Hell. No.

Luckily it will never happen and if it ever does it will be the death of the greatest high school basketball postseason in the WORLD!!!!

Luckily it will never happen and if it ever does it will be the death of the greatest high school basketball postseason in the WORLD!!!!

 

I know. Pushing through the busing in Louisville forty years ago assured some of the schools would never win again. Talk with people at Shawnee about that one.

One thing you won't be allowed to mess with is "money." District tournaments, the way they have been set up for decades, bring in money. That's why the district runner-up is allowed to advance. Makes a 7-game region tournament instead of a 3-game affair. And more schools get to share in the proceeds.

 

If you intersperse the districts and have teams playing in places many of their fans have never gone, attendance will suffer tremendously. Especially at smaller venues in out-of-the-way places. Many folks who frequent district tournaments with neighbor schools won't have any interest in going to a town & school they have never been to before, in the winter, in a crowded parking/gym seating situation.

 

I agree: don't like three-team districts But re-districting in many parts of the state just isn't feasible. In the first/second region, it's geography. In far Eastern Kentucky, I believe it's the same thing.

 

One reason Kentucky still has a single class system: tradition. People like it. Especially as we get older. Compiling and posting district tournament scores state-wide, I always felt bad for the people whose schools were moved...especially more than once. That takes away from tradition...and interest...and (bottom line) money.

 

(I was just thinking: some posters just get too wordy. And then...I re-read this one. )

I kinda like the idea! If that's the case my Raiders have wins over the entire 64th district (didn't play Rose Hill but result is a given), didn't lose to a 63rd district team! If matched up with the 3rd seed from any district I would favor East Carter over Menifee (61st), whoever was in the 63rd, and Ashland (64th). But this format is tradition and I don't think I have too big of a problem with it.

Don't think you are following him Cat. In his scenario, the 4 seed from District 1, instead of playing the one seed from District 1, might play the one seed from district 4 to open post season play. Has nothing to do with everyone "getting a trophy".

 

I'm not one to go against tradition, but if they did do this, I would think it would have to be single elimination.

An sec tournament type feel

Answer is simply no. Good teams during the regular season get rewarded by their seed in the districts and typically move on in post season and leave the not so good teams behind. The process has worked for so many years and doesn't need any messing around with.

Actually, the current system of having four district champions per region goes more in line with the "everyone gets a trophy" thinking then the one big regional tournament if you compare the two ways. Thats three (or four, depending on if a runner up wins the region) more teams that get a chance to cut down nets and call themselves "champions".

 

One thing that would be lost that really hasn't been discussed would be the ability for more schools to host post season play. I know its a big deal for a lot of schools and communities the years they host district tournaments.

I agree with you. What would be the point in doing that? Everyone is a winner even if you go 0 for the season mentality?

 

It really would be just the opposite. In the current system, a team could lose in the finals of their district tournament and still win the regional tournament. All the teams get into the post season anyway, but without a district tournament only the regional winner would not have lost. I think attendance would go up because it's always win or go home.

Not a bad idea. You'd still have 1 seeds playing a 4/5 seed, just from another district in same region.

 

The problem is more geographical than anything. Where it would work in the 9th and the Lexington/Louisville regions very easily. It wouldn't work as well in say the 8th & 10th as examples.

I am curious and this may be the topic of another thread, but does anyone know the history behind allowing the district champ and runner-up to go to the Region Tournament? Having come from Ohio, I always thought it was bizarre, but got used to it after a couple of years in the Commonwealth.

Sounds like a "let's give everyone a trophy" tournament to me.

 

When you advance the LOSER of the district championship game. There is know way you can fall back on that statement when talking about changing it

Are there any other states that advance a team that loses in tournament? Probably one of the most "backwards" processes in the commonwealth. And there are a lot of those

Blasphemy is what this is. Blasphemy.