Not a fan of any super / select class at all. Could be lots of politics involved in how teams would be selected and who would be the group to determine the selection.

 

However, for those that think Kentucky should make a change, look to how Indiana is now going to implement their two year "tournament success" model for baseball, basketball, football, soccer, softball, and volleyball. A team gets assigned a score based on how far you go into the playoffs (1pt sectional, 2pts regional, 3pts semis, and 4 pts state). Max points assigned in a year is 4. If over two years, you accumulate 6 or more points, you move up a class for the next two year cycle. This is to start with the 2013-2014 school year. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in Indiana and how some of those perennial state champs are affected.

How about doing something like this, and then you don't have to worry about an arrogant class.

 

I get so tired of hearing how only a few teams are truly great and the rest are embarrasments. If people are so worried about blowouts and the same teams winning every year, then how about evening the playing field?

 

Look at the schools that are always winning and think about how some of them do that each year?

 

Instead of the arrogance, how about leveling the playing field. How about passing a State rule saying teams can only be made up of kids that actually live inside thier school districts? How about making another rule that says if a kid switches schools (due to moving etc.) must sit out an entire year?

 

How about private schools simply playing other private schools and having their own class?

 

Then I'd be interested in seeing who is always the dominate programs amongst the public schools.

Now before people get up in arms saying blah blah we don't recruit blah blah blah, simply make it a level playing field across the state and quit looking down your noses at the other schools for doing the right thing year in and year out.

 

That is my 2 cents.....If you want to talk about the Elite Class, then take your lumps along the way instead of looking down at all the other programs state wide.

 

WOW, how arrogant do you sound assuming that the successful schools are not "doing the right thing"

Nearly impossible to pull off.

 

I think the way to get better championship games (without recreating the wheel) is to find a way to reseed the 4th round.

This is where something like a combination of the Massey, Litkenhaus and the numbers in the Herald Leader (sorry--the name escapes me) could be used to determine seeds.

Get rid of alternating 4th round games--and play at a neutral site (which would probably save money over the long term for man teams).

1 plays 4, 2 plays 3 ... winners move on to the championship.

 

Now .. many people are not interested in computer rankings ... but it could actually help improve the quality of play.

For instance (since all the computer models take "strength of schedule" into account) smaller schools would have to make an attempt to play better teams.

Larger schools are not going to step down as often to play smaller schools (and if they do--it is not a huge deal--because they end up with a tougher game in the semi-finals--as opposed to somewhere like Ohio ... where you don't even make it in).

 

In reality .. this is a very small tweak ... and if explored and set up properly ... the quality of football should increase over the entire season ... and would also improve the quality of the championship games.

WOW, how arrogant do you sound assuming that the successful schools are not "doing the right thing"

I didn't say they aren't following their own rules for their own district etc. What I am saying is I get tired of the Trinity's etc. always looking down on the other schools across the state because if you want to know the truth you know rules that some follow aren't the same rules others follow. Never said anything about them breaking any rules, it's just rules are different some places than other places. Each school ditrict follows a certain set of rules. Some say it's their fault for not having the same set of rules etc. I say it's just different strokes for different folks.

and in the end it would be more balanced if everyone used the same set of rules.

 

So if you can't see the difference than I can't help you. I just get so tired of the same arrogant comments and always putting down the majority of schools across the state simply because they do things differently.

 

I look at it this way. The schools that most of the people look down on, the same people that make threads and floats ideas like this year in and year out are much better stories when they make it to the big game than those schools that are annually playing for thier title. Do I pull for teams like Cooper and the incredible seasons they had over teams like Trinity who simply continue to reload year in and year out? Yes, because schools like Cooper have to overcome a lot more than schools like Trinity.

 

So be upset at me if you wish, I just get tired of the continuing talk about how the elite schools are the only ones that matter.

 

Give me a cinderalla story like the 1980 US Hockey team over the annual right of passage of the New York Yankees.

 

Yes these teams I pull for will more times than not get their butts handed to them in ttitle games, but it doewsn't take anything away from the journey they had to make to get there.

I'd love to see an Elite class.. I'd even like to see 2 elite classes.. Your 4a, 5a, 6a elite class and a 3a, 2a, 1a elite class.. You could evaluate it every 4 years and adjust teams as needed.. You'd have to have some criteria to use to determine who'd be it and not sure what that would be, but, I love the idea..

 

It would be great to have a class with Trinity, St X, Male, PRP, BGreen, Scott Co, Cov Cath, Highlands, Lex Cath, Ballard, Eastern, Hend Co, WCentral, JHardin, Etc, even if it only had 24 or so teams in it..

A small class elite division with Central, Bell Co, Belfry, Breathitt Co, NCC, Mayfield, Beechwood, OB Cath, Tilghman, Ft Campbell, Murray, Danville, CAL, Desales, Etc..

 

Would sure make for alot more excitement and competitiveness..

PP, what did Tackett say? I did not hear him. I am curious.

 

He said a lot of things. I remember him saying that he respects the memories of those who recall how it was done in 1985 but it isn't 1985 anymore and things have changed a lot since then. He said said that KHSAA would never go back to that model. He said that traveling plays a significant role in how they put together their classes and districts. He said Kentucky is not a square state. The districting and regionalizing of the schools within their larticular areas and the sizes of the schools is incredibky difficult. He said that they have found that even schools that have 150 students should not be playing of in the same class as schools with even 500-600 students. Those are some of the things I remember. I was impressed with his answer. It sounded like they have been looking at different ideas but have yet to come up with an viable answer. He did also say he would rather have six classes and watch the rise of more football programs creating tradition instead of seeing the same traditional powers keep beating everyone. He correctly noted that it doesn't matter if they have 3 classes or 6 classes the traditional powers will always still win. While I do get annoyed with the 'everybody gets a trophy' mentality I do enjoy seeing schools like Cooper and Collins creating history and without 6 classes that history wouldn't be created.

Edited December 1, 201213 yr by PurplePride92

It's fine the way it is. As Julian Tackett explained it's not as easy as people think.

6 Classes in Kentucky is not fine the way it is.

How about doing something like this, and then you don't have to worry about an arrogant class.

 

I get so tired of hearing how only a few teams are truly great and the rest are embarrasments. If people are so worried about blowouts and the same teams winning every year, then how about evening the playing field?

 

Look at the schools that are always winning and think about how some of them do that each year?

 

Instead of the arrogance, how about leveling the playing field. How about passing a State rule saying teams can only be made up of kids that actually live inside thier school districts? How about making another rule that says if a kid switches schools (due to moving etc.) must sit out an entire year?

 

How about private schools simply playing other private schools and having their own class?

 

Then I'd be interested in seeing who is always the dominate programs amongst the public schools.

Now before people get up in arms saying blah blah we don't recruit blah blah blah, simply make it a level playing field across the state and quit looking down your noses at the other schools for doing the right thing year in and year out.

 

That is my 2 cents.....If you want to talk about the Elite Class, then take your lumps along the way instead of looking down at all the other programs state wide.

 

First, I believe the intent of the post is to say that FANS would like to see competitive playoff and state games. Outside of a hand full of games in all classes, the playoffs consisted of blowouts!

 

Second, no one truly feels an elite class would work. As one poster said, too many politics would go into who deserved/had to/forced/awarded/required/privileged to play in this class. My point there is each team would look at it totally different. Some teams would look at it as a privilege to be selected into the class and some would view it as a death sentence. We all could name 100's of reasons why it wouldn't work.

 

But you feeling that's its arrogance that drives this is completely incorrect. It's actually the opposite. These teams would not be happy to just be called "elite", the reason I like the idea is because of the competition level it provides. Teams that would want to play in a league such as this are actually making it tougher on themselves to win state championships! If you volunteer to play in an elite league, knowing that your chances to be a champion goes down, but you are willing to sacrifice that for competition in the playoffs, I don't see how you call that arrogance. I call it stepping up! I really don't think this post is about the teams that would be awarded into the elite league walking around gloating about being selected.

 

And because I feel the intent of the post was more for playoff competitiveness, then those 4-8 teams playing each other in the regular season does nothing to solve the problem. Again, you'd have to get your printer warmed up for paper certificates.

 

Lastly, your solution for new rules are just as crazy as the proposed solution of this post. When you talk about the private schools, your really only talking about T and X. They are the only private schools dominating. Do you want them to play each other every week because the outcomes would be no different if you made a private school league. With your solution, the public schools just don't have to play T and X. Buts lets say T and X didn't exist. Then all the talk would be about Scott county and why they play unfair. My point is, today for some reason everyone wants to knock the teams on top instead of working harder to get there. People feel entitled to a trophy! It's absolutely out of control!

 

Another point that I feel you are directing towards the successful public schools. Transfers. You say make them sit out a year. Lets look at that. First HHS has 5 kids that live outside of ft Thomas in their entire program. 5 out of about 140 kids. Do the math and tell me what that percentage is. I bet that half the schools in the state probably have close to that percentage on their team. Maybe they didn't go there for football, but are kids that live outside their district and go there for whatever reason. In fact, I think a couple of those kids on the HHS football team that live out of the district aren't even their for football reasons. They are their for education and just want to be a part of the football program. They aren't impact players at all!

 

So now lets talk about kids moving into the district and having to sit out a year. The reason this is so silly is because you can't be selective on who you choose to sit out. It would have to apply to all schools, every sport and every kid. That's not going to work! HHS softball team just had a girl move here from Wisconsin. Should she have to sit out a year? Do you think she came all the way here because she heard about HHS softball? What if she's a senior? Is she forced to just miss her senior season because her parents relocated her. That's crazy! Same with football. Not all kids move to ft Thomas just because of football. It is a great community with great schools. If you we're moving and had kids, what is the first question you ask yourself when looking for new areas to move to? You don't have to answer. I know what it is. You can't penalize high school kids if they move. That is the decision of the family and it a huge deal to pick up and move. If a family is willing to do that, then more power to them! And even if you did make that rule, families that would consider that solution would just start planning earlier and make that decision in grade or middle school. It wouldn't change a thing!

I personally think 4 is the best number... Not too many and not too few.

I didn't say they aren't following their own rules for their own district etc. What I am saying is I get tired of the Trinity's etc. always looking down on the other schools across the state because if you want to know the truth you know rules that some follow aren't the same rules others follow. Never said anything about them breaking any rules, it's just rules are different some places than other places. Each school ditrict follows a certain set of rules. Some say it's their fault for not having the same set of rules etc. I say it's just different strokes for different folks.

and in the end it would be more balanced if everyone used the same set of rules.

 

So if you can't see the difference than I can't help you. I just get so tired of the same arrogant comments and always putting down the majority of schools across the state simply because they do things differently.

 

I look at it this way. The schools that most of the people look down on, the same people that make threads and floats ideas like this year in and year out are much better stories when they make it to the big game than those schools that are annually playing for thier title. Do I pull for teams like Cooper and the incredible seasons they had over teams like Trinity who simply continue to reload year in and year out? Yes, because schools like Cooper have to overcome a lot more than schools like Trinity.

 

So be upset at me if you wish, I just get tired of the continuing talk about how the elite schools are the only ones that matter.

 

Give me a cinderalla story like the 1980 US Hockey team over the annual right of passage of the New York Yankees.

 

Yes these teams I pull for will more times than not get their butts handed to them in ttitle games, but it doewsn't take anything away from the journey they had to make to get there.

 

Everyone follows the same rules. If your school district chooses to limit themselves that's your problem. You call that arrogance, I call it truth.

 

Sent from my Samsung Stratosphere using Forum Runner

6 Classes in Kentucky is not fine the way it is.

 

I like it.

I like it.

This isn't Ohio. What's to like about watering down the classes?

He said a lot of things. I remember him saying that he respects the memories of those who recall how it was done in 1985 but it isn't 1985 anymore and thugs have changed a lot since then. He said said that KHSAA would never go back to that model. He said that traveling plays a significant role in how they put together their classes and districts. He said Kentucky is not a square state. The districting and regionalizing of the schools within their larticular areas and the sizes of the schools is incredibky difficult. He said that they have found that even schools that have 150 students should not be playing of in the same class as schools with even 500-600 students. Those are some of the things I remember. I was impressed with his answer. It sounded like they have been looking at different ideas but have yet to come up with an viable answer. He did also say he would rather have six classes and watch the rise of more football programs creating tradition instead of seeing the same traditional powers keep beating everyone. He correctly noted that it doesn't matter if they have 3 classes or 6 classes the traditional powers will always still win. While I do get annoyed with the 'everybody gets a trophy' mentality I do enjoy seeing schools like Cooper and Collins creating history and without 6 classes that history wouldn't be created.

 

I disagree, thugs from 1985 are just older than the thugs from 2012. Either way, they're still THUGS :lol:

6 is definately too many. we only have 220 schools with a football program.. I don't like the fact that the KHSAA says, okay, we're going to take the smallest 32 schools and put them in 1a and the lasrgest 32 in 6a.. I think there ought to be a limit of students in each class and if that means 50 in 1 class and 25 in another, so, be it.. In other words, if your smallest schools have 100 boys in the top 4 grades, they should limit the teams in that class to students with, say, 200 boys.. Thats still quite a difference, but, what if that 32nd team had 300 boys, then it really gets unbalanced.. I'd much rather see it layed out something like this:

 

0-200 - 1a

201- 400 - 2a

401-600 -3a

601-800 - 4a

801 + - 5a

 

Or something along these lines.. I also think schools should be allowed to play up a class is they prefer and play down a class if geography is better, as long as they're no more than 10% over the max limit. That may help getting teams more easily placed..

I disagree, thugs from 1985 are just older than the thugs from 2012. Either way, they're still THUGS :lol:

 

Fat fingers + autocorrect =thugs instead of things. :lol: