Why do kids choose to play DIII then? And no I don't think some kids care about playing against the best. In fact, some don't want to play the best and lose 76-0. They are out there to play and be a part of something that can be positive without HAVING to win a district, regional or state championship. I think parties on BOTH SIDES forget that HS Athletics IS NOT ABOUT WINNING STATE TITLES.

 

A lot of them playing DIII would love to play DI but they are not talented enough to earn a scholarship.

 

I disagree. There is not enough wealth in a lot of rural counties through donations to fund an artificial turf football field like Highlands did. No Chris Collinsworth to lead the charge and not many like him that can financially do it. That is a huge benefit.

 

For all the attention given the artificial turf, people forget to remember the crappy weight room, the poorly ventilated locker room, the small gym, etc. at Highlands. Highlands athletic facilities are much, much poorer than many less successful athletic programs in the state. People also forget that that turf didn't make one block this year; make one tackle, complete one pass. Surely you don't think that its the turf that makes Highlands successful do you? And I wouldn't be so certain that there isn't that much wealth in a lot of the rural counties in Ky.

 

 

 

I will not disagree with you at all here and battled with a baseball parent this weekend who was trying to tell me that parents of really talented baseball players say they don't put in time offseason. I called her on it and gave scenario after scenario to say does not happen that way.

 

So I take it with your post that you think the 3 divisions of the NCAA is a bad idea and Centre, TMC, Transy should compete against UK and be happy that they are competing against the best?

 

No I don't think the 3 divisions is a bad idea. But the disparity of economic committment of the 3 NCAA divisions is much greater than the disparity of economic committment amongst high school athletic programs. Admittedly, I don't know Scott's athletic budget (and I'm using Scott again only as an example. I like Scott and other than Highlands probably pull for them the most in football). My guess is that their football budget is about the same as Highlands. They are located in an affluent area. Their football stadium is as nice or nicer than Highlands (other than the turf and I'd think Doug Pelfrey could help there if he was really pressed to do so). Their baseball facility looks to be better than Highlands. Their basketball gym is nicer. And while I've not been in it, their weight room has to be nicer than Highlands is; then again everyone's is nicer). Bottom line is that they probably have as good if not better funds, resources and facilities. But their success on the football field is no where close. Why is that in your opinion?

No I don't think the 3 divisions is a bad idea. But the disparity of economic committment of the 3 NCAA divisions is much greater than the disparity of economic committment amongst high school athletic programs. Admittedly, I don't know Scott's athletic budget (and I'm using Scott again only as an example. I like Scott and other than Highlands probably pull for them the most in football). My guess is that their football budget is about the same as Highlands. They are located in an affluent area. Their football stadium is as nice or nicer than Highlands (other than the turf and I'd think Doug Pelfrey could help there if he was really pressed to do so). Their baseball facility looks to be better than Highlands. Their basketball gym is nicer. And while I've not been in it, their weight room has to be nicer than Highlands is; then again everyone's is nicer). Bottom line is that they probably have as good if not better funds, resources and facilities. But their success on the football field is no where close. Why is that in your opinion?

 

And the only pool in a NKY school, correct?

 

I know it's not a HHS/Scott comparison but that can't hurt a football program...

No I don't think the 3 divisions is a bad idea. But the disparity of economic committment of the 3 NCAA divisions is much greater than the disparity of economic committment amongst high school athletic programs. Admittedly, I don't know Scott's athletic budget (and I'm using Scott again only as an example. I like Scott and other than Highlands probably pull for them the most in football). My guess is that their football budget is about the same as Highlands. They are located in an affluent area. Their football stadium is as nice or nicer than Highlands (other than the turf and I'd think Doug Pelfrey could help there if he was really pressed to do so). Their baseball facility looks to be better than Highlands. Their basketball gym is nicer. And while I've not been in it, their weight room has to be nicer than Highlands is; then again everyone's is nicer). Bottom line is that they probably have as good if not better funds, resources and facilities. But their success on the football field is no where close. Why is that in your opinion?

 

I am not a football guy so I feel totally unqualified to comment on a HS's football program that is outside of where I live. I have been to 3 HS football games in my 40some years on this planet.

 

I have been told and have zero clue on whether it is fact, but that Highlands draws a lot of kids to the school from throughout NKY to play football. If Scott had that same tradition, they might draw from throughout NKY to Scott too. Don't know.

 

I do believe and again have zero clue on whether it is fact, but that the football program has an extremely high level of commitment, a demand of commitment, from the community (maybe the Scott community does not put as much demand as it is a much larger community), the school and the kids.

But I do think that there are advantages out there. Look at Harrison County and golf. One 9 hole course that is a country club. So if you want to play golf, your parents have to fork over $1200 a year. Most families in Harrison County cannot do that. Where at NKY, Louisville, Lexington, etc schools they have multiple courses, practice ranges (Golf Ranch) to choose from. Look at swimming and diving. Big advantages to the urban areas and a main reason that you see so few swimming teams/clubs in the rural areas. Schools cannot afford a pool and business wise, it makes zero sense to build a swim club in a rural area.

 

I'm not sure what your point is. I see all these "poor little us" posts from you about a rural community sports programs. There is no magic solution for these programs. They are small schools with little or no money for many of their sports. WE GET IT. Stop throwing yourself a pity party all the time. There is no level playing field there for those schools in many sports. Its called life. Not everything is always fair. If your community doesn't have a golf course why get upset if your golf team is getting beat by those with a golf course? Our society has become so concerned with making everything so fair for our kids and worrying about making sure their feelings don't get hurt. I think its obvious to little Johnny that he won't be getting a full ride to swim for Ohio State if his school doesn't have access to a pool.

Why do kids choose to play DIII then? And no I don't think some kids care about playing against the best. In fact, some don't want to play the best and lose 76-0. They are out there to play and be a part of something that can be positive without HAVING to win a district, regional or state championship. I think parties on BOTH SIDES forget that HS Athletics IS NOT ABOUT WINNING STATE TITLES.

 

 

LBBC, I thought some more about this part of your prior post. If the kids at a school aren't interested in playing the best or "having" to win a championship, but rather are more interested in just going out there and having some fun without worrrying about getting beat 76-0, there is an option already available to those kids and their schools: just elect not to play in district play. Schedule only teams have a similar philosophy or are of similar talent and then go out there and have fun. Since that option is already available, it doesn't seem like any change to the KHSAA system is necessary.

I'm not sure what your point is. I see all these "poor little us" posts from you about a rural community sports programs. There is no magic solution for these programs. They are small schools with little or no money for many of their sports. WE GET IT. Stop throwing yourself a pity party all the time. There is no level playing field there for those schools in many sports. Its called life. Not everything is always fair. If your community doesn't have a golf course why get upset if your golf team is getting beat by those with a golf course? Our society has become so concerned with making everything so fair for our kids and worrying about making sure their feelings don't get hurt. I think its obvious to little Johnny that he won't be getting a full ride to swim for Ohio State if his school doesn't have access to a pool.

 

So you are for one class of football and Highlands having to compete against St. X and Trinity? Because not doing that sure has upped Highlands championship trophies. Do you think Highlands football trophies are devalued because you don't compete against Trinity and St. X?

 

You make the comment that players just want to compete against the best, but I don't see you railing on here about Highlands not getting the chance to compete against the best for the state football title. If that was TRULY believed at Highlands, you guys (parents or school) would be suing the KHSAA for the right to play against Trinity and St. X for the state football title. Not sure I have seen that story in the Enquirer.

 

I hear you railing on others who want opportunities to compete against like schools as "pity me parties" and challenging them to want to compete against the best (which I am assuming you think is Highlands) but don't hear you challenging your own school to compete against the best for state titles and quit winning titles that are not against the best. (That is all using your view of the state titles, not mine. And pointing out that it seems you use one view to look at others while another different set of glasses to look at Highlands. Your constant berating on this issue loses credibility when your own school does NOT DO what you claim all of us should do.)

 

There is an answer. Different divisions based upon true reasons that differentiate how a school is able to compete.

Why do kids choose to play DIII then? And no I don't think some kids care about playing against the best. In fact, some don't want to play the best and lose 76-0. They are out there to play and be a part of something that can be positive without HAVING to win a district, regional or state championship. I think parties on BOTH SIDES forget that HS Athletics IS NOT ABOUT WINNING STATE TITLES.

 

 

LBBC, I thought some more about this part of your prior post. If the kids at a school aren't interested in playing the best or "having" to win a championship, but rather are more interested in just going out there and having some fun without worrrying about getting beat 76-0, there is an option already available to those kids and their schools: just elect not to play in district play. Schedule only teams have a similar philosophy or are of similar talent and then go out there and have fun. Since that option is already available, it doesn't seem like any change to the KHSAA system is necessary.

 

You are right that is an option out there. And I guess the NCAA could have chosen that option and given it to a Transy, a Centre, a Thomas More. But instead they saw that there was a better option. Create a playoff system for those teams. And they did.

 

Why is it so hard for adults to want to give 15-16-17-18 year old kids the same option that 19-20-21-22-23 and in the case of one football player 59 year old kids the option to do the same?

 

My view, adults egos are getting in the way. It is more important that their state championships mean what they want to mean in their own eyes to beef up their egoes rather than to give kids opportunities.

 

You are right that is an option out there. And I guess the NCAA could have chosen that option and given it to a Transy, a Centre, a Thomas More. But instead they saw that there was a better option. Create a playoff system for those teams. And they did.

 

Why is it so hard for adults to want to give 15-16-17-18 year old kids the same option that 19-20-21-22-23 and in the case of one football player 59 year old kids the option to do the same?

 

My view, adults egos are getting in the way. It is more important that their state championships mean what they want to mean in their own eyes to beef up their egoes rather than to give kids opportunities.

 

Sorry that you think my "ego is getting in the way" just because I disagree with you. Not the kind of thought process I expected out of you.

 

The bottom line is that you think rural schools are unfairly disadvantaged. I've pointed out numerous times that rural schools like Boyle, Bell, Johnson Central, Rockcastle and others have managed somehow to overcome those advantages and become very competitive in football. I guess they must have cheated to do that. Not!

 

They did that with hard work, committed players and great coaches. And if they can do it, then any rural school can do it if they want to work hard enough. From one of your prior posts, in my opinion you implied that some schools and some kids don't want to make the financial and time committment required to compete with the likes of Highlands, etc. Rather, like the NCAA you argue, there should be separate classes for those not willing or able to make that committment. I totally disagree.

 

The NCAA analogy is comparing apples to cucumbers. The disparity of athletic funding difference between DI and DIII in college sports is simply much greater than what is found in high school sports. The ability to give full athletic scholarships is no where to be found in high school sports. The requirement of a minimum average home attendance number is no where to be found in high school sports.

 

I'm sorry, but I just don't find the NCAA analogy on point.

 

What I find somewhat ironic is that in one post you argue that high school sports is not supposed to be about winning district, regional and state championships and that HS sports is not about winning state titles. Yet in the quoted post you seem to be arguing that the KHSAA should create more divisions to allow the rural schools the fair opportunity to win state championships. Which is it?

 

Bottom line: I personally don't care whether some rural schools want to create a separate division with the other schools unable or more likely unwilling to make the necessary committment to win. But where I disagree with you is in your belief that those rural schools are unable to win no matter how hard they try, no matter how great of a committment that they make. Boys basketball proves me to be correct. The success of Bell, Boyle, Rockcastle, Johnson Central and others in football proves me to correct. Is it easy for them? Of course not. Then again, I don't think the effort that the likes of Trinity, X, Highlands, CovCath and Beechwood make is easy either.

 

The KHSAA like almost every other state feels that the only true differentiation of schools is size based. Open vs closed enrollment is not really a good factor in my opinion and I know of no other state that uses such a factor.

 

If a school allows open enrollment but has no one living outside the district playing sports, is that school open or closed?

On the schools, I have PM'd you because any comments I make on them is pure speculation and don't want to do that in a public forum about other schools.

 

Sorry that you think my "ego is getting in the way" just because I disagree with you. Not the kind of thought process I expected out of you.

Please see my apology to LN in post #55.

 

 

 

They did that with hard work, committed players and great coaches. And if they can do it, then any rural school can do it if they want to work hard enough.

From my view, when rural counties do have that success they have outworked the urban schools. When a NKY parent puts their child in a league at SOAS, it is 90 minutes out of their evening. They can go do other things besides the league game. For rural parents, that doesn't happen. The bus drops the kid off at 4:30, the parents get home from work at 5:00, rush to get supper, game at 7:00 so they are out the door at 6:00, get to the game, make the drive home and they are back by 9:00 and time to put the kids to bed.

 

When rural parents do make that commitment, they outwork the urban parents

From one of your prior posts, in my opinion you implied that some schools and some kids don't want to make the financial and time committment required to compete with the likes of Highlands, etc. Rather, like the NCAA you argue, there should be separate classes for those not willing or able to make that committment. I totally disagree.

 

The NCAA analogy is comparing apples to cucumbers. The disparity of athletic funding difference between DI and DIII in college sports is simply much greater than what is found in high school sports. The ability to give full athletic scholarships is no where to be found in high school sports. The requirement of a minimum average home attendance number is no where to be found in high school sports.

 

The disparity in the NCAA is probably less at the funding of scholarships than at other places of travel, facilities, resources. NKU does not have the travel budget of UK, nor the facilities, nor the community support but probably are very similar in scholarships given. To type in an ACT format, TMC to NKU is like NKU to UK.

 

 

 

What I find somewhat ironic is that in one post you argue that high school sports is not supposed to be about winning district, regional and state championships and that HS sports is not about winning state titles. Yet in the quoted post you seem to be arguing that the KHSAA should create more divisions to allow the rural schools the fair opportunity to win state championships. Which is it?

 

It is about true opportunities to have honest competition.

 

Bottom line: I personally don't care whether some rural schools want to create a separate division with the other schools unable or more likely unwilling to make the necessary committment to win. But where I disagree with you is in your belief that those rural schools are unable to win no matter how hard they try, no matter how great of a committment that they make. Boys basketball proves me to be correct. The success of Bell, Boyle, Rockcastle, Johnson Central and others in football proves me to correct. Is it easy for them? Of course not. Then again, I don't think the effort that the likes of Trinity, X, Highlands, CovCath and Beechwood make is easy either.

 

The KHSAA like almost every other state feels that the only true differentiation of schools is size based. Open vs closed enrollment is not really a good factor in my opinion and I know of no other state that uses such a factor.

 

If a school allows open enrollment but has no one living outside the district playing sports, is that school open or closed?

The open question is easy to handle. The board simply makes the call whether they are going to be an open or closed district. That is the defining point. Whether they have students or not, is irrelevant.

 

On the bolded, absolutely, I did not say that. I have CONSISTENTLY said that the way rurals compete is through cycles of great athletes as they came through. When Pendleton boys went to the state and are did not before or after, why was that.

 

Did that group of boys outwork these and before them those group of boys? Not necessarily

Did Coach Biggs and his staff not work as hard the years before and the years after?

Nope.

Did the parents and community not support the boys like before and after?

Nope.

 

It was because they had a class that came through with size and could play. They were 6'8", 6'5" and 6'5". You can count on one hand the number of kids at PCHS that have played at PCHS that were 6'8".

 

It was a cycle of great players. I see the same work ethic by Coach Simms that I saw by Coach Biggs. I see the kids working hard just like they did. What I don't see is 6'8", 6'5" and 6'5".

I need to publically apologize to LN. We were involved in a converstion and Delta, rightfully so, made a comment. I did not really recognize that and thought it was a continuing of LN and I's conversation. I responded to LN and he wasn't the poster.

 

So, I apologize for the assumption I made and the post I sent to him. Sorry LN.

I need to publically apologize to LN. We were involved in a converstion and Delta, rightfully so, made a comment. I did not really recognize that and thought it was a continuing of LN and I's conversation. I responded to LN and he wasn't the poster.

 

So, I apologize for the assumption I made and the post I sent to him. Sorry LN.

 

No problem LBBC. While we may disagree (sometimes strongly) on issues, I still respect you very much. No apology necessary, but I appreciate you making the gesture. It says a lot about you.

What about 2 divisions, one for communities/countie/metro with populations over 100,000 and one for all others utilizing divisions for the school populations? State champs in both. Winners play.

What about 2 divisions, one for communities/countie/metro with populations over 100,000 and one for all others utilizing divisions for the school populations? State champs in both. Winners play.

 

Let's say Henry Clay's designated area in Lexington is not over 100,000. Do they go into it since they are in Lexington but don't draw from all over the county of Fayette?

Yes. The population of Fayette County Metro would be the determining factor. Enrollment criteria for individual schools are determined by the local board of ed.

There are less than a handfull of schools that meet that requirement in KY. Unless you double the enrollment Trinity and St.X don't meet it either.

 

That, my friend is why the majority of non-privates have a difficult time of defeating the privates in football. Baseball, basketball, wrestling...not so much due to the makeup of the games or matches themselves....

 

Of course, doubling the number of single sex schools' enroolments would continue.

 

Many folks read the KHSAA enrollment figures of the past and assumed Trinity and St. Xavier had 2600-2800 boys attending their schools!