Message from UIL

[mogul84]

I'm just saying that paying the $10 rider fee and 1 car sure seems better for the schools than paying 3 cars 60% or 2 cars 75%. I think the UIL is going to experience the law of unintended consequences firsthand with this decision.

[TXMike]

You are absolutely right about that.  If I were a school I would try to negotiate out of the additional vehicles, although the current law would not permit that.  I really expect to see some changes made between now and the 2014 season.

[JasonTX]

Timmons said if you travel 75 miles one way that you get a $15 meal fee.  All those who drove or rode 75 miles get it regardless of how many vehicles are driven.

[TXMike]

And it appears that is something that also does not need prior approval from school to claim.  I realize that there are few umpires who can eat a meal for less than $15 so maybe the crewmates can chip in to pay for his meals.

[mishatx]

Apparantly Tony Timmons himself clarified at the meeting today. A rider fee will only be paid to official #4 and #5 if 3 cars are taken.

This was mentioned at our meeting last night, and it sounds like it's being interpreted as:

5 man crew, 3 drivers:
Driver 1: 66%
Driver 2: 66%
Driver 3: 66%
Rider 4: $10
Rider 5: $10

5 man crew, 1 driver:
Driver 1: 100%
Rider 2: 0
Rider 3: 0
Rider 4: 0
Rider 5: 0

Which doesn't seem to be what 1204 actually says.  Shouldn't the rider fee be applicable to anyone who is not a driver, as long as there are more than 3 officials on the crew?  And TT's statement should be "if there are three cars taken, only officials 4 and 5 get $10. If there are 2, only officials 3, 4, and 5 get $10. Etc"

[Joe Stack]

I wish they had gone ahead and charted this all the way to 5 drivers. We have a lot of that. Do we just all 5 split 3 * 66%?

[TXMike]

It does seem illogical to pay riders 4 and 5 but not riders 2, 3, 4 & 5.  Especially since by not paying the rider you give some encouragement to using a 2d or 3d vehicle which will cost you even more.

Maybe this is like the rulebook where changes sometimes are not fully thought out so the unintended consequences become clear?

[rickref]

It does seem illogical to pay riders 4 and 5 but not riders 2, 3, 4 & 5.  Especially since by not paying the rider you give some encouragement to using a 2d or 3d vehicle which will cost you even more.

Maybe this is like the rulebook where changes sometimes are not fully thought out so the unintended consequences become clear?

Revised 1204 to be printed in 20 weeks .

[curlyrefjd]

it creates a "Lose--Lose" situation

school pays more by paying 3 cars @60%, plus two rider fees
drivers each lose 40 % of what it cost them to drive there and back
but, two riders get the $10 that we have been getting for the last 4 years.

 

[TxBJ]

Curly, I wouldn't say a driver loses 40% of what it costs to drive. The current mileage rate it pays a lot more than the actual cost of driving, even considering the price of gas and wear and tear on the vehicle. That is why it is usually not hard to get people to volunteer to drive. They look at it as a money maker, which is not what it should be.

[Joe Stack]

The mileage figure actually DOES attempt to equate to the total cost of travel, but after X number of miles, there are economies of scale. In other words, there's going to be more wear and tear on your car if you go 25 miles on 4 nights rather than going 100 miles on 1 night.

The thing is, I have an SUV but still can't fit all 5 guys (not to mention 6th man) in my vehicle. Unless someone has a van or we rent it, 6 going together isn't happening. And we have had games were 3 or 4 of us travel a long way and 1 or 2 are local. The 60% would probably work well in those cases.

[Cowman52]

The schools here are reading the new 1204 and not liking it any.  Our district meeting last night was even less informative than the printed material already out.  Someone hopefully will think a little and adjust some of the thinking.