Potential for Private/Public Split in the AHSAA

The thoughts and views expressed in this article are my own.  I'm sure I will catch some heat for some of these opinions, but ultimately, I want what I believe to be the best for cross country and track and field.  I do not want AHSAA leadership or AD's making decisions for all sports based on the almighty football and basketball.        

         In the world of Alabama high school athletics, rumors of significant changes have been swirling, in particular the Alabama High School Athletic Association (AHSAA) potentially splitting public and private schools into separate divisions for postseason competitions. These discussions typically stem from frustrations in high-profile sports like football and basketball-where perceptions of recruiting advantages and transfers from the CHOOSE Act often dominate the conversation.  Taking this very short-sighted approach risks overlooking the unique dynamics of smaller sports like cross country and track and field. Continuation of the current competitive balance measures or a full public-private split could have long-term detrimental effects on less popular sports, stifling growth, reducing competition, and punishing hard-earned success built on culture rather than resources.
                

        At its core, competitive balance-the AHSAA's system of reclassifying teams based on recent performance-sounds fair in theory. It aims to prevent any one school from dominating indefinitely by bumping successful programs up in classification. However, in practice, especially for smaller sports where fewer members of a team can greatly impact the performance of a team, this approach can be counterproductive over the long haul. Sports thrive on consistency, community, and program-building, not blockbuster transfers or deep-pocket resources.

         
        Now back to the potential split of private and public institutions:  with fewer than 60 private schools among the AHSAA's 420 members, creating separate private divisions would result in sparse, unbalanced competitions-particularly in niche sports like cross country, track, tennis, and golf. Many private institutions are small, with limited participation pools, and simply don't have the numbers to field robust postseason fields across multiple classes. A glance at the data underscores this: Over the last 10 years (2015-2024), 23 unique private schools have won state team titles in either cross country or outdoor track and field. These include programs like Montgomery Academy, American Christian Academy, St. Paul's Episcopal, UMS-Wright, Bayside Academy, and Whitesburg Christian, among others. That's a far cry from widespread dominance; instead, it highlights isolated pockets of success driven by coaching, tradition, and athlete development as highlighted earlier.  In total, private schools claimed approximately 100 of the roughly 250 team state titles available in these sports during that span-hardly an overwhelming majority.

        These potential changes shouldn't be dictated by the dynamics of football and basketball, where team sizes and recruiting concerns are more pronounced. Cross country and track are individual-heavy team sports, where a single standout athlete (Janie Ford Effect) can dramatically influence outcomes. Consider Janie Ford, a generational talent from St. Paul's Episcopal who graduated in 2025. Her individual prowess in track-scoring up to 40 points per meet-singlehandedly triggered reclassifications for her team, forcing a small private school to compete against behemoths like Hoover, Vestavia Hills, and Mountain Brook, some boasting over five times the student body of St. Paul's. Expecting a program with one-fifth the students to thrive in such an environment isn't competitive balance; it's a setup for failure that ignores the nuances of these sports. In cross country and track, transfers for athletic reasons are exceptionally rare, as evidenced by anecdotal reports from coaches and the lack of scandals in these sports. Decisions based on football or basketball issues risk dismantling thriving ecosystems in less glamorous sports.

        Ultimately, the AHSAA should reconsider applying blanket reforms to all sports. Competitive balance, while well-intentioned, can cap upward mobility and deter long-term investment in programs at smaller schools.  A public-private split would dilute postseason excitement, creating lopsided private brackets with insufficient depth for meaningful rivalries. Instead, the focus should be on sport-specific adjustments-perhaps limiting reclassification jumps or exempting lower-participation activities from football-driven rules. Alabama's student-athletes in cross country and track deserve policies that foster growth and fair play, not ones that punish success and fracture the community.  While the current competitive balance system is not perfect, I personally much prefer it over the proposed split.  I think reworking the competitive balance rules would better serve the students of Alabama in the long run.  Perhaps capping how many classifications a school can be moved up or reworking the point system.  As this discussion continues, let's hope the AHSAA prioritizes the bigger picture for all sports, not just the headline-grabbers.

Community Poll: You have until January 20, 2026 to cast your vote!

If you want to let your voice be heard I've complied a list of the AHSAA Central Board of Control - Members and Contact Information.

Care to share your thoughts?  Email me  al.milesplit at gmail.com