Beechwood and Mayfield need to move to 2A.

 

I'm just saying.

Mayfield is...

The current system stinks. Why not have the Fulton's playing like teams? Isn't that what the class system is suppose to be doing? Shouldn't BG be a 6A school with their current domination of 5A? Why not level the playing field for everyone. Do it on an individual basis, and look at each school, it's history, it's current program and evaluate them in that way. For instance, Mayfield is a perennial powerhouse for a smaller school, and can compete with any 2A or 3A school in a given season. Another would be Bowling Green, no way they are not a 6A school. BY reevaluating each school in this way, you would force each school to have an exceptional year in their respective class to become a state champion. Isn't that what we are after in the end?

In my view, male enrollment is almost irrelevant. Look at Highlands. Their roster size is larger that many 6A programs and they win titles often on the basis of depth alone. Roster size should be the weighting criteria for defining classification, not male enrollment.

The current system stinks. Why not have the Fulton's playing like teams? Isn't that what the class system is suppose to be doing? Shouldn't BG be a 6A school with their current domination of 5A? Why not level the playing field for everyone. Do it on an individual basis, and look at each school, it's history, it's current program and evaluate them in that way. For instance, Mayfield is a perennial powerhouse for a smaller school, and can compete with any 2A or 3A school in a given season. Another would be Bowling Green, no way they are not a 6A school. BY reevaluating each school in this way, you would force each school to have an exceptional year in their respective class to become a state champion. Isn't that what we are after in the end?

 

The system is so good , that it insures that the entrenched powers maintain their advantage!

Good gracious. The ONLY consistent factor you can use is enrollment, and it should be the only one used when classing teams. Can't use roster size, "doormat team" syndrome, or anything else. Enrollment, ESPECIALLY with 6 classes, does MORE than enough is trying to somewhat equalize the playing field.

 

It's not 1A Mayfield's fault that they can dress 60+ players some years (58 this year according to KHSAA roster), and 1A Dayton can only dress 29 (KHSAA listed roster). They are classed relative to their size, and they are close in size.

 

My take...quit trying to separate "mediocrity" into it's own class and make teams rise above it. And, lets remember, all the teams in KY only have to play teams in their district, they can schedule anyone else who will schedule them for their remaining games. So, if you are a not very successful program (Hopkins Co Central the past few years as an example) then schedule 4 or 5 out of district teams that you more line up with and can compete with. Problem solved.

In my view, male enrollment is almost irrelevant. Look at Highlands. Their roster size is larger that many 6A programs and they win titles often on the basis of depth alone. Roster size should be the weighting criteria for defining classification, not male enrollment.

 

Really??? They won because of depth alone??? Didn't outwork the other programs in the off season? Didn't have great coaching? Didn't develop kids into that depth? Didn't create a program and culture that a lot of kids want to play? They don't adapt to the talent they have better than anyone in the state? Nothing to do with a conditioning program that has D1 coaches saying "that's the best off season program I have ever seen" and alumni players coming back saying "college is easy compared to our workouts in HS". They develop the kids they have from day one. There is a reason they have more kids on the roster than a lot of 6A programs. It's hard work and pride that makes them good...depth is a very small part of it and that's only when they have it.

 

When I was a sophomore, we had about 110 kids on the team. And back then, we didn't platoon and there were about 6 kids that never came off the field. They were winning back then too. So what did depth have to do with it then?

 

I will give you that creating depth has helped HHS compete with the big schools in recent history. But depth is created by work ethic and development. Not by how many kids you have on the sidelines. You can have depth with 40 kids on the team if you develop them. HHS graduates about 30 kids a year. Do you think all of them contribute on a high level? No, some develop and some don't. But the others still play. Is that the depth you're talking about?

 

To say they have won titles on depth alone is flat out silly! Depth is a small part of the bigger solution, but nowhere near the top of the list of why they win titles.

Good gracious. The ONLY consistent factor you can use is enrollment, and it should be the only one used when classing teams. Can't use roster size, "doormat team" syndrome, or anything else. Enrollment, ESPECIALLY with 6 classes, does MORE than enough is trying to somewhat equalize the playing field.

 

It's not 1A Mayfield's fault that they can dress 60+ players some years (58 this year according to KHSAA roster), and 1A Dayton can only dress 29 (KHSAA listed roster). They are classed relative to their size, and they are close in size.

 

My take...quit trying to separate "mediocrity" into it's own class and make teams rise above it. And, lets remember, all the teams in KY only have to play teams in their district, they can schedule anyone else who will schedule them for their remaining games. So, if you are a not very successful program (Hopkins Co Central the past few years as an example) then schedule 4 or 5 out of district teams that you more line up with and can compete with. Problem solved.

 

This!...We want to create opportunities to reward mediocrity rather than challenging them to get better. There will always be good programs and there will always be programs with challenges. Challenge the other programs to get better! Some will and some won't. Some care to get better and some don't. Some schools are "football schools" and some aren't. It should be a challenge to make a deep run at a state title. Not an entitlement or expectation. It's a privilege that only the best teams should have and be able to cherish. State titles are handed out like candy now and it's ridiculous. Sorry for the rant, but trying to find ways for more teams to have success just doesn't make sense to me. What happened to work harder if you really want something? Challenge them to get better. The ones that want to and can will, the others may not even care. If you keep moving down the ladder to "provide opportunities", we might as well call it rec football. Pretty soon we'll have it broken down to "Congratulations coach, you are the state champions of the schools below 100 boys with the average weight of under 195lbs, with average 40 times of 4.9, that live in warmer climates, that live in an area of X type of income areas and wear green uniforms. Now can you get your kids off the field so I can present the trophy to the state champs that wear red uniforms?"

The system is so good , that it insures that the entrenched powers maintain their advantage!

 

Can you fill us in on who those powers are and what their advantages are?

Really??? They won because of depth alone??? Didn't outwork the other programs in the off season? Didn't have great coaching? Didn't develop kids into that depth? Didn't create a program and culture that a lot of kids want to play? They don't adapt to the talent they have better than anyone in the state? Nothing to do with a conditioning program that has D1 coaches saying "that's the best off season program I have ever seen" and alumni players coming back saying "college is easy compared to our workouts in HS". They develop the kids they have from day one. There is a reason they have more kids on the roster than a lot of 6A programs. It's hard work and pride that makes them good...depth is a very small part of it and that's only when they have it.

 

When I was a sophomore, we had about 110 kids on the team. And back then, we didn't platoon and there were about 6 kids that never came off the field. They were winning back then too. So what did depth have to do with it then?

 

I will give you that creating depth has helped HHS compete with the big schools in recent history. But depth is created by work ethic and development. Not by how many kids you have on the sidelines. You can have depth with 40 kids on the team if you develop them. HHS graduates about 30 kids a year. Do you think all of them contribute on a high level? No, some develop and some don't. But the others still play. Is that the depth you're talking about?

 

To say they have won titles on depth alone is flat out silly! Depth is a small part of the bigger solution, but nowhere near the top of the list of why they win titles.

 

BGP equivalent of "swatting a fly with a machine gun."

BGP equivalent of "swatting a fly with a machine gun."

 

Well did I get him? Sorry. A sore spot with me when outsiders minimize the efforts that go into who they are.