People across the state have been anxiously awaiting their first look at proposed new conferences for the 2025-2029 N.C. High School Athletic Association realignment.

There’s a lot of intrigue and we’ve been talking about it for years now. The NCHSAA will expand to eight classifications for the first time. There was discussion about whether or not conferences would even exist (we now know they will), and there’s been speculation about things like split conferences and what the Big 32 will look like.

On Wednesday, everyone who has been waiting got the news they’ve been wanting — the first draft of the new conferences has been released.

It’s news in the sense that we now know what the NCHSAA Realignment Committee thinks is the best way forward. We know they’re willing to create large conferences and small conferences. We know there can be more than two classifications represented in a single conference. And we know there doesn’t have to be more than one team from a classification in a given conference.

But beyond that, there are still far more questions than answers. These are questions that I believe should have been answered by the NCHSAA Board of Directors before conferences were ever proposed.

You’re going to see a lot of reactions on social media, and you’ll hear from people involved in high school athletics about what they like, don’t like, and wish would change in this first draft. Many of those reactions are likely premature though.

On the surface, I support the idea of creating geographical conferences with lots of splits so teams are playing the schools that are close by, even though they may not be in the same classification.

To be clear, the proposal from the Realignment Committee includes a lot of splits, but I do not think it comes close to nailing the geography part. Geography is important. These are your natural rivals, these are the games where schools are most likely to see bigger crowds and it takes less time & money to travel to them. Earning more and spending less helps athletic departments sustain themselves financially. I think this proposal misses the ball on this aspect.

But on the surface, I do support the idea of many split conferences. The devil is in the details though. I have no idea if I support split conferences in this new realignment because I have no idea how the playoff format will work.

The biggest gripe with split conferences today (and it’s not even close) is how they are treated when it comes to playoff qualification and seeding. Many feel split conferences have an advantage because they don’t have to win their conference to be seeded as a conference champion. It’s easier in some cases for split conference teams to qualify the playoffs with a lower RPI rating than teams who are left out of the playoffs in other conferences. It’s a legitimate issue, and it messes with what is otherwise a great playoff format that the NCHSAA has in place.

Are we going to change the split conference application for the state playoffs? I have to imagine it will change. But I don’t know that. The board has not voted on that. I’ve not seen anything in public about how it could change, what the new process might look like. If it doesn’t change, I think this proposal doesn’t work at all. But I can’t possibly make that judgment without knowing the details of whatever the playoff format will be.

At this point, we don’t even know for sure how many teams will qualify for the playoffs in each classification. We’ve heard suggestions from the NCHSAA Bylaw Committee — for example, 24 teams in the 8A classification and 32 teams in other classifications. But that has not been finalized by the board.

Another piece of critical information we are missing: will we continue using RPI ratings (or something similar) to determine at-large bids and seeding? If so, I’m very unhappy to be in some of these large conferences with eight or nine teams in them. Large conferences mean fewer opportunities for non-conference games on the schedule. If that conference ends up being weaker in some sports, it’s going to harm my ability to get stronger non-conference opponents to increase my RPI.

Beyond the geography concerns I have, the biggest flaw in the proposal from the Realignment Committee, at least in my eyes, is the fact there are some conferences with just six teams and other conferences with nine teams. That is not only going to create an unlevel playing field in terms of RPI, but it is going to create non-conference scheduling nightmares for smaller conferences. Those teams will need more non-conference games, and they’re not going to be able to find them with schools involved in eight and nine-team conferences.

Speaking of things we don’t know: With (likely) fewer rounds of the playoffs, will teams get to play more non-conference games? If so, that might change my opinion on conference sizes. While that might be possible in some sports, it’s hard to see the NCHSAA adding a week to the regular season in a sport like football. There was a conscious decision made to reduce the length of the football regular season some years back. North Carolina’s high school football season among the longest in high school sports. But this is something else that would be nice to know for sure as conferences are being built.

The good news: this is just a first draft. It will change. It might change a lot. We’re probably going to see a number of appeals coming to the NCHSAA early next year. Maybe a record number. So this job is not done.

I’m sure the NCHSAA Board of Directors and the Realignment Committee are going to listen to each appeal and try to make things work the best they can for everyone. Realignment never satisfies everyone though.

That said, it’s difficult to make the best decision possible when you’re missing critical information. It would be helpful to everyone involved, including the schools who will be filing appeals, to know how playoffs will work, whether or not RPI will be used, and the length of the regular season.

Right now, schools are being asked to play a sport without knowing the rules of the game.