Why do the winners always represent themselves as ALL A STATE CHAMPS. With any of the other examples of tournaments given, the winners are just the champions (i.e. LIT champions, Republic Bank champions). Maybe that is why everyone has an issue with it. If it is just the All A Tournament, as many have defended, then shouldn't the champs be the All A champions, not the All A State champions?

Why do the winners always represent themselves as ALL A STATE CHAMPS. With any of the other examples of tournaments given, the winners are just the champions (i.e. LIT champions, Republic Bank champions). Maybe that is why everyone has an issue with it. If it is just the All A Tournament, as many have defended, then shouldn't the champs be the All A champions, not the All A State champions?

 

Why does it matter what they call themselves, as long as All A is in the title everyone knows what it is?

Why do the winners always represent themselves as ALL A STATE CHAMPS. With any of the other examples of tournaments given, the winners are just the champions (i.e. LIT champions, Republic Bank champions). Maybe that is why everyone has an issue with it. If it is just the All A Tournament, as many have defended, then shouldn't the champs be the All A champions, not the All A State champions?

 

I'd say that it is that way because the regions from all around the state of KY send a representative to play in the finals in Frankfort. If the LIT were to invite a team from every region they would probably call the winner the LIT State Champion.