If that many teams have a chance that means the region is weaker overall. Could this year's Jackson City team play with last year's Breathitt team, for example?

 

No they are not on par with Breathitt's last years team. The competition in the 14th is better this year but the overall level of talented teams is not on the same level as the last few years, IMO. But nobody should have to apoligize for that because in March it all leads to the same conclusion. Jackson has a good solid team and I am all for them. Lee had a better team then Jackson last year and may have this year, that will be a good game. As far as not hitting their shots last year when Lee and Breathitt played? I thought it was just the opposite. The Brandenburg kid was in a como, throwing up NBA 3's that were falling! At any rate, it's a fun year so far.

The situation is this, to varying degrees: Breathitt, Perry, and Hazard are down from the teams they have had over the last 3-4 years. That opens the door for others to shine and that's good, enjoy it!

In my earlier post, let me just say I didn't mean to take anything away from Breathitt's team last year. Andrew, Jacob, Matt, Eli and all those guys had a great team and I hated to see them lose. I thought they were the #1 team in the region and should have made the trip to Lexington in a bus.

Actually if you go by Cantrall's ratings the region doesn't look too bad compared to the other regions, with the exception of the usual powerhouse regions such as the two in Jefferson County and the 2nd, 3rd ,9th,10th, and 11th. The 14th's top team, Perry Central, would be rated as follows in other regions:

 

1. 5th

2. 7th

3. tied for 6th

4. 2nd

5. 3rd

6. 6th

7. 10th

8. 3rd

9. 7th

10. 7th

11. 11th

12. 1st

13. 3rd

14. 1st

15. 1st

16. 2nd

 

Of course, the region might not match up too well if one took an average rating of each region's teams and then compared the averages, which would take a while and I didn't do.

Professors post makes sense. If the 14th is weak, then the whole state would have to be down. PCC rates this high in other regions and PCC does not stand out head and shoulders above the rest.

Professors post makes sense. If the 14th is weak, then the whole state would have to be down. PCC rates this high in other regions and PCC does not stand out head and shoulders above the rest.

 

 

Yes, but how often and how accurate are those ratings? I never follow Cantrall's rating system. Simply because, ratings or not, I can gaurantee you come march one 14th Region team will be in the top 16 teams in the state. Does this fact ever get a 14th region team ranked in the top 20 in the state? If someone ever puts out a rating system with at least one team from every region in the top 20 then I'll buy it. No offense Professor I know how you intended your post and it makes sense that way. I do believe teams from the 14th can play with anyone, however, they seem to fall to the way side come "Dance" time.

Yes, but how often and how accurate are those ratings? I never follow Cantrall's rating system. Simply because, ratings or not, I can gaurantee you come march one 14th Region team will be in the top 16 teams in the state. Does this fact ever get a 14th region team ranked in the top 20 in the state? If someone ever puts out a rating system with at least one team from every region in the top 20 then I'll buy it. No offense Professor I know how you intended your post and it makes sense that way. I do believe teams from the 14th can play with anyone, however, they seem to fall to the way side come "Dance" time.

I may not be interpreting your post like you intended, but are you saying that we should only have a rating based on the favorites to win each region? If that's the case, then the 14th region will always be in the top 20.....or top 16 in this case.

Yes, but how often and how accurate are those ratings? I never follow Cantrall's rating system. Simply because, ratings or not, I can gaurantee you come march one 14th Region team will be in the top 16 teams in the state. Does this fact ever get a 14th region team ranked in the top 20 in the state? If someone ever puts out a rating system with at least one team from every region in the top 20 then I'll buy it. No offense Professor I know how you intended your post and it makes sense that way. I do believe teams from the 14th can play with anyone, however, they seem to fall to the way side come "Dance" time.

 

 

You can't argue with logic like this.

You can't argue with logic like this.

I agree :lol:

You can't argue with logic like this.

 

 

Meaning?

I agree :lol:

 

It what way was it amusing?

 

Quote: "I may not be interpreting your post like you intended, but are you saying that we should only have a rating based on the favorites to win each region? If that's the case, then the 14th region will always be in the top 20.....or top 16 in this case."

 

Correct. My point exactly, each Region would have a team in the top 16. Why does Cantrell also power rank each Region? IMO, It's pointless to do so, if one team from each Region is not in your top 16. It may be a hilarious suggestion? However, year in and year out how many top twenty power ranked teams make the Sweet 16? 8, 10, or 12? We all know that 1 team from each Region will be one of the final 16 teams standing come Sweet 16 time. To not have the top team from each Region ranked in the top 16 is even more hilarious to me.

I do understand the power rankings to a point. But how effecient is a power ranking when, say, three of the top ten teams are in the same region? How many of them will make the Sweet 16? It, IMO, would be better to just power rank each Region and be done with it. Or put one team from each region in the top 16.

But how effecient is a power ranking when, say, three of the top ten teams are in the same region? How many of them will make the Sweet 16?

It means that 2 of the teams are better than those in other regions and would probably win if the were in another region.

It means that 2 of the teams are better than those in other regions and would probably win if the were in another region.

 

Therefore, proving my point. They aren't, nor will they probably ever be. Thus, A poor system. Just because a team has a poorer power ranking doesn't mean they will not see Rupp Arena. By the same token, a high power ranking doesn't gaurantee a spot in the final tourney.

 

HYPO: I suppose we could abandon the district and regional tourney's instead. Then we could have a tourney with the top 20 power ranked teams playing in it. Which truefully does makes better sense. Perhaps we could realign the Districts and Regions each season to encompass the top 20 ranked teams. Then we could definatly give the Championship some credibility.

 

I understand the system and what it means. It just doesn't make any sense! Why give a top 20 power ranking to a team that's never going to play for all the marbles? As I said, I understand they could beat several teams in the Sweet 16 tourney. However, guess what, they'll never get that chance.

It what way was it amusing?

 

Quote: "I may not be interpreting your post like you intended, but are you saying that we should only have a rating based on the favorites to win each region? If that's the case, then the 14th region will always be in the top 20.....or top 16 in this case."

 

Correct. My point exactly, each Region would have a team in the top 16. Why does Cantrell also power rank each Region? IMO, It's pointless to do so, if one team from each Region is not in your top 16. It may be a hilarious suggestion? However, year in and year out how many top twenty power ranked teams make the Sweet 16? 8, 10, or 12? We all know that 1 team from each Region will be one of the final 16 teams standing come Sweet 16 time. To not have the top team from each Region ranked in the top 16 is even more hilarious to me.

I do understand the power rankings to a point. But how effecient is a power ranking when, say, three of the top ten teams are in the same region? How many of them will make the Sweet 16? It, IMO, would be better to just power rank each Region and be done with it. Or put one team from each region in the top 16.

My apologies for offending you. I was just kidding around.

 

However,

if there's going to be a pre-tournament Top 20 it only makes sense to pick what is precieved to be the 'best' top 20 teams in the state. Now, there may be 3 or 4 teams from the same region in that top 20, but how are we to know (with your suggestion) at that time which one of them will eventually win the region, and which ones to leave out of the rankings?

My apologies for offending you. I was just kidding around.

 

However,

if there's going to be a pre-tournament Top 20 it only makes sense to pick what is precieved to be the 'best' top 20 teams in the state. Now, there may be 3 or 4 teams from the same region in that top 20, but how are we to know (with your suggestion) at that time which one of them will eventually win the region, and which ones to leave out of the rankings?

 

No apology necessary. I was just wanting to make sure you understood my reasoning. (Not that it makes any sense :thumb: )

 

That part of the equation would be the same as it is right now. However, you would only be changing one team from the top 20 instead of say 12. As usual, in this regard, it would still be a prediction. To me it would just appear to be more accurate with at least one team from each region in it.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to lower or up the "rating" for any team. Leave their ratings strenght alone. This would still let us see who should come out on top in other match-ups.

Weak as in basketball skill and ability, I don't think so. However, I think that it has to be considered one of the weakest regions in terms of player size and athletic ability.