Prep Talk

As I mentioned briefly last week, I don't like Section VI's new football format, and I wrote about it in this morning's Prep Talk column.

Here are a couple of other things to point out, courtesy of Section VI's proposal of the seven-game season (click your way to it by going step-by-step, starting at the Section VI site and then going to "Athletic Council Minutes," and then the March 19 page):

** Listed as under "need/rationale" are: "Teams end up playing three games that ... mean nothing" as well as "difficulty finding nonleague matchups."

There's no difficulty finding nonleague matchups -- I've been told by the section for years that nonleague games are certainly possible, it's just a matter of having teams express interest in it. The real difficulty is finding Section VI schools that will schedule Catholic or city schools.

The only reason those games "mean nothing" is that the schools -- along with, one could argue, the section -- have failed to turn them into something. There have been ideas floated far and wide about early-season football events which would pair teams together in nonleague games. But Section VI teams refuse to create the the same kind of matchups that highlight baseball's Robert E. Rich Classic at Dunn Tire Park or basketball's Monsignor Martin-ECIC Challenge or MLK Classic (or countless softball, volleyball or soccer tournaments).

** The proposal outlines how different teams will be paired up, so that every team will have nine games scheduled (except one school, and there are great outlines for how to get that team games). I think Section VI has done an outstanding job in recent years about making sure all of its football teams play postseason games, through the consolation bowl playoffs and other games in which nonplayoff teams are paired up. Section VI has dramatically increased the amount of games that have been played since the early 2000s. The 2008 system provides a stronger structure for teams' postseasons, but it's not an overwhelming benefit of the shorter regular season. Under last season's format, every team played at least nine games.

** Listed under pros is "more revenue for Section." And you thought it was only the pros who were worried about the bottom line.

I'm sure there are many who may be sick and tired of hearing and hearing (or reading and reading) that "Western New York high school football will never be as good as it could be as long as the best teams don't play each other." Well, I'm sick and tired of saying it, but it remains true.

Until all the very best large schools schedule each other, WNY football fails to live up to its potential.

The new format reduces the number of nonleague games, reducing the chance that that potential will be reached.

There is hope. Maybe some day all schools will see the big picture -- like North Tonawanda coach Eric Jantzi has. NT is playing St. Joe's this year after opening with St. Francis last season. 

Of course, high school football will continue to be an outstanding experience for students and their schools. The games will still pack in the fans and the sectional finals will still leave us with the best teams. In 10 or 15 years, someone will probably have to point out to fans, players or parents that "way back before 2008" only two teams from each division made the playoffs, and they'll probably say, "Wow, that must have been tough." It sure was.

But maybe, just maybe, those same fans, players or parents will be thankful that they're able to attend the Kickoff Classic tripleheader at All High Stadium every opening weekend, or the WNY Showdown at UB every Week Four.   

---Keith McShea