Basketball in KY needs to be classified...

[rockmom]

Indiana has five classes for football and four for basketball. You have to have a class system for football. It is not about winning a state championship in football, it is about a players safety.

 

I played basketball in Indiana when we didn't have a class system. We went into tournament time knowing that we had to play the most winning basketball program in the state. There gym seats over 7500, and they have won more state titles than anyone. During this time, they won three in a row. So, are chances were slim to none. I have more fond memories playing in that atmosphere, and losing by a few points or taking them to overtime, than winning a class regional title.

 

I would have loved to play in an All A State Tournament and then had a chance to play the states best teams. The All A is a great tournament, but it needs to be changed a little. Maybe do what Indiana is doing with their private schools. They are making them add 1.5 for evey student. This might eliminate some of them for the All A Tournament.

 

 

I'm confused by your bolded sentence.

 

How is classifying football about safety? :confused:

[ukbellco14]

So you are for consolidation of football, cross country and track?

 

Since sports is really supposed to be about work ethic, teamwork and character building, let's just not have any playoffs. That is what sports is supposed to be about right? At least, that has been the argument in other threads. HS sports is not supposed to be about winning championships.

 

OK..... I dont know who you have argued with about this...... but any sport, HS, college, pro, or otherwise, is about WINNING, PERIOD.

 

If it wasnt they wouldnt keep score.

 

Hard work, team work, sportsmanship, etc are all intangibles that sport should teach and follow, but they are not the bottom line. If these intangibles were the bottom line then you wouldnt have championship trophys for winning a championship game, you would have them for having more offseason workouts then the other team.

 

Sure there are other things that are MORE IMPORTANT then winning in the "big picture", but winning is what counts. If it wasnt then you would have a huge parade when you lose the championship. NOOOOO, you only have that huge parade when you win the championship.

 

Any sport is about winning! Its about beating the guy across from you so that you can say you are the better man (or women) on the field of competition. It's about beating the odds, overcoming obstacles, and winning the big game when no one gave you a chance.

 

There should be 1 basketball STATE championship, and not 2 or 4 class championships.

[SMOKEANDMIRRORS]

IMO--the strong point of The Guru's arguement is ---WHY all the talk and committees about making sports fair for all with regard to private vs. public and NO outcry against small vs. large schools IF you are really trying to make it fair.

[rockmom]

IMO--the strong point of The Guru's arguement is ---WHY all the talk and committees about making sports fair for all with regard to private vs. public and NO outcry against small vs. large schools IF you are really trying to make it fair.

 

That's what I gather from his post as well.

 

And, it's a valid question, IMO.

[ladiesbballcoach]

IMO--the strong point of The Guru's arguement is ---WHY all the talk and committees about making sports fair for all with regard to private vs. public and NO outcry against small vs. large schools IF you are really trying to make it fair.

I agree and a point I was trying to make in a PM earlier.

[SMOKEANDMIRRORS]

That's what I gather from his post as well.

 

And, it's a valid question, IMO.

:thumb: :thumb:

[ukbellco14]

I agree...... it is a valid question, and one that should be addressed.

[hoopitup25]

See. Indiana.

 

 

Nuff Said!

 

The Indiana state tourney, is bad, there is no other event like the Sweet 16.

this is basketball.

[hoopitup25]

Change it and it goes from being the "Greatest Show in High School Sports" to "just another high school State Tournament."

 

when the class A school wins the state tournament you know every fan will be cheering for them. Except UHA. THat is what makes this the best in the country.

[hoopitup25]

How many other states have the same system as Kentucky. (NO CLASS SYSTEM?)

[NEERFAN]

I believe Rhode Island may be one class still. Personally I loved the post by Scuffman, he lived the dream of dreams, and he said don't change a thing. Is the system fair for everyone, No, but what's fair about the game of life? Bottom line is there will always be teams without a chance no matter how many times you divide.

[ukbellco14]

Before I make this post let me clarify something. When I say "numbers" I am not referring only to the size of a school or the number of students enrolled. When I say "numbers" I am referring to the size of the player pool a school can draw from relative to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team.

 

Ok..... now for a lengthy post.

 

The public/private debate in football, as well as the class system that now exists, is about leveling the playing field and making it fairer, and doing this through numbers. This is because numbers is crucial to fielding a competitive football team because it takes sooooo many players to field a competitve team.

 

The large/small debate in basketball is also about leveling the playing field and making it fairer. I just dont know if the large/small debate adequatley deals with the numbers issue because numbers is not as crucial to fielding a competitive basketball team since it takes, at the most, 15 players to field a competitive team. Realistically, you could field a competitive basketball team with 10 players.

 

The public/private debate within football deals with the size of the player pool that public schools have to draw from vs. the size of the player pool that private schools have to draw from. However, this is in relation to the amount of players it takes to field a competitive team.

 

With the large/small debate in basketball the main problem for me is that although the small schools have a much smaller player pool to draw from then the larger schools, it really doesnt affect competitiveness because it doesnt take a large number of players to field a competive team.

 

The large/small debate within basketball doesnt take into account the number of players it takes to field a competitive team, it only takes into account the fact that small schools are not winning championships; then automatically attributes the fact that small schools are not winning championships to the fact that those schools are small.

 

In basketball, unlike in football, numbers don't make as big a difference because it doesnt take a large number of players to field a competitive team.

 

I think this is the point DiggerBill was making by his previous posts, and the reason that the football public/private debate differs from the basketball large/small debate.

 

In football the public/private debate and the class system is about the size of a schools player pool in relation to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team. In basketball the large/small debate is about the size of a schools player pool in relation to the quality/talent of players that can be drawn out of a larger player pool.

 

Now ladiesbballcoach made a good point in response to DiggerBill's comments.

 

The response was this....... A 4A school with 1500 students vs a 1A school with 200 students is going to have a bigger player pool to draw from, and although this may not be important with regards to numbers, the team with the bigger player pool is still going to have a much better chance of getting better talent from within their player pool then the team who just has 200 students.

 

I would say....... of course that 4A school will also have MORE TALENT within their player pool to draw, but that is JUST THE WAY IT IS and JUST THE WAY IT ALWAYS WILL BE. The "nature of the beast" if you will have it. The bigger the school = the biigger the player pool = its more likely that out of that player pool you will be able to draw more quality numbers. Their is nothing you can do about this.

 

Due to the fact that it takes soooo many players to field a competitive football team, there is justification in a class system, or a public/private split. However, within basketball there is no justification for this because it doesnt take alot of players to field a competitve team.

 

Sure those smaller schools may not be getting the quality of players the bigger schools are getting, but it is not the KHSAA's job to ensure that the talent level or enrollment at every school is equal. All the KHSAA can do is make sure that the size of the player pool relative to the amount of players is takes to field a competitve team is as equal as possible.

 

Within basketball the small schools player pool is much more equal to the large schools in terms of the number of possible players they can draw from when viewed in the context of the number of players it takes to field a competitive team. This is much different in football where a class system, or public/private split, is neccessary in order to ensure that the size of the player pool relative to the number of players it takes to field a competitve team is equal and therefore fair for all teams.

 

If you can get 10-15 players out for a basketball team, then your player pool is plenty big enough to field a competive basketball team. Those 10-15 players may not be able to play worth a hoot...... but there is nothing anyone can do about that.

 

In football there are alot of 1 and 2A teams that can barely get 30 kids out for the football team. Now all 30of those kids may be talented, quality players, but they shouldnt have to play a Trinity team that can get over 100 kids out. The football debate doesnt deal with the quality of players, just the number of possible players in relation to the number of players you need to field a competitive team.

 

Big difference between the football debate and basketball debate.

[TomSportsHack]

I hate repeatin myself.

 

Like I said..... pair those teams up. Have a mini playoff. Crown an All Out Football Champion.

 

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

[TomSportsHack]

Very good point.

 

Numbers matter when you have to have 45-60 players. In football you have 22 positions on offense and defense, plus special teams. You also need backups for each of those positions at least 2 deep, and you would also like to have different players on special teams as well. Plus many of these athletes at small schools have to play 3 ways, as you pointed out,

 

Numbers dont matter when you have to have 10-15 players. In basketball you have 5 positions. All 5 players are expected to play both ways. You need a few subs, and a few extra players. In all reality most teams only play between 7-10 guys.

 

Football is largely about numbers, whereas basketball is more about talent.

 

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.

[DiggerBill]

Before I make this post let me clarify something. When I say "numbers" I am not referring only to the size of a school or the number of students enrolled. When I say "numbers" I am referring to the size of the player pool a school can draw from relative to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team.

 

Ok..... now for a lengthy post.

 

The public/private debate in football, as well as the class system that now exists, is about leveling the playing field and making it fairer, and doing this through numbers. This is because numbers is crucial to fielding a competitive football team because it takes sooooo many players to field a competitve team.

 

The large/small debate in basketball is also about leveling the playing field and making it fairer. I just dont know if the large/small debate adequatley deals with the numbers issue because numbers is not as crucial to fielding a competitive basketball team since it takes, at the most, 15 players to field a competitive team. Realistically, you could field a competitive basketball team with 10 players.

 

The public/private debate within football deals with the size of the player pool that public schools have to draw from vs. the size of the player pool that private schools have to draw from. However, this is in relation to the amount of players it takes to field a competitive team.

 

With the large/small debate in basketball the main problem for me is that although the small schools have a much smaller player pool to draw from then the larger schools, it really doesnt affect competitiveness because it doesnt take a large number of players to field a competive team.

 

The large/small debate within basketball doesnt take into account the number of players it takes to field a competitive team, it only takes into account the fact that small schools are not winning championships; then automatically attributes the fact that small schools are not winning championships to the fact that those schools are small.

 

In basketball, unlike in football, numbers don't make as big a difference because it doesnt take a large number of players to field a competitive team.

 

I think this is the point DiggerBill was making by his previous posts, and the reason that the football public/private debate differs from the basketball large/small debate.

 

In football the public/private debate and the class system is about the size of a schools player pool in relation to the number of players it takes to field a competitive team. In basketball the large/small debate is about the size of a schools player pool in relation to the quality/talent of players that can be drawn out of a larger player pool.

 

Now ladiesbballcoach made a good point in response to DiggerBill's comments.

 

The response was this....... A 4A school with 1500 students vs a 1A school with 200 students is going to have a bigger player pool to draw from, and although this may not be important with regards to numbers, the team with the bigger player pool is still going to have a much better chance of getting better talent from within their player pool then the team who just has 200 students.

 

I would say....... of course that 4A school will also have MORE TALENT within their player pool to draw, but that is JUST THE WAY IT IS and JUST THE WAY IT ALWAYS WILL BE. The "nature of the beast" if you will have it. The bigger the school = the biigger the player pool = its more likely that out of that player pool you will be able to draw more quality numbers. Their is nothing you can do about this.

 

Due to the fact that it takes soooo many players to field a competitive football team, there is justification in a class system, or a public/private split. However, within basketball there is no justification for this because it doesnt take alot of players to field a competitve team.

 

Sure those smaller schools may not be getting the quality of players the bigger schools are getting, but it is not the KHSAA's job to ensure that the talent level or enrollment at every school is equal. All the KHSAA can do is make sure that the size of the player pool relative to the amount of players is takes to field a competitve team is as equal as possible.

 

Within basketball the small schools player pool is much more equal to the large schools in terms of the number of possible players they can draw from when viewed in the context of the number of players it takes to field a competitive team. This is much different in football where a class system, or public/private split, is neccessary in order to ensure that the size of the player pool relative to the number of players it takes to field a competitve team is equal and therefore fair for all teams.

 

If you can get 10-15 players out for a basketball team, then your player pool is plenty big enough to field a competive basketball team. Those 10-15 players may not be able to play worth a hoot...... but there is nothing anyone can do about that.

 

In football there are alot of 1 and 2A teams that can barely get 30 kids out for the football team. Now all 30of those kids may be talented, quality players, but they shouldnt have to play a Trinity team that can get over 100 kids out. The football debate doesnt deal with the quality of players, just the number of possible players in relation to the number of players you need to field a competitive team.

 

Big difference between the football debate and basketball debate.

 

Good Post!!