I enjoy the system the KHSAA has in place, but honestly I would like to see every team get an opportunity in the playoffs, regardless of record. The playoffs bring about a special experience that nobody should be denied, even if your team is on the losing end of a 63-0 beating in the first round. There needs to be a special setup so that everybody can make the playoffs and have an opportunity to win the state tournament.

 

I think that will actually increase competition. You look at the NCAA basketball tournament and people complained when it was built up to 64 teams. I personally think it should be 96 teams, but it's not uncommon to see a 2 seed or a 3 seed lose in the first round. I think it would be the same way with 96 teams and I also think it would be the same in high school should more teams be allowed to compete. Don't know for sure, but it's a solution I am confident in.

:popcorn:

Move to Indiana. How can it improve an 0-10 team's season by having them take a 50-0 shellacking to wrap things up? Most times, these teams are happy to end the season.

Most folks in this forum would argue that there are too many teams in the playoffs as it is. These same folks would express the opinion that a post season birth should be a reward for a good season and should not be all inclusive. I don't believe there is merit in playing a game in which one team believes they cannot win.

The first round games are comical. In order for the playoffs to be better the state needs to reduce classes. 6 is too many for KY.

The way its setup right now is perfect for every team to make the playoffs.. But Some intstances I would like to see winless teams not be able to make the playoff not because there winless but to save money on the travel.

The way its setup right now is perfect for every team to make the playoffs.. But Some intstances I would like to see winless teams not be able to make the playoff not because there winless but to save money on the travel.

 

Money is a huge factor. Poor Fulton City has had to travel to Louisville to get 50+ points

If you don't win AT LEAST half your games, you do not deserve to be in the playoffs. End of discussion, IMO. "Participation sports" and everybody getting a trophy should NEVER carry past entry level youth sports. This mentality is why there are so many issues with parents in middle and high school that get bent out of shape because Little Johnny isn't the star of the football team. Your kid sucks, and by giving him/her participation trophies their whole life, you have created a distorted view of reality.

 

Just my two cents.

I've been on the 10-0 end of things going into the playoffs, the 5-5 and the 0-10.

 

There is absolutely zero point for an 0-10 team in this current set up to go on the road some 2-3 hours in the first round to get pistol whipped.

 

If an 11th game is what the KHSAA wants, then so be it:

-Go to an 11 game regular season, take the top 2 with the current 6 class set up.

 

0-10 teams have zero business going to the playoffs.

 

All of the feel good, gum drops and butterfly answers out there sound good, but it does ZERO good...for either team. So, go an 11 game regular season.

 

I've mapped that out and recently post it here in some thread, it wouldn't effect the season length at all (which I'm also against. The State Finals have been the 1st weekend in December for the past 20-25 years...not just since 6 classes like many think. It's always 70 degrees and sunny for basketball, which I love, be it starting the first week of December or the June...when the play their other season...sorry, couldn't resist. )

I think its fine the way it is, outside of the fact that I hate four team districts. Everyone should have to win at least a game in their district to get in IMO.

 

For teams that barely make it in and get destroyed I'll agree. I think the experience is worth it, especially if you're not at a school that makes the playoffs on an annual basis. It helps teams build programs.

 

In our area I think Lewis is a good example of why the playoff system can work. After beginning to make the playoffs their program has really improved over the past few years and have become more competitive on the local level than in previous years. Even won a district title a few years ago.

 

However, I think it can be argued that with only 2 teams per district making it that play across the state would improve out of necessity. However, I think the effects are debatable. Do programs grow more due to increased exposure to the playoffs or would programs improve more by trying to improve their programs to the level of the top teams in their district to try to get one of two highly coveted spots in the big show? Who knows? Overall, I see no negatives in the current playoff setup, some programs will continue to improve regardless. Overall I think the level of the product on the field now is superior to what it was 10-15 years ago. Players do seem smaller though .

If you don't win AT LEAST half your games, you do not deserve to be in the playoffs. End of discussion, IMO. "Participation sports" and everybody getting a trophy should NEVER carry past entry level youth sports. This mentality is why there are so many issues with parents in middle and high school that get bent out of shape because Little Johnny isn't the star of the football team. Your kid sucks, and by giving him/her participation trophies their whole life, you have created a distorted view of reality.

 

Just my two cents.

So you would of had no problem with Trinity not getting in the playoffs last year?

I only say this because if you have to win half or more than half your games to get into the playoffs then that pretty much deters coaches from scheduling tough games.

 

KHSAA has screwed up the playoffs by the way they created districts. There really can't be a fair way of doing the playoffs until they fix the districts and quit creating 3 team districts which is the dumbest thing ever thought up.

If you take geography out of the mix, I'd like to see 6 team districts with the top 4 moving on to a playoff. Top teams get rewarded, everyone has something to play for during the regular season and we should have more competitive games in the playoffs.

Move to Indiana. How can it improve an 0-10 team's season by having them take a 50-0 shellacking to wrap things up? Most times, these teams are happy to end the season.

 

I actually like the Indiana system. Play an 8 game regular season against whoever you want. Then do a blind draw to fill out the region bracket.

 

Does a few things:

 

1) If the bad teams are not going to win, this way they only have 9 games instead of 11.

2) Cuts down on regular season travel costs as there are no far flung district games. You can schedule whoever you want.

3) Allows coaches to tailor their schedule. Not many teams want to be stuck in a district with Trinity/X/Highlands/Mayfield etc. Now you don't have to play them if you don't feel it benefits your program.

4) Makes the first week of the playoffs much more interesting as you could potentially have the top two teams in the region meeting in the first week.

The playoff system is already watered down enough with allowing 4 teams per district in. It should only be the 1st and 2nd place teams in the playoffs. Anymore than that is ridiculous to me.

I actually like the Indiana system. Play an 8 game regular season against whoever you want. Then do a blind draw to fill out the region bracket.

 

Does a few things:

 

1) If the bad teams are not going to win, this way they only have 9 games instead of 11.

2) Cuts down on regular season travel costs as there are no far flung district games. You can schedule whoever you want.

3) Allows coaches to tailor their schedule. Not many teams want to be stuck in a district with Trinity/X/Highlands/Mayfield etc. Now you don't have to play them if you don't feel it benefits your program.

4) Makes the first week of the playoffs much more interesting as you could potentially have the top two teams in the region meeting in the first week.

 

Yuck. I'd rather control my playoff destiny with how I do against common opponents.