Please tell everyone how to do it.

 

Another diversion because I asked you to tell whys it impossible.

 

If getting all teams in and an opportunity to compete on the field (and remember, we are only talking about 30 teams that get eliminated)..

1. Lengthen the playoffs by a week and play the games. What's one more week and I'm not positive you even have to do that. Haver looked at a bracket.

2. Shorten the season to 9 weeks and play the extra playoff games, because the season would mean nothing anyway other than seeding. You are shortening the regular season, but guaranteed a playoff game so the season is essentially the same length anyway.

 

 

Heck, this is just off the top of my head. Now tell me why all these smart guys couldn't figure even something better out. Tell me why it can't be done.

RC, it seems to me you continue to ignore what we've been saying about other sports. You for some reason keep saying there is no playoffs in other sports until

They play on the regionals. That is false and a lie. Until you realize that in bball and baseball etc that they actually have district tournaments AND unlike football

Those other sports allow even more tes to advance than football after district tournaments (2) while football if you lose in the playoffs you are out and don't advance.

 

Your lack of knowledge and understanding on how the other sports post season works is what keeps you from having a fair discussion about football. This surprises

Me because I thought you coached softball or something like that.

 

You see. To lay it out for you I will explain the difference. No gray areas at all this is point blank black and white.

 

1. In baseball, softball and basketball every single team gets to play in the post season.

 

2. In football not all the teams advance to play in the postseason.

 

Yet for some reason you think too many teams in football play in the post season but not too many in softball and baseball and basketball.

 

Now you tell us whose thought process is flawed.

 

I'm not comparing other sports, you are. I'm trying to discuss the football process. We all agree its different right?

 

I say the current football process lets too many team get rewarded and advance.

 

You never answered my question of what did cooper do to deserve a playoff spot. And if cooper was in a 4 team district and grant co wasn't in the district, would you feel that Cooper deserved and earned a playoff spot? Because they would of had no district wins.

 

Just answer the question.

I'm not comparing other sports, you are. I'm trying to discuss the football process. We all agree its different right?

 

I say the current football process lets too many team get rewarded and advance.

 

You never answered my question of what did cooper do to deserve a playoff spot. And if cooper was in a 4 team district and grant co wasn't in the district, would you feel that Cooper deserved and earned a playoff spot? Because they would of had no district wins.

 

Just answer the question.

Cooper had to win in district play. Something that i've always said I think every district teams should hhave to do and that is earn their way in by winning in the regular season. If there were only 3 teams in every district that got in would I have a problem with it this year? No, and Cooper wouldn't of gotten in. But I will say any less than 3 teams in is bad because there are more times than some want to admit 3 way ties in districts.

 

I have been on record in the past that I would have no big problems with only allowing the top 3 teams in. What I do have a problem with however is when people like you only look at the minority of districts and say because they only have 4 teams the state should not allow 4 teams each district in. Your question about Cooper is useless because the fact is Cooper is in a district with 5 teams, not 4. Even if it was 4 I already said I have no problem with only 3 per district going so this year I would oof had no issue if it were that way also. I just always have an issue with those that think only 2 should go.

You say my lack of knowledge of other sports. Now that's really funny because most on here know I am the head coach of HHS softball team and my daughter is a sophomore who has been in the varsity high school Bball program since 7th grade. I know the other sports very well.

 

I'm saying we aren't talking about the other sports. We are talking about football. Answer the questions about football. We all know its completely different, so you can't compare it to other sports.

 

You guys do a great job of diverting the topic to other things when challenged. You're like magicians "hey, look over here!".

 

I've asked several questions pertaining to football and neither of you answer them.

 

1.Does football have process to eliminate weak teams and reward teams for their accomplishments in the regular season?

2. If your answer is yes and you say the process is fine, why does the process reward teams that have no wins or no district wins, or even just one district win.

 

Don't do any diversion, just answer the question.

Football is different. Football is the only sport that doesn;t allow all the teams in the post season. So tthat is why I have such a question to you and that is why does football bother you so much? Shouldnn't your beef be with Softball since you do coach a team in a sport where every team gets in the post season and your entire beef has always been too many teams (football) get in the playoffs.

Lol, getting to technical. Winner and runner up, end of story. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

Lol, getting to technical. Winner and runner up, end of story. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

That makes for a very weak playoff system. I'd much rather have the best team win state titles and that will happen a lot more times than just taking 1 and 2.

 

Why would anyone not want the probability of crowning the best team in each class over not knowing mmore times than not if the best team won?

 

Shoot, if you want it your way, then why even bother with 1 and 2? Lets just take #1 seed in every district and let them play eachother. Shoot, Football could be over before thanksgiving.

Cooper had to win in district play. Something that i've always said I think every district teams should hhave to do and that is earn their way in by winning in the regular season. If there were only 3 teams in every district that got in would I have a problem with it this year? No, and Cooper wouldn't of gotten in. But I will say any less than 3 teams in is bad because there are more times than some want to admit 3 way ties in districts.

 

I have been on record in the past that I would have no big problems with only allowing the top 3 teams in. What I do have a problem with however is when people like you only look at the minority of districts and say because they only have 4 teams the state should not allow 4 teams each district in. Your question about Cooper is useless because the fact is Cooper is in a district with 5 teams, not 4. Even if it was 4 I already said I have no problem with only 3 per district going so this year I would oof had no issue if it were that way also. I just always have an issue with those that think only 2 should go.

 

First, minority of districts? 48 districts and 26 districts have 4 or less. (one district has 3 teams) So i'm not sure where you get your info. Either way, it makes no difference because I'm not focusing on any of it. I'm saying that I don't care how many teams are in a district, teams should earn their way in and rewarded for success. You both have said "the best" and "earn their way in". In fact, Cooper benefited from having more opportunities in their district to "get one win" and be "rewarded" a playoff spot. Because "the majority" of the districts only have 4 teams which means less chances to get that "one win" needed to earn a spot and pass the best teams on to the playoffs.

 

 

I'm not saying teams and I'm not looking at anything about 4 team districts. You tend to sway things the way you think I'm going. I am saying (IN FOOTBALL) teams are rewarded for less than mediocre success. (if you agree that the regular season is indeed used to reward success and advance teams. If you don't believe that, then I'm going to start argueing for poor Grant Co because there were plenty of no win teams and no district win teams in the playoffs. So in their case, it would be better for them to play in a 4 team district!

First, minority of districts? 48 districts and 26 districts have 4 or less. (one district has 3 teams) So i'm not sure where you get your info. Either way, it makes no difference because I'm not focusing on any of it. I'm saying that I don't care how many teams are in a district, teams should earn their way in and rewarded for success. You both have said "the best" and "earn their way in". In fact, Cooper benefited from having more opportunities in their district to "get one win" and be "rewarded" a playoff spot. Because "the majority" of the districts only have 4 teams which means less chances to get that "one win" needed to earn a spot and pass the best teams on to the playoffs.

 

 

I'm not saying teams and I'm not looking at anything about 4 team districts. You tend to sway things the way you think I'm going. I am saying (IN FOOTBALL) teams are rewarded for less than mediocre success. (if you agree that the regular season is indeed used to reward success and advance teams. If you don't believe that, then I'm going to start argueing for poor Grant Co because there were plenty of no win teams and no district win teams in the playoffs. So in their case, it would be better for them to play in a 4 team district!

In football you are right, some teams are rewarded for less than mediocre success. You are absolutley correct. With that said, at least a many do still have to earn their way in, something that the other sports don't even have. In football 21 districts leave teams out of the post season. In other sports you can have every single district with a team with 0 wins the entire season and they stilll make the post season. So in reality although you have an issue with football, at least football does restrict teams from going to the playoffs more than any other sport which is why I never understtood this argument every year. Football is the most restricted sport out of the main HS sports when it comes to post season participation. Yet they are the most scrutinized. I just don't undderstand it. Could it be better? Yes sir. But it's already better than all the other sports and how they handle post season play.

 

 

Maybe KHSAA should start with the other sports and get them caught up to Football before starting to criticize the only sport that actually limits teams fromplaying in the post season.

Football is different. Football is the only sport that doesn;t allow all the teams in the post season. So tthat is why I have such a question to you and that is why does football bother you so much? Shouldnn't your beef be with Softball since you do coach a team in a sport where every team gets in the post season and your entire beef has always been too many teams (football) get in the playoffs.

 

Remember, other sports are different. Other sport's disrticts have 1A schools all the way up to 6A schools in the same district. Other sports have a way to break down the weak teams very quick that is not condusive to football. Other sports get down to 16 teams within 2 weeks (across all levels, 1A to 6A) How many teams are left after 2 weeks of football (all divisions). So you're right, they are much different and can't be compared. So lets start talking football and forget about comparing them to the other sports.

 

If you agree that the district games in football are used to eliminate the weaker teams, reward success and pass the best on to the playoffs, then you cannot tell me the process is just fine. WAY too many examples why that's not working.

 

If you say it's intended to let the most teams possible in (while in your next breath saying the teams that earn it and the bes,VOR), then they should all be let in. Wouldn't that be the "most teams possible in". Indiana does it! Don't have a process to let in 90% of the teams.

 

EITHER, acutally reward success OR let them all play. Like you want to believe, the other sports "let them all play"...if you actully don't understand.

 

If we had Julian Tackett in our scenario like I said before and we asked him, what are the intentions of the regular season district competiton. What do you think he'd say was the intention. What are they trying to do with that process in place. Don't divert...answer that question.

That makes for a very weak playoff system. I'd much rather have the best team win state titles and that will happen a lot more times than just taking 1 and 2.

 

Why would anyone not want the probability of crowning the best team in each class over not knowing mmore times than not if the best team won?

 

Shoot, if you want it your way, then why even bother with 1 and 2? Lets just take #1 seed in every district and let them play eachother. Shoot, Football could be over before thanksgiving.

 

That's basically the way it used to be. Districts were 7-9 teams and they only took 4. Now districts are 4-6 teams and they still take 4. So they used to only take the top 50% of the teams. Now they take the top 85-90% of the teams.

Remember, other sports are different. Other sport's disrticts have 1A schools all the way up to 6A schools in the same district. Other sports have a way to break down the weak teams very quick that is not condusive to football. Other sports get down to 16 teams within 2 weeks (across all levels, 1A to 6A) How many teams are left after 2 weeks of football (all divisions). So you're right, they are much different and can't be compared. So lets start talking football and forget about comparing them to the other sports.

 

If you agree that the district games in football are used to eliminate the weaker teams, reward success and pass the best on to the playoffs, then you cannot tell me the process is just fine. WAY too many examples why that's not working.

 

If you say it's intended to let the most teams possible in (while in your next breath saying the teams that earn it and the bes,VOR), then they should all be let in. Wouldn't that be the "most teams possible in". Indiana does it! Don't have a process to let in 90% of the teams.

 

EITHER, acutally reward success OR let them all play. Like you want to believe, the other sports "let them all play"...if you actully don't understand.

 

If we had Julian Tackett in our scenario like I said before and we asked him, what are the intentions of the regular season district competiton. What do you think he'd say was the intention. What are they trying to do with that process in place. Don't divert...answer that question.

But other sports still get every team in. I understand they get a lot of the teams out after 2 weeks, but a big reason that is is they can play more games than 1 a week.

 

I agree with some of what you are saying about Football. But I don't understand why you don't argue that too many get in for baseball etc. That is what doesn't make much sense to me. How can iit be such a problem for one but not another especially when the other has even more participants in tthe post season.

 

I think it would be best to have 6-8 teams per district and take the top 4. I think that would be great. The problem is the classes and you do have to have classes in Football because Football more thaan any other sport is a sport of attrition. The bigger the school the more of an advantage you have in football more than any other sport.

 

 

I'd have no problem with 6-8 teams per district in football. I actually would have no problem seeing iff they could expand the areas for the districts or even cut classes down to 5...not 4, but 5 because I'd make the 5th class the Private and big Schools class, let them battle it out amongst themselves and have all the rest inthe other 4 classes. People would complain about that too, but it's what I would do.

 

I'd love for it to be back to 6+ teams a district and take top 4. But it's not that way right now so with what they have right now I have no problem with 4 getting in. I never have a problem with playoffs, aafter week 1 the majority of the teams people have a problem with playing will be out anyway.

In football you are right, some teams are rewarded for less than mediocre success. You are absolutley correct. With that said, at least a many do still have to earn their way in, something that the other sports don't even have. In football 21 districts leave teams out of the post season. In other sports you can have every single district with a team with 0 wins the entire season and they stilll make the post season. So in reality although you have an issue with football, at least football does restrict teams from going to the playoffs more than any other sport which is why I never understtood this argument every year. Football is the most restricted sport out of the main HS sports when it comes to post season participation. Yet they are the most scrutinized. I just don't undderstand it. Could it be better? Yes sir. But it's already better than all the other sports and how they handle post season play.

 

 

Maybe KHSAA should start with the other sports and get them caught up to Football before starting to criticize the only sport that actually limits teams fromplaying in the post season.

 

So what? We've already agreed they are different sports with different processes. Who cares what the other sports do. If football was condusive to playing it like the other sports, they would. But they aren't so they have their own process and their process is flawed by letting too many team earn their way in (if you want to call it that)

So what? We've already agreed they are different sports with different processes. Who cares what the other sports do. If football was condusive to playing it like the other sports, they would. But they aren't so they have their own process and their process is flawed by letting too many team earn their way in (if you want to call it that)

No, you agreed they are different. I still claim post season is post season no matter what sport.

 

 

The only difference they have is Football needs to be seperated by school size due to the nature of the game. that is the only difference I see. As far as post season play they are the same. Which is wwhy I question why other sports get everyone in post season play. I think the other sports should bee more like football when it comes to post season and that is to make the regular season mean something like it does in football in those 20+ districts we've already discussed.

^ I can't speculate on the intentions of the current system except that it is to fit the teams into a 10 game regular season followed by 5 week playoff. I think you are right. There has to be a way to get all the teams in. How many teams play football in Kentucky?

^ I can't speculate on the intentions of the current system except that it is to fit the teams into a 10 game regular season followed by 5 week playoff. I think you are right. There has to be a way to get all the teams in. How many teams play football in Kentucky?

 

I think it was 220 when I just checked and 190 are in the playoffs.