Maybe the dumbest question ever on BGP...... District tourney time is the most exciting time in any young basketball players life!!!!!!!!

 

 

:thumb:

Maybe the dumbest question ever on BGP...... District tourney time is the most exciting time in any young basketball players life!!!!!!!!

 

What is dumb about this idea? I can certainly understand people disagreeing with the prospect, but dumb? I bet you are a creative thinking individual, just like the guy whom invented the square wheel.

 

I guess for teams that never make the regional tourney, the district is a big deal. Nothing against district tourneys, I enjoy cutting down the nets as much as the next guy. But for a lot of teams, the regional is the meat and potatoes and the district is just a formality. Heck, a lot of schools dont even bother to cut down the nets in the district. In my district the 63rd, my school went 28 years between district titles, it was a pretty big deal when they won it. But for the powerhouses in the district it frankly didnt mean a whole lot. It would make region play that more exciting and certainly should draw interests all around for the middle seeded games.

 

Dont look now but there are 10 other dummies like me that think it might be a viable option over all the bickering over district seeding.

 

Eagle8: I agree that adults should be able to rate their own region without a lot of bickering, but I hesitate. It seems as though in Ohio the open meeting method does work from what I am told. Even on the borderline decisions it usually works out for the most part to the coaches liking. The tough calls are usually in the middle and those teams usually play each other so they get to prove it on the court in the tourney.

I think it would be a little hard for every team in a region to play each other, especially when you have so many tournaments that everyone likes ( and needs) to play in during the season. Besides tournaments most of our schools only play around 18-19 scheduled games if they had to play everyone in their region that would leave no time for playing other schools out of region. Those kids need exposure to other regions. I know its a big difference to our kids in the mountains when they go and play the Bluegrass teams and I think they need that in order to get better and be more competitive. Besides district tourneys are the cornerstone of local basketball rivalries and some of the best games ever are at the first level of tournament time!

District tourney's are so pressure packed and critical that you get the opportunity to LOSE in the post season and still win a regional title. In 2003 in the 64th District Ashland was the champion, only to lose in the region final to Rose Hill. You think those young men remember that grand District Title? Ashland's billionth District Title. Or the Region Runner-Up?

 

I remember it well! I just hope there isnt any Rose Hill fans around when I'm telling my grandkids how I won the district title and two weeks later watched the team I beat, play at Rupp.

I think it would be a little hard for every team in a region to play each other, especially when you have so many tournaments that everyone likes ( and needs) to play in during the season. Besides tournaments most of our schools only play around 18-19 scheduled games if they had to play everyone in their region that would leave no time for playing other schools out of region. Those kids need exposure to other regions. I know its a big difference to our kids in the mountains when they go and play the Bluegrass teams and I think they need that in order to get better and be more competitive. Besides district tourneys are the cornerstone of local basketball rivalries and some of the best games ever are at the first level of tournament time!

 

I agree in some of the bigger regions, the scheduling to play all the teams would hurt. In the 16th there are only 16 teams which leaves you 9 games to play outside comp., plus when you add a couple tournaments where you can play multiple games and count it as 1 game it is pretty flexible. But the best for seeding would be a coaches meeting and lay them out like the NCAA.

I think this would be very interesting. You could possibly see a #16 team up setting the #1 team. There would be many upsets. I think the atmosheres would be a lot more huger because a lot of these smaller schools havent ever played in the region tourney because their district is stacked with big schools.

I just think the way the Districts are aligned is pretty goofy in the 9th region. There really is not a good rivalry when it comes to Districts. In the old days.. you played your district opponents 2 times during the year and the tournament was always the 3rd time ifyou met... Now.. Highlands doesnt even play Dayton, Bellevue, probably because they are much weaker but just my opinion....on the whole District thing. It is good for tournament seeding.

I do not like the fact that a District loser can end up a State Champion. I also do not like that some coaches are forced to make decisions on banged-up players in the District Finals. Play them and jepordize your chances of winning a Region, or sit them and give the District away.

 

I prefer the Ohio method of seeding and allowing teams to "pick their poison". Basically teams are seeded and then the others draw and get to pick who they want to play in the bracket. (Obviously you might want to avoid the #1 seed, but maybe not if you think you match up better with them.)

 

If you are unfamilar with that method read this article.

 

Lakota West (14-1) drew its first No. 1 sectional seed Saturday since the Lakota District divided nine years ago, as coaches got their first look at the road to the state title.

 

Coach after coach stayed clear of the Enquirer coaches' poll No. 1 team, forcing Colerain (1-11), which drew the last pick, to face the Firebirds Feb. 23 in the Division I sectional tournament.

 

"You have no control over that," said Lakota West coach Mike Mueller. "I'm pretty confident that we are a tough team to beat any time we take the floor, and maybe other people felt the same way."

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060129/SPT0301/601290415/1069/SPT03

I suggested the same idea about 10 years ago when some KHSAA officials were talking at a meeting I attended.

 

I don't see it happening soon. The idea then was that if consolidation reduced the number of teams in the state to less than 256, you would have 16 teams or less in each region. This would also happen if the public/private split were approved.

 

It would be real easy to do if there were 15 teams or less in a region. If there were 14 teams, for example, you would have two teams receiving byes with six "play-in" games on a Monday. You would then have your regular eight-team regional tournament and carry on as always. I would have the girls regional one week, then the boys, with the state tournaments to follow, or vice-versa.

I dont see what is difficult with an overall region tourney, you dont have to have 16 teams or less or 15. Several regions are already 16 teams and that is pretty simple to have a 16 team tourney. In the other regions you have a few play-in games to set the 16 team tourney. All of the teams play district play and region play in a 2 week span now. In fact it would be easier to play the overall region because you eliminate the useless district title games. All of those teams advance now. Consequently there would be less games in a single tourney format than the current layout.

I could live with it either way now. My point is that if you drop below 256 teams it is then impossible to have 64 four-team districts. Three-team districts are terrible, so it would be an easier sell if you had some of those.

 

I'm not against the idea, but I think you need a few less schools or a public/private split to give it enough steam to go through.

I could live with it either way now. My point is that if you drop below 256 teams it is then impossible to have 64 four-team districts. Three-team districts are terrible, so it would be an easier sell if you had some of those.

 

I'm not against the idea, but I think you need a few less schools or a public/private split to give it enough steam to go through.

 

I dont seem to understand were you are going. Right now we have more than 256. IF you do what I propose and have only region tourneys, it doesnt matter if you have more or less than 256. 256 is perfect to have 16, 16 team regions. But either way above or below 256 is a simple adjustment for a region tourney. Below 16 you have some byes. Above 16 you have some play-in games. It's not that complicated.

I prefer option 1 as well.

 

I am a big fan of history and District Tourney's of past. But I am so sick of this District Seeding whining that I wish they would eliminate district play and go straight to region play. Plus this would force teams to compete with one another inside the region and still allow you plenty of games to schedule outside region.

Some regions have a many a 18 teams and most have 16, I don't seem how that leaves plenty of room for a school to beef up it's schedule. Currently some schools schedule as many as 15 out of region teams in an effort to have a strong a schedule as possible. This would only benefit the Louisville, Lexington and Northern Ky areas. Eastern Ky would suffer! I vote against!

Keep District PLay;)

Better yet- we could go to the pod system where you could play at a neutral site with limited travel time!! :thumb: Then if there was a really strong #2 from say, the 1st region they might be able to put him as a #1 in the 16th Region! :lol: With the pod setup it would not really be a big deal. I would like them to seed 1-whatever(all the teams) and go from there. That would be a large and unique thread!!!Be aware I'm being completely fictitious!!! :ylsuper: