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 9 # of all-district players lost: 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense 3-3A Wall (12-1/5-0) Playoff Finish: Regional Semifinalist (L 26-7 to Pilot Point) # of seniors lost: 17 # of all-district players lost: Defensive MVP; 4 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 1st team defense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning; UTIL MVP; 2 1st team offense; 3 2nd team offense; 3 1st team defense; 3 2nd team defense Clyde (7-4/3-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 24-0 to Brock) # of seniors lost: 13 # of all-district players lost: Special Team MVP; 2 1st team offense; 6 2nd team offense; 6 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 2nd team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense Jim Ned (7-4/2-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 27-13 to Pilot Point) # of seniors lost: 23 # of all-district players lost: UTIL MVP; 3 1st team offense; 4 2nd team offense; 3 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense Breckenridge (1-9/1-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 3 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Defensive Newcomer; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Early (3-7/0-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 14 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense 4-3A Pilot Point (12-2/6-0) Playoff Finish: State Quarterfinalist (L 31-21 to Brock) # of seniors lost: 19 # of all-district players lost: District MVP; Offensive MVP; 4 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 3 2nd team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense Brock (12-3/5-1) Playoff Finish: State Semifinalist (L 36-35 to Pottsboro) # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district player lost: 2 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 1st team defense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Co-Defensive MVP; Newcomer of the Year; 2 1st team offense; 4 2nd team offense; 4 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense Whitesboro (7-5/4-2) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 34-10 to Bushland) # of seniors lost: 13 # of all-district players lost: UTIL MVP; 2 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 4 1st team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense Boyd (6-5/3-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District (L 32-7 to Wall) # of seniors lost: 9 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Co-Defensive MVP; Lineman MVP; 2 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 1st team defense; 3 2nd team defense Paradise (5-5/2-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 9 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 2 2n team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 3 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 1st team defense; 4 2nd team defense Ponder (3-7/1-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 14 # of all-district players lost: 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 3 2nd team offense Bowie (0-10/0-6) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 5 # of all-district players lost: 1 2nd team offense; # of all-district players returning: 2 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense 5-3A Pottsboro (15-1/6-0) Playoff Finish: State Finalist (L 42-35 to Grandview) # of seniors lost: 19 # of all-district players lost: MVP; Defensive MVP; 3 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Offensive MVP; Offensive Lineman MVP; Defensive Lineman MVP; 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense Rains (6-5/4-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 42-19 to Madison) # of seniors lost: 10 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 5 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense Commerce (4-7/3-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 49-3 to Malakoff) # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: All Purpose MVP; 2 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Howe (3-7/2-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 15 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team defense; 4 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: All Purpose MVP: Newcomer; 1 1st team defense Bonham (1-9/0-6) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 13 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense 6-3A Malakoff (11-2/5-0) Playoff Finish: Regional Semifinalist (L 38-31 to Pottsboro) # of seniors lost: 14 # of all-district players lost: District MVP; Defensive MVP; Offensive Lineman MVP; 3 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense Madison (9-3/4-1) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 28-20 to Winnsboro) # seniors lost: 13 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 5 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Offensive MVP; Special Teams MVP; Offensive Lineman MVP; Defensive Lineman MVP; 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Life Oak Cliff (8-3/3-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 69-27 to Van Alstyne) # of seniors lost: 9 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Newcomer; 2 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Kemp (3-8/2-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 63-0 to Pottsboro) # of seniors lost: 10 # of all-district players lost: Special Teams MVP; 2 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Eustace (2-8/1-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: None # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Dallas A+ (1-9/0-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 9 # of all-district players lost: None # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense 7-3A Jefferson (9-3/4-2) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 53-41 to Malakoff) # of seniors lost: 19 # of all-district players lost: Co-District MVP; Offensive MVP; UTIL MVP; Special Teams MVP; 1 1st team offense; 4 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Mt. Vernon (8-3/4-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 20-14 to Sabine) # of seniors lost: 14 # of all-district players lost: Defensive MVP; UTIL MVP; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Special Teams MVP; 3 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense Atlanta (5-5/3-3) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 16 # of all-district players lost: Defensive MVP; Offensive Lineman MVP; 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: UTIL MVP; Special Teams MVP; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense New Boston (1-9/1-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 11 # of all-district players lost: UTIL MVP; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Special Teams MVP; 2 1st team offense; 2 2nd team defense 8-3A Gladewater (10-4/5-1) Playoff Finish: State Quarterfinalist (L 35-34 to Pottsboro) # of seniors lost: 10 # of all-district players lost: Defensive MVP; UTIL MVP; Special Teams MVP; 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Offensive Lineman MVP; 5 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Sabine (10-2/5-1) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 47-35 to Pottsboro) # of seniors lost: 14 # of all-district players lost: MVP; Defensive Lineman MVP; 2 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: UTIL MVP; Special Teams MVP; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Winnsboro (4-3/9-5) Playoff Finish: Regional Semifinalist (L 27-7 to Gladewater) # of seniors lost: 7 # of all-district players lost: UTIL MVP; 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Special Teams MVP; 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team defense Mineola (5-5/3-3) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 10 # of all-district players lost: UTIL MVP; Special Teams MVP; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Offensive Newcomer; 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Tatum (3-7/2-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 3 # of all-district players lost: UTIL MVP; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: Special Teams MVP; 1 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense White Oak (0-10/0-6) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: UTIL MVP; Special Teams MVP; 1 2nd team defense 9-3A Whitney (11-2/6-0) Playoff Finish: Regional Semifinalist (L 9-7 to Troy) # of seniors lost: 15 # of all-district players lost: MVP; UTIL MVP; Defensive Lineman MVP; 4 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Offensive Newcomer; 3 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense Grandview (15-1/5-1) Playoff Finish: STATE CHAMPIONS # of seniors lost: 13 # of all-district players lost: Defensive MVP; Special Teams MVP; 7 1st team all-district; 1 2nd team all-district # of all-district players returning: Offensive MVP: Offensive Lineman MVP; 2 1st team all-district; 4 2nd team all-district West (4-7/4-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District (L 56-7 to Cameron Yoe) # of seniors lost: 6 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team defense # of all-district players returning: Defensive Newcomer; 3 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Teague (4-7/3-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District (L 44-17 to Troy) # of seniors lost: 3 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense # of all-district players returning: Defensive Newcomer; 2 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense McGregor (4-6/2-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 9 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense Maypearl (3-7/1-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Kicking MVP; 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense Groesbeck (2-8/0-6) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 3 # of all-district players lost: 1 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: 1 2nd team offense 10-3A Troy (12-2/6-0) Playoff Finish: State Quarterfinalist (L 34-13 to Grandview) # of seniors lost: 21 # of all-district players lost: 6 1st team offense; 6 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: MVP; Defensive Newcomer; Offensive Newcomer; 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 6 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense Cameron Yoe (11-2/5-1) Playoff Finish: Regional Semifinalist (L 45-14 to Grandview) # of seniors lost: 23 # of all-district players lost: Defensive MVP; 5 1st team offense; 5 1st team defense; 5 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Rockdale (8-3/4-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 42-7 to Grandview) # of seniors lost: 18 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Offensive MVP; 4 1st team offense; 5 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Lago Vista (6-5/3-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District (L 21-14 to Whitney) # of seniors lost: 21 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 4 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Little River Academy (2-9/1-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 14 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense 11-3A Diboll (11-1/6-0) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 21-6 to Cameron Yoe) # of seniors lost: 28 # of all-district players lost: MVP; Offensive MVP; Defensive MVP; 1 1st team offense; 6 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 1nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense Crockett (9-3/5-1) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 50-33 to Troy) # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 7 1st team offense; 4 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Coldspring (5-5/3-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 42-20 to East Chambers) # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 4 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Elkhart (5-5/2-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 7 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: 1 2nd team offense Westwood (2-8/1-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Offensive Newcomer; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Trinity (0-10/0-6) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team defense 12-3A East Chambers (10-2/7-0) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 43-29 to Grandview) # of seniors lost: 13 # of all-district players lost: Co-District MVP; Defensive MVP; 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Co-District MVP; Co-Newcomer; Co-Lineman MVP; 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Anahuac (5-6/5-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 49-0 to Crockett) # of seniors lost: 9 # of all-district players lost: Offensive MVP; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Buna (6-5/4-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 50-2 to Diboll) # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Woodville (4-6/3-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 3 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense Kirbyville (2-8/2-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 3 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense # of all-district players returning: Co-Newcomer; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Hardin (2-8/1-6) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; # of all-district players returning: Co-Lineman MVP; 2 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense; 1 2nd team defense 13-3A Columbus (12-3/5-0) Playoff Finish: State Semifinalist (L 41-21 to Grandview) # of seniors lost: 15 # of all-district players lost: MVP; Offensive MVP; Lineman MVP; 3 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Defensive MVP; 3 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense Palacios (8-3/4-1) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 28-14 to Edna) # of seniors lost: 11 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Newcomer; 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Hitchcock (4-7/2-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 50-22 to Industrial) # of seniors lost: 9 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Hempstead (5-5/1-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense Boling (1-8/0-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 6 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 2nd team offense 14-3A Industrial (11-2/5-0) Playoff Finish: Regional Semifinalist (L 34-28 to Columbus) # of seniors lost: 13 # of all-district players lost: Offensive MVP; Defensive MVP; 1 1st team offense; 4 1st team defense; 4 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 5 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Hallettsville (11-3/4-1) Playoff Finish: State Quarterfinalist (L 48-25 to Columbus) # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: MVP; 4 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense Edna (8-4/3-2) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 12-3 to George West) # of seniors lost: 15 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Yoakum (4-7/2-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 35-12 to Columbus) # of seniors lost: 11 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Newcomer; 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Goliad (1-9/1-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 17 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 2nd team offense Luling (0-10/0-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 2nd team offense 15-3A Jourdanton (10-2/5-1) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 35-28 to Hallettsville) # of seniors lost: 22 # of all-district players lost: Defensive Lineman MVP; Offensive Lineman MVP; 6 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: MVP; Receiver MVP; 2 1st team offense; 6 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense Marion (8-4/5-1) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 41-7 to Industrial) # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: Linebacker MVP; Defensive Back MVP; Receiving MVP; 4 1st team offense; 5 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Defensive MVP; Kicking MVP; 2 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 5 2nd team offense; 5 2nd team defense Randolph (8-4/4-2) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 21-16 to Columbus) # of seniors lost: 15 # of all-district players lost: Offensive MVP; Defensive Lineman MVP; Offensive Lineman MVP; 3 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Newcomer; 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Cotulla (7-4/3-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District (L 55-6 to George West) # of seniors lost: 10 # of all-district players lost: Running-back MVP; Punting MVP; 1 1st team offense; 4 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 3 1st team offense; 3 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense S.A. Cole (4-6/2-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Punting MVP; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Lytle (1-9/0-6) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 11 # of all-district players lost: None # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense 16-3A Mathis (7-4/6-1) Playoff Finish: Bi-District (L 42-13 to Randolph) # of seniors lost: 19 # of all-district players lost: Defensive MVP; Offensive MVP; Linebacker MVP; Secondary MVP; Quarterback MVP; Running-back MVP; 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 3 1st team offense; 5 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Lyford (5-6/5-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 56-30 to Marion) # of seniors lost: 6 # of all-district players lost: 4 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Offensive Newcomer; Receiving MVP; 4 1st team offense; 6 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 5 2nd team defense San Diego (7-5/5-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 63-18 to Jourdanton) # of seniors lost: 14 # of all-district players lost: Offensive Lineman MVP; Quarterback MVP; 7 1st team offense; 6 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; # of all-district players returning: MVP; Offensive Newcomer; Linebacker MVP; Running-back MVP; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Falfurrias (6-4/3-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 14 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 4 2nd team offense; 4 1st team defense; 4 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 3 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Aransas Pass (3-7/2-5) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 5 # of all-district players lost: 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 1st team defense; 3 2nd team defense Bishop (1-10/1-7) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 3 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Santa Gertrudis Academy (0-10/0-7) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 13 # of all-district players lost: 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoe09 Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 Teams joining 3A DI for 2020 & 2021. Blanco (4-6/2-3) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Caldwell (3-7/1-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 23 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Comfort (10-3/5-0) Playoff Finish: Regional Semifinalist (L 28-6 to East Bernard) # of seniors lost: 11 # of all-district players lost: MVP; Lineman MVP; 4 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Special Teams MVP; 3 1st team offense; 5 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense London (9-2/6-0) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 23-16 to Ganado) # of seniors lost: 16 # of all-district players lost: 4 1st team offense; 5 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: MVP; 1 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 1 2nd team defense Dalhart (7-5/3-1) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 42-23 to Iowa Park) # of seniors lost: 12 # of all-district players lost: 4 1st team offense; 5 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 3 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Fairfield (7-5/3-3) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (56-35 to Gilmer) # of seniors lost: 21 # of all-district players lost: Defensive MVP; 4 1st team offense; 4 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Lorena (5-5/2-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 17 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense 3 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Huntington (1-10/1-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 56-7 to WO-S) # of seniors lost: 11 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 5 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Offensive Newcomer; 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Lamesa (0-10/0-6) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 16 # of all-district players lost: 1 2nd team offense; # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team defense; 1 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense Llano (7-5/2-3) Playoff Finish: Area Finalist (L 41-34 to Sinton) # of seniors lost: 20 # of all-district players lost: 2 1st team offense; 2 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 3 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Orange Grove (3-8-3-2) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 48-6 to Rio Hondo) # of seniors lost: 8 # of all-district players lost: 2 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: Newcomer; 5 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 2 2nd team offense; 3 2nd team defense Poteet (3-8/2-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District Finalist (L 49-35 to Wimberley) # of seniors lost: 16 # of all-district players lost: Offensive Lineman MVP; 2 1st team offense; 1 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 2 1st team offense; 1 1st team defense; 4 2nd team offense; 2 2nd team defense Progreso (3-8/0-3) Playoff Finish: Bi-District (L 61-0 to Rockport-Fulton) # of seniors lost: 13 # of all-district players lost: 3 1st team offense; 3 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 1 2nd team offense Tarkington (3-6/0-4) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 10 # of all-district players lost: 1 1st team offense; 4 2nd team offense; 4 2nd team defense # of all-district players returning: 4 2nd team offense; 1 2nd team defense San Angelo TLCA (1-9/1-6) Playoff Finish: None # of seniors lost: 6 # of all-district players lost: 1 2nd team offense # of all-district players returning: 1 2nd team defense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lionpride08 Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 I wish someone did this for d2... Great work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoenation79 Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 Thanks for the detailed breakdown of the districts. Already counting the days down to the opening kickoff this coming fall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tiger03lb Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 Can't wait to see the new districts. Thanks for the breakdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatum_DirtyBird Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 Dog gone. The teams in the second post that are joining us are loading a lot of Seniors. I’m ready for some HS football already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoenation79 Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 Diboll losing 28 seniors stands out, should of been loaded for a run in 2019. It just shows you have to be more balanced offensively and defensively come playoff time. Problems in the secondary covering and issues passing the ball down the field was their downfall. Yoemen losing 23 seniors. Yoe will rely on some talented 2019 freshmen and sophomores that will be suiting up for 2020. Lots of holes to fill on both sides of the ball. Notice several schools just losing 3 seniors which is a incredible small number for a d1 3a program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts