While we are on the topic of playing up (or down) in football class...

I am ok with playing up a class when it puts you in a district to help with travel. But, it is so tough getting a schedule with such small districts, why not travel for maybe two tough trips, then play the teams you are closer to geographically for your non-district games? For me, that would make it easier to put together a schedule. You are only going to have one or two bad trips a year as a result of your district if the schools are spread out. Then, you have less travel for non-district games, and probably better attendance.

Another word or pair of words for subjective is arbitrary and capacious.

The KHSAA is an entity under the constitution and being arbitrary and capacious violates the constitution.

But no one seems to care.

Lets just say being subjective is wrong. And being secretive and subjective is worse.

I think you should be able to play up and continue to move up once you win the state championship, but you should not be able to play down reguardsless.

I agree. I have heard that in Ohio if you win State in on class in 2 consecutive years then you automatically move up when they redistrict. I am not positive on this, but I think it would be interesting to try it for some period of time. It seems to be working in Ohio. This came up because LaSalle in Cincinnati has won State the past two years and will probably have to move up a class.

Indiana has something similar. Its called something like a "success quotient," which adds to your enrollment based on championships won over a period of time.

"PLAYING UP" should always be an alternative. "PLAYING DOWN" never should be considered. I agree that moving up in class after dominance of the class you are in over a period of time. Belfry, Bowling Green, Mayfield, NCC are good examples.

So are you going to foot the bill for transportation? Will the KHSAA? How to do propose to nullify transportation costs, because that is the obvious obstacle before the logistical argument can be dismissed.

This. Anyone who disagrees does not understand the logistics of small, EKY programs, and the financial resources of these programs and the players within. If we had to play in the NKY district, we'd likely have to drop out of district play. Three road trips to NKY would be crazy expensive, not just for the program but for our players families as well.

We choose to play in a higher class, with larger schools. All schools should have the ability to do that if it is in their best interest. After all, its what's best for our kids. JMO, but too often the people outside the programs do not always keep that in mind.

I have not seen an argument that would make me even consider the idea that teams shouldn't be able to play up. Where is the secrecy? What are these schools doing that is so bad? Playing larger schools? If Highlands is 4A and wants to play 5A, who are they hurting?

Playing down is another story.

Playing down isn't an option for anyone, is it?

No, and it probably shouldn't be.

...

Playing down was an option and multiple schools took advantage of it. 9 schools are playing down in class. The attachment shows the schools.
http://khsaa.org/football/realignmen...nrollments.pdf

Yes and no. In an effort to balance classes, if a 4A team requested to move up to 5A, then the smallest 5A was afforded the opportunity to move down. If they declined, then the next smallest was given the option, etc. But they couldn't INITIALLY request to move down.

Playing down in class is playing down in class. How it happened is irrelevant. It should never happen.

I agree with you, although it's hardly irrelevant. The procedure is important to clarify for anyone who isn't as familiar with how realignment went as others.