If your team is 10-0 facing an 0-10 team, don't you pull starters way early to prepare for next week and allow the JV/Frosh to finish the last 3 quarters? You might still get to 70 but you've protected your key guys and afforded the other team a better chance of being competitive for most of the game.

 

I'm not pulling my starters before halftime.

I'm not pulling my starters before halftime.

 

Why not pull them? You're not intentionally running up the score once you pull starters anyway. In most cases your JV will be on equal footing with a lesser teams starters anyway. The remainder of the game, under a running clock, should be fairly even.

Let's give everybody a trophy.

Why not pull them? You're not intentionally running up the score once you pull starters anyway. In most cases your JV will be on equal footing with a lesser teams starters anyway. The remainder of the game, under a running clock, should be fairly even.

 

Because by pulling my starters that early in the game, it is in a way penalizing them for being significantly better than the other team. I'm supposed to bench my guys because they are more talented and maybe worked harder than the other team all year? That's not fair.

 

As far as letting the JV play, the playoffs ain't the time for that. That's what the JV schedule is for.

IMO, your point is shortsighted. The bigger picture is the championship. Why take a risk on a star player getting hurt, that you may need to win the next game or the one after, just to demoralize a struggling program.

 

Rest your starters. Have them fresh and injury free for the next round.

How bout we just eliminate the "everybody" gets in mentality and go back to 2 teams from each district. Money? I mean how much money is really made after expenses. Not much. Freezing the score is silly IMO.

 

Only if you do it for every other sport as well.

When I was still an AD we answered this question more than once officially from the KHSAA. We were asked about the playoff structure & how many teams should make it into the playoffs & given a couple of scenarios.

 

If I remember correctly, it went like this: (not word for word obviously)

 

1. Carry on as usual with the majority of teams making the playoffs

 

2. Take the top 2 from each district, shorten the playoffs by 2 weeks & it would

eliminate the majority of the blowouts. (not the way it was worded) Allow the

teams that didn't qualify the freedom to schedule 1 game during the week of

the 1st round of playoffs against another non-qualifier.

 

3. Take the top 3 from each district, shorten the playoffs by 1 week. Allow the

teams that didn't qualify the freedom to schedule 1 game during the week of

the 1st round of playoffs against another non-qualifier.

When I was still an AD we answered this question more than once officially from the KHSAA. We were asked about the playoff structure & how many teams should make it into the playoffs & given a couple of scenarios.

 

 

 

If I remember correctly, it went like this: (not word for word obviously)

 

1. Carry on as usual with the majority of teams making the playoffs

 

2. Take the top 2 from each district, shorten the playoffs by 2 weeks & it would

eliminate the majority of the blowouts. (not the way it was worded) Allow the

teams that didn't qualify the freedom to schedule 1 game during the week of

the 1st round of playoffs against another non-qualifier.

 

3. Take the top 3 from each district, shorten the playoffs by 1 week. Allow the

teams that didn't qualify the freedom to schedule 1 game during the week of

the 1st round of playoffs against another non-qualifier.

 

I'd be in favor of proposal 3, as long as we had agreed in advance that the non qualifier from district 1 would play 2 on a rotating basis.

When I was still an AD we answered this question more than once officially from the KHSAA. We were asked about the playoff structure & how many teams should make it into the playoffs & given a couple of scenarios.

 

If I remember correctly, it went like this: (not word for word obviously)

 

1. Carry on as usual with the majority of teams making the playoffs

 

2. Take the top 2 from each district, shorten the playoffs by 2 weeks & it would

eliminate the majority of the blowouts. (not the way it was worded) Allow the

teams that didn't qualify the freedom to schedule 1 game during the week of

the 1st round of playoffs against another non-qualifier.

 

3. Take the top 3 from each district, shorten the playoffs by 1 week. Allow the

teams that didn't qualify the freedom to schedule 1 game during the week of

the 1st round of playoffs against another non-qualifier.

I think the format of the question caused a lot of trouble, by giving three options. Yes, the majority of schools voted for number 1, but the numbers were very close for the combined vote of number two and number three. If I remember correctly, number three got a lot of votes. There could have possibly been a different majority if there was only two options. I think most Ads and coaches favored the three team option as opposed to two teams making the playoffs.