One of the biggest problems is that for the most part, the same teams are winning the state championships year after year, with 75% of the titles going to 8 teams.

 

Is that really a problem if they deserve it? 3, 4 or 6 classes. This phenomenon has been ever present for the most part since 1959.

 

It seems though that the State Championship is the one and only measure of accomplishment.

 

Does anyone care about winning district? Or even region? For the big 8 or so - the answer is probably not. But what about those at the tiers below the big 8 or so? What about for a school that has not won a a playoff game in a decade or so?

 

With some teams not even making the playoffs on a multi-year basis those programs probably are struggling and not getting better.

 

I just believe that 'fixing' the 'Big 8' problem with more classes is short-sighted. It would be good to get all the teams into the playoffs since most make it anyway. And now teams that are 0-10 in 6A and 1A are getting 'rewarded' and are treated completely differently that similarly situated teams in 2A, 3A, 4A and 5A. Did I post something about 'arbitrary and capacious' previously? Well there is the definition right there.

 

Regions Championships used to mean something, even district championships at one time. Some schools have the older ones prominently displayed. But not so much the more recent ones. In 4A the Final game used to between the State-wide 'Champion' and the Jefferson County 'Champion'. And I know people who use those terms describing their high school achievement. Probably because Jefferson County won 75+% of the final games. But KHSAA mucked up that multi-tier approach out of jealousy of Jefferson County's accomplishments,

 

I like Indiana's two tier tournament structure. It separates their Section tournaments from the State Tournament. Giving more meaning and definition to both. In Kentucky we just have 5 weeks of 'survivor' playoffs and 6 winners at the end.

Well stated brother. You get it, and I know it. Maybe this explanation will help others get it too.

 

I get it too!!!! If 16 weeks of football, 6 classes, and almost everyone making the playoffs optimizes all the benefits of high school football. Then I would propose a double elmination post season, double the numer of classes to 12, and I wouldn't exclude anyone from the playoffs. The current structure is silly - I propose we go ahead and make it totally absurd. The arguments for the current structure and my new proposal will be the same.

... I don't care what other sports think.

 

Wow!!!!

The 5 years prior to going to 6 classes, 1A had 4 different champs, 2A had 4, 3A had 4 and 4A had 1.

 

State Champs - Since Year 2000 - 6 Years of 6 Class and 7 Years of 4 Class

Edited August 15, 201313 yr by XtraIce

Class 4A has Trinity and St X winning State Titles and when classes were expanded to 6 Classes that continued in 6A

 

Class 3A had 4 teams winning titles and when the classes expanded 5A and 4A was shared by the same teams that were winning in 3A with the exemption of Cov Cath winning in 2006 and Bell Co winning in 2008. Highlands Boyle Co and Lex Cath all won multiple State Titles. When Highlands was moved from 5A to 4A then you have Bowling Green winning 5A.

 

Class 2A had Boyle Co win in 2000 and then they moved to 3A and continued. When they left 2A had 5 different teams win Titles. When the class went to 6 Central had dominated 3A and FT Campbell and NCC has won multiple 2A Titles

 

Class 1A has Danville and NCC winning multiple titles when only 4 Classes. When the classes were expanded to 6 you have Beechwood and Mayfield winning multiple titles.

 

Personnaly I like the 6 classes even if there is some inbalance in scoring.