Basketball in KY needs to be classified...

[ukbellco14]

Why? So Trinity or St. X can win it every year?

 

If thats what happens then thats what happens. I would think that a 3A team would win it sometimes, and that a 2A team could occasionally pull the upset.

[ukbellco14]

You're missing the point: A 3A or 4A school like Male or J'town has a much, much larger talent pool to draw from than a Paintsville, South Floyd or Ashland Fairview can draw from. There's a reason the EKy schools have no chance whatsoever at a state basketball championship anymore, and that reason is less talent available to pull from. To put it bluntly, you have a better chance of finding 3 superstar players in a 2000-student high school than you do in a 400-student high school.

 

The one-class tournament's time is past. It's not fair to the kids.

 

No I am not missing the point.

 

Funny you say that EKY teams cant compete, considering 4A South Laurel, a EKY team, seems to be doing just fine. I get your point though, and I agree, but there are alot of other reasons that most EKY teams cant compete, and it isnt because of numbers.

 

There is a difference between TALENT POOL and PLAYER POOL. It is not the KHSAA's job to manage TALENT POOLS, it is there job to manage PLAYER POOLS. They have to make sure every schools has a fairly equal number of players to draw from in relation to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team, they do not have to ensure the quality or level of talent of these schools. For this reason, in basketball one class works but in football you can justify the need for more then 1 class.

 

If you want to debate TALENT POOLS then this could very easily become a Rural/Urban debate. I dont hear anyone crying for the rural schools to have their own championship while the urban schools have a seperate championship.

[ukbellco14]

You're missing the point: A 3A or 4A school like Male or J'town has a much, much larger talent pool to draw from than a Paintsville, South Floyd or Ashland Fairview can draw from. There's a reason the EKy schools have no chance whatsoever at a state basketball championship anymore, and that reason is less talent available to pull from. To put it bluntly, you have a better chance of finding 3 superstar players in a 2000-student high school than you do in a 400-student high school.

 

The one-class tournament's time is past. It's not fair to the kids.

 

 

I agree....... but that will ALWAYS be an issue.

[Ms Liberty]

It is a very sticky situation , but what's fair in one sport should be fair for all sports.

[Nothingbutnet]

Then you would agree we should do the same thing for football to create the same type of atmosphere and sense of accomplishment. Get rid of the classes or at a minimum, not dilute them anymore than they already are, correct?

 

There is another part to football (other than numbers to choose from) that basketball does not have. In football a 1A school can't dress 90+ players (Beechwood excepted). They not only don't have the numbers to choose from regarding talent, they don't have the numbers period!! HOWEVER, in basketball all teams are usually about the same in roster numbers. So the only disadvantage a small school has is in numbers to choose from regarding talent!

[ukbellco14]

There is another part to football (other than numbers to choose from) that basketball does not have. In football a 1A school can't dress 90+ players (Beechwood excepted). They not only don't have the numbers to choose from regarding talent, they don't have the numbers period!! HOWEVER, in basketball all teams are usually about the same in roster numbers. So the only disadvantage a small school has is in numbers to choose from regarding talent!

 

My point exactly. Very nice job in explaining that in lamen terms. :thumb:

[TomSportsHack]

There is another part to football (other than numbers to choose from) that basketball does not have. In football a 1A school can't dress 90+ players (Beechwood excepted). They not only don't have the numbers to choose from regarding talent, they don't have the numbers period!! HOWEVER, in basketball all teams are usually about the same in roster numbers. So the only disadvantage a small school has is in numbers to choose from regarding talent!

 

And that is the crucial disadvantage that gives theguru's argument legitimacy.

 

Two thousand students gives you more of a pool to find 12 talented players in than 400 does. Anyone who tries to explain it away with excuses is lying, disingenuous or far out of touch with reality. The system is patently unfair.

[CSI Miami]

IMO leave high school basketball the way it is. I agree that larger schools have more students to select from, but hard work and determination can overcome talent. The mountain schools have kids that are as talented as any where else in the state. However, many kids decide not to play high school ball after the middle school years for one reason or another. When the ball is thrown up anything can happen! That's what's so great about basketball and tournament time.

[NEXT]

Since everyone wants a fair playing fieled lets do this in all sports so all the little Johnnies and Janies get a "fair" chance to win a title, because America is not fair if they don't

 

 

A -

AA - 100 boys/girls

AAA - 200 boys/girls

AAAA - 300 boys/girls

AAAAA - 400 boys/girls

AAAAAA - 500 boys/girls

AAAAAAA - 600 boys/girls

AAAAAAAA - 700 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAA - 800 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAA - 900 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAAA - 1,000 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAAAA - 1,100 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAAAAA - 1,200 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAAAAAA - 1,300 boys/girls

 

Then put in the rule everyone gets to play at least 1 min, nobody gets cut from the team, uniforms all have to be the same black and white design, Chuck Taylors are the only shoes, only Powerade for TO's and after you win one title, you cannot win another for 3 years, in that league, you got to the Champions League, where everyone will again win a title.

 

 

 

Add the seperation of public/private( in the private we will have independent, Catholic, Baptist, non-denominational, etc. etc) you get 112 state champs in every sport every year, if your school is cheated out of winning a championship this way, we play a tourney at the end of the year with all the non-winners(losers is degrading and not fair to Johnny and Janie) until everyone wins a game.

 

This way llittle Johnnie and Janie know how the real world works and when they don't get a job they want, the company will just make a super position for them to get paid $85,000 a year.

 

Forget hard work, pactice, and the purpose of being on a team, thats all a waste of time and Un-American now.

 

Kentucky's new slogans could be

 

Unbeatable Kids!

 

Superman and Superwoman raised here!

 

Welcome to Kentucky, Where Everyone is a Champion.

 

Home of Unrealisitc Expectations!!!!

 

Everyone happy now?

[ukbellco14]

Since everyone wants a fair playing fieled lets do this in all sports so all the little Johnnies and Janies get a "fair" chance to win a title, because America is not fair if they don't

 

 

A -

AA - 100 boys/girls

AAA - 200 boys/girls

AAAA - 300 boys/girls

AAAAA - 400 boys/girls

AAAAAA - 500 boys/girls

AAAAAAA - 600 boys/girls

AAAAAAAA - 700 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAA - 800 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAA - 900 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAAA - 1,000 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAAAA - 1,100 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAAAAA - 1,200 boys/girls

AAAAAAAAAAAAAA - 1,300 boys/girls

 

Then put in the rule everyone gets to play at least 1 min, nobody gets cut from the team, uniforms all have to be the same black and white design, Chuck Taylors are the only shoes, only Powerade for TO's and after you win one title, you cannot win another for 3 years, in that league, you got to the Champions League, where everyone will again win a title.

 

 

 

Add the seperation of public/private( in the private we will have independent, Catholic, Baptist, non-denominational, etc. etc) you get 112 state champs in every sport every year, if your school is cheated out of winning a championship this way, we play a tourney at the end of the year with all the non-winners(losers is degrading and not fair to Johnny and Janie) until everyone wins a game.

 

This way llittle Johnnie and Janie know how the real world works and when they don't get a job they want, the company will just make a super position for them to get paid $85,000 a year.

 

Forget hard work, pactice, and the purpose of being on a team, thats all a waste of time and Un-American now.

 

Kentucky's new slogans could be

 

Unbeatable Kids!

 

Superman and Superwoman raised here!

 

Welcome to Kentucky, Where Everyone is a Champion.

 

Home of Unrealisitc Expectations!!!!

 

Everyone happy now?

 

 

:laugh: Great Post!

[ukbellco14]

And that is the crucial disadvantage that gives theguru's argument legitimacy.

 

Two thousand students gives you more of a pool to find 12 talented players in than 400 does. Anyone who tries to explain it away with excuses is lying, disingenuous or far out of touch with reality. The system is patently unfair.

 

No it isnt. It is the crucial disadvantage that the KHSAA shouldnt deal with because it is a disadvantage that will always exist unless we go to JD If U Please's proposed solution. It is also a disadvantage that is a crucial part of life, and one that will not go away in that arena of competition. Therefore it shouldnt go away in the sporting arena.

 

In football it is a matter of the size of a player pool (number of possible players, regardless of talent) that a team has to draw from, relative to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team. The key here is that the size of a player pool isnt concerned with how much talent may be drawn out of that player pool due to its size, but is only "relative to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team."

 

In basketball it is a matter of the talent of a player pool (number of possible quality players) that a team has to draw from, relative to the talent pool that other competing teams have to draw from. The key here is that there is no relevancy to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team, but only with how much possible talent may be drawn out of a bigger talent pool.

 

In football the numbers matter not because it makes for more quality players or a bigger "talent" pool, but because its neccessary in order to ensure that every team and the teams it is competing against are able to field a competitive team based on the sheer number of players it has to draw from (player pool). This is why a class system is neccessary, and why the public/private split has some legitimacy.

 

In basketball numbers dont matter because it is not neccessary, unless of course you just want a bigger talent pool and therefore better possible talent to draw from. This is why a class system, or a large/small split, in basketball has no legitimacy.

 

To say that because small school's have not won basketball championships and then attribute that to the fact that those schools are small is a big assumption. There are alot of other possible reasons that small schools havent won basketball championships, and I have seen plenty of small schools that compete and win against big schools all the time, it just hasnt happened in March for whatever reason. If these small schools were getting blown out by the big schools all the time, and not fielding competitive teams, then I would say OK, here is a problem. The fact remains though that these small schools often do compete and win against the big schools. Also, the reverse it true in that alot of big schools with big player pools havent done so well with regards to state championships or just winning ball games.

 

The quality of players that a school has to draw from is not the KHSAA's issue. They must only ensure that each team has a fair amount of possible players to draw from in order to field a competitive team based on the number of players it takes to field a complete team.

 

This issue is not a matter of a "talent" pool with regards to having more numbers meaning you have more possible talent. It is a matter of a "player" pool with regards to every competing team being able to field a competitive team based on the number of players it takes to have a competitive team. This is regardless of how good or bad the talent is in that "player" pool.

 

If you needed to fill 22 total individual offensive and defensive positions, have at least 1 backup for each of those, and preferably have a bunch of special teams players that arent neccessarily playing offense and defense...... all this in a sport where depth, and the number of kids who playing 2 or 3 ways, holds the key to how well you perform...... then I could see having a class system where the numbers matter.

 

But in basketball you have to fill 5 total individual positions period, and you really only need 5-7 more players after that. It doesnt matter if you have 200 students or 2000 students, every school can fill a competitive roster, and if they cant it isnt because they are a small school with too little enrollment and therefore too little a "talent" pool to draw from.

[TomSportsHack]

Nice big long post ... that's all smoke and mirrors.

 

It's a fact that a public high school with 2,000 students will be able to find a better group of 12 athletes for a basketball team than a public high school with 400. If you don't believe me, please compare Pikeville and Jeffersontown, or Lynn Camp and Male, and so on, and so on, and so on.

 

The single-class tournament is nostalgic, and quaint, and may have had its place once upon a time. But times have changed. I guarantee you that when they came up with the single-class tournament, they didn't have to deal with the kinds of enrollment disparities that we see today.

 

Stop defending the indefensible.

[BGGreen]

No it isnt. It is the crucial disadvantage that the KHSAA shouldnt deal with.

 

In football it is a matter of the size of a player pool (number of possible players, regardless of talent) that a team has to draw from, relative to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team. The key here is "relative to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team."

 

In basketball it is a matter of the talent of a player pool (number of possible quality players) that a team has to draw from, relative to the talent pool that other competing teams have to draw from. The key here is that there is no relevancy to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team.

 

In football the numbers matter not because it makes for more quality players or a bigger "talent" pool, but because its neccessary in order to ensure that every team and the teams it is competing against are able to field a competitive team based on the sheer number of players it has to draw from (player pool). This is why a class system is neccessary, and why the public/private split has some legitimacy.

 

In basketball numbers dont matter because it is not neccessary, unless of course you just want a bigger talent pool and therefore better possible talent to draw from. This is why a class system, or a large/small split, in basketball has no legitimacy.

 

The quality of players that a school has to draw from is not the KHSAA's issue. They must only ensure that each team has a fair amount of possible players in order to field a competitive team.

 

This issue is not a matter of a "talent" pool with regards to having more numbers meaning you have more possible talent. It is a matter of a "player" pool with regards to every competing team being able to field a competitive team based on the number of players it takes to have a competitive team. This is regardless of how good or bad the talent is in that "player" pool.

 

If you needed to fill 22 total individual offensive and defensive positions, have at least 1 backup for each of those, and preferably have a bunch of special teams players that arent neccessarily playing offense and defense...... all this in a sport where depth, and the number of kids who playing 2 or 3 ways, holds the key to how well you perform...... then I could see having a class system where the numbers matter.

 

But in basketball you have to fill 5 total individual positions period, and you really only need 5-7 more players after that. It doesnt matter if you have 200 students or 2000 students, every school can fill a competitive roster, and if they cant it isnt because they are a small school with too little enrollment and therefore too little a "talent" pool to draw from.

 

You're not really trying to say numbers don't matter in hoops are you?? Sure, it's true that it's easier for a small school to field a competitive team in basketball than football; but to act like picking a team from 1500 boys isn't easier than from 200, is pretty unrealistic!! I'd guess CovCath's intermurals could field a team that would finish at least in the middle of the pack in NKY, and I'm guessing the same is true at some of the Louisville schools as well.

 

Having just returned from a trip to Philadelphia and discussing New Jersey's program; I think it has some merit. They have four classes (I believe) play for their respective state titles and then the four champs compete in a "Tournament of Champions" weekend to decide a composite State Champion. This gives schools a chance to win their class and then test themselves against the other champs, for ultimate bragging rights!! (especially if the smaller school has their "once in a lifetime team")

[ukbellco14]

Nice big long post ... that's all smoke and mirrors.

 

It's a fact that a public high school with 2,000 students will be able to find a better group of 12 athletes for a basketball team than a public high school with 400. If you don't believe me, please compare Pikeville and Jeffersontown, or Lynn Camp and Male, and so on, and so on, and so on.

 

The single-class tournament is nostalgic, and quaint, and may have had its place once upon a time. But times have changed. I guarantee you that when they came up with the single-class tournament, they didn't have to deal with the kinds of enrollment disparities that we see today.

 

Stop defending the indefensible.

 

I am far from defending the indefensible considering the majority of ppl on this thread have been in favor of the Sweet 16 tourney the way it is, and it doesnt look like the KHSAA is going to be changing it any time soon.

 

Don't misunderstand me......I am not denying that if you have a bigger school you will have more players to choose from, and therefore you will most likely be able to find more quality players.

 

I am just saying that it DOESNT MATTER. It isnt the reason football has a class system, and it isnt going to be reason basketball will go to one.

 

Football doesnt have a class system because the bigger schools have more players to draw from and therefore more talent to draw from (which is why ppl are defending a class system in basketball). Football has a class system because the bigger schools have more players to draw from period; and football is a sport where having more players, regardless of talent, is crucial to fielding a competitive team.

 

In basketball it isnt neccessary to have lots of numbers to field a competitive team. In basketball a team with 15 players doesnt neccessarily have the advantage over a team with 10 players, whereas in football a team with 100+ has an overwhelming advantage over a team with a little over 30.

 

I love your awful example...... 2 mountain schools being compared to 2 Lexington and Louisville schools. There is another big problem I see with this whole debate.

 

Its almost as if this large/small debate is really a urban/rural debate. I think to say that the reason small schools cant compete against big schools is because they are small is really minimalizing the issue. There are plenty of reasons, other then enrollment, why smaller schools dont usually compete with bigger schools, or why rural area schools dont usually compete with urban area schools.

 

Also..... for the example you gave there are a hundred other counter examples. North Laurel and Whitley County have enrollment similar to J'Town and Male, yet they cant compete with those teams. Why is that? It isnt numbers obviously. Also...... 1A Barbourville took 4A South Laurel to the wire in the region tourney, and probably should have beat them. The best 1A and 2A teams can compete with and win against the best 3A and 4A teams, and they have done so in the past. Just because they havent done so in March doesnt mean the Sweet 16 should be scrapped.

[ukbellco14]

You're not really trying to say numbers don't matter in hoops are you?? Sure, it's true that it's easier for a small school to field a competitive team in basketball than football; but to act like picking a team from 1500 boys isn't easier than from 200, is pretty unrealistic!! I'd guess CovCath's intermurals could field a team that would finish at least in the middle of the pack in NKY, and I'm guessing the same is true at some of the Louisville schools as well.

 

Having just returned from a trip to Philadelphia and discussing New Jersey's program; I think it has some merit. They have four classes (I believe) play for their respective state titles and then the four champs compete in a "Tournament of Champions" weekend to decide a composite State Champion. This gives schools a chance to win their class and then test themselves against the other champs, for ultimate bragging rights!! (especially if the smaller school has their "once in a lifetime team")

 

On the bolded..... I am not acting like it isnt any easier. I understand the difficulty of finding 12 quality players in a school of 200 compared to finding 12 quality players in a school of 2000. I am simply saying that this is a battle the KHSAA shouldnt deal with. They dont deal with it in football, they shouldnt deal with it in basketball.

 

And before someone says "but they do deal with it in football because football has a class system," let me remind everyone that football doesnt have a class system to address the above issue. Football has a class system to address the issue of having enough players to field a complete, competitive roster. A team with 30 players vs a team with 100+ is unfair, regardless of talent level.

 

I dont see the point in a composite state champ though if I am looking at it from the point of view that you all are coming from (pro big/small split), because those respective state titles really wont mean much in comparison to the composite state title. Doesnt having the composite state title take away from the class state titles, which basically defeats the purpose of splitting the state up in to classes in the first place.

 

The pro big/small split hate the 1 champion deal right now because it eliminates the small man, and wouldnt having a composite state title do the same thing.

 

I would have no problem with it, just like I would have no problem with it in football. I just dont see how if you dislike the Sweet 16, you would like an "All Out" State Champion.