Here's how it's incorrect.

 

We're saying that in ANY format, any team that would have to go through the Big 3 three or four games in a row (mostly if not all on the road) would have no shot. That there is no set of comparable teams in AAA that provide an impossible road block like this when set in a row. There ARE teams that couldn't beat HHS, CovCath and Rock three weeks in a row, and I'm sure there are several in their district. But there are teams out there in the state of Kentucky that could do it. A team did it last year.

 

NO Team in the state of Kentucky is capable of winning agaisnt the road that Manual will have set in front of them. It has nothing to do about which specific teams have this impossible task in front of them... trade them out with any team in the state, including one of those Big 3 members, and it's still impossible. That's what we're saying, that's the difference.

 

 

I know you like to call them the big 3, but really isn't it the big 2? Male is a very good team no doubt, but to place them currently at the level of X and T really isn't accurate in my opinion. Have they really been a dominant team since Bush graduated? Perhaps Male has been a dominant team for Manual, but that doesn't mean they are for everyone. Do people think that Male is that much better than Scott Co, Henry Clay, Dixie or Henderson? Even in the Bush years Highlands was competitive against Male. Sure one year they flat out laid the wood to us, but in most of the games and scrimmage games, they haven't dominated us. As good as X was last year, didn't Bowling Green and Lex Cath give them all they wanted at the beginning of the season. Didn't J. Hardin give them all they wanted in the playoffs? Was it Henry Clay or Dunbar who played T very tough in the playoffs? And Manual fans, keep this also in mind, after this year, when the rotation starts, you won't have to play Male and the big 2 in succession anyway. It may be the X and Male in the district playoff and then Dixie or Henderson or Scott Co. You might not run into T until the finals. I know that this year you have been dealt a very hard row to hoe, I admit that, but its not going to be like that each year. And while you will disagree, I don't think its any tougher than Ashland having to perhaps in future years having to play Highlands, Lex Cath and Boyle back to back to back. Those three teams have accounted for how many of the last 10 AAA championships? I don't know the exact number, but I'd have to think its a big majority of them.

I know you like to call them the big 3, but really isn't it the big 2? Male is a very good team no doubt, but to place them currently at the level of X and T really isn't accurate in my opinion. Have they really been a dominant team since Bush graduated? Perhaps Male has been a dominant team for Manual, but that doesn't mean they are for everyone. Do people think that Male is that much better than Scott Co, Henry Clay, Dixie or Henderson? Even in the Bush years Highlands was competitive against Male. Sure one year they flat out laid the wood to us, but in most of the games and scrimmage games, they haven't dominated us. As good as X was last year, didn't Bowling Green and Lex Cath give them all they wanted at the beginning of the season. Didn't J. Hardin give them all they wanted in the playoffs? Was it Henry Clay or Dunbar who played T very tough in the playoffs? And Manual fans, keep this also in mind, after this year, when the rotation starts, you won't have to play Male and the big 2 in succession anyway. It may be the X and Male in the district playoff and then Dixie or Henderson or Scott Co. You might not run into T until the finals. I know that this year you have been dealt a very hard row to hoe, I admit that, but its not going to be like that each year. And while you will disagree, I don't think its any tougher than Ashland having to perhaps in future years having to play Highlands, Lex Cath and Boyle back to back to back. Those three teams have accounted for how many of the last 10 AAA championships? I don't know the exact number, but I'd have to think its a big majority of them.

I take the long view on the term... There was a time when people were wondering if Trinity was up to snuff, and not that long ago as I recall.

 

It will always be 3 in a row for Manual, as the Old Rivalry with Male is the last game of the regular season. This year will be FOUR in a row.

 

And I don't buy the 'rotation.' It's never going to happen, in my opinion.

Let me put it this way:

 

If changing the brackets with an eye on the Big 3 were unacceptable, we'd be playing under last years format...

 

Since the powers that be are already rigging the game, I don't see why I should be apologetic for suggesting that a format is unfair.

 

 

Again I ask :

 

02Ram54,

 

So is it your argument basically that before a playoff bracket is setup, that the powers to be(KHSAA) examine the strength of teams and then make sure that those teams are not aligned in a way that some other team would have to play them several weeks in a row?

 

That seems to be your argument as I see it - do I have it correct before I proceed?

 

Woody Jr

Makes perfect sense to me......same as baseball and basketball. Hard to argue with that.

^ His argument is that you should not have to play (please allow an NCAA comparison) 3 1-seeds to get to an 8 seed, and then a 9...

 

 

I understand, I've repeatedly said I understand someone doesnt like playing these guys in a row

 

Your arguments weak spot as I see it:

 

We DON'T have any #1 through whatever seeds

 

This isnt like the NCAA basketball.

It's not even like Ohio HS football.

 

Its playoff vs. teams in your district, then region, then so forth and so on.

Just b/c you've had the luck of a system taking the 3rd and 4th best teams and letting them play another district for a few years does nor mean that is the standard from which we start the debate, nor does it mean that is the correct fair way to do it. it just happens to be what was in place the lasy few years.

 

WoodyJr

Again I ask :

 

02Ram54,

 

So is it your argument basically that before a playoff bracket is setup, that the powers to be(KHSAA) examine the strength of teams and then make sure that those teams are not aligned in a way that some other team would have to play them several weeks in a row?

 

That seems to be your argument as I see it - do I have it correct before I proceed?

 

Woody Jr

And again I say:

 

If the KHSAA is already setting the brackets up so that most teams don't have to play several of the Big 3, let alone all of them consecutively, what is wrong about my pointing out Manual's situation?

 

I refuse to drop the premise. The KHSAA is already doing something with an eye toward the strength of the Big 3. I won't be bullied into pretending that I'm arguing for special treatment of my team- I'm arguing for the same treatment the rest of the state is getting.

And again I say:

 

If the KHSAA is already setting the brackets up so that most teams don't have to play several of the Big 3, let alone all of them consecutively, what is wrong about my pointing out Manual's situation?

 

I refuse to drop the premise. The KHSAA is already doing something with an eye toward the strength of the Big 3. I won't be bullied into pretending that I'm arguing for special treatment of my team- I'm arguing for the same treatment the rest of the state is getting.

 

 

02Ram54,

 

I give up on the first question - you wont or cant answer fro some reason:confused:

 

How about this:

 

Do you agree with what the KHSAA has "already been doing" :

- the #3 and #4 seeds eligible for the playoffs as opposed to just the top 2 teams

- having X and T in opposite halves of the state (despite the fact they are closer to each other than an incredibly large # of the other schools)

 

Woody Jr

02Ram54,

 

I give up on the first question - you wont or cant answer fro some reason:confused:

 

How about this:

 

Do you agree with what the KHSAA has "already been doing" :

- the #3 and #4 seeds eligible for the playoffs as opposed to just the top 2 teams

- having X and T in opposite halves of the state (despite the fact they are closer to each other than an incredibly large # of the other schools)

 

Woody Jr

I did answer your question, and I'm sure there are plenty of posters that can see that.

 

Yes, I agree with both.

 

I've already laid out the reason the two Louisville districts belong in seperate semi-states two nights ago in this very same thread, and no one has stepped to the plate and shown me a logical redistricting plan that puts all of Louisville in the Western semi-state.

 

I like the fact that the top 4 make the playoffs. It's just one more round, and as has been mentioned previously, there are cases where the third or even fourth team in a district is better than the top 2 in the district right next door. I think that four making it in is an adequete reward, and gives teams that may not be the best in their district playoff experience so that when they DO become the best, they have a chance to do something with it.

I did answer your question, and I'm sure there are plenty of posters that can see that.

 

Yes, I agree with both.

 

I've already laid out the reason the two Louisville districts belong in seperate semi-states two nights ago in this very same thread, and no one has stepped to the plate and shown me a logical redistricting plan that puts all of Louisville in the Western semi-state.

 

I like the fact that the top 4 make the playoffs. It's just one more round, and as has been mentioned previously, there are cases where the third or even fourth team in a district is better than the top 2 in the district right next door. I think that four making it in is an adequete reward, and gives teams that may not be the best in their district playoff experience so that when they DO become the best, they have a chance to do something with it.

 

 

02Ram 54,

 

Sorry, I guess I just missed the answer to my previous question that you say plenty of posters can see. Was it a yes or a no ?

 

I don't have a map with the various schools shown so I can't sit down and suggest anything re; a 1/2 and 1/2 split. I believe someone else suggested an idea on it but I wasnt concerning myself with that point. If I can offer a different way to split the 4A in halves I will do so for discussion. Generally I like some idea involving a rotation for varietys sake.

 

I see things from a different view b/c I am NOT focusing all my attention on how just 1 district/city/county is affected - I'm looking at it in terms of the overall state:cool:

 

I think that #3 & 4 teams should just feel lucky that they even get to participate in the playoffs. Theres is no standard or justification to do so - the KHSAA just decided to make up this arrangment and we've been using it for some time. Its not like 3 & 4 seeds have this unalienable right to the playoffs that is a part of the soul & fabric of the Commonwealth.

 

Some districts are killers. Some districts are just downright weak. Some fluctuate. As an Ashland fan I have seen out team go from winning 3A with one of the biggest title game spreads to then having really down years where all 4 of our seeds lost to No KY teams. recently we have matched agaisnt the mountains and are on the upswing along with several of our district partners.

 

You guys are sitting next to powerhouse teams - NO one is questioning this. But from out in the state a common feeling could be summed up as: let those local teams deal with the powers in their own backyard before they send them out across the state. If you can't control your own backyard (ie, compete with close neighbors) then you simply do not deserve a manipulation in the playoff bracket to enable you to "win one more measly game and get an extra week of practice".

The cold hard facts are; if you arent good enough to beat those guys(in ANY order) then no one cares. It's called life. Take your medicine like many, many other schools do, and learn to like it or stop taking it.

 

Woody Jr

Some people would answer along the lines of

 

"You're not my mother,"

 

but I don't see a reason to go that route.

 

I did answer the question. The KHSAA is already altering the bracket for the specific reason of keeping other schools from having to face too many of the Big 3... why should my school be any different? I would prefer we go back to a bracket that didn't seem to have the strength of the Big 3 in mind (the last one) but if we aren't going to do that, I want the same consideration as the rest of the state.

 

Someone else DID suggest an idea, but I pointed out the flaws in the statement which made it untenable. No one has responded.

 

You, on the other hand, are making a different point. You don't need a basis for wanting X and T on seperate sides of the state- you just want it to happen. There's no arguing with preference, though, so there's not much I can say.

 

I will say that your REASONING for wanting them on seperate sides of the state is flawed. There's always going to be a divide SOMEWHERE, where teams that are near each other are placed on seperate sides of the bracket, so long as the bracket is done geographically. If you don't want to do the bracket geographically, then your reasoning suddenly holds no water, since it's geographically based.

 

In response to your argument about the 3/4 place teams, couldn't the same be said for the second place finisher? They don't HAVE to advance... we choose for them to. I never said they have an inalienable right to the playoffs. I said it was my preference. Again, you can't argue with preference.

 

As for your mildly boring, pedantic, and stock response at the end, I would have no problem if this were just the way of things. But this arrangement has come about for one reason:

 

The state is scared to play two of the Big 3.

 

Which is what most of them had to do to win the title before. Some schools, in region 2, had to play possibly three of them to win the title. So, instead of that frightening possibility, the KHSAA has thrown out some poppycock about this being the 'blind draw,' (only FOUR districts in the ENTIRE state affected!) and it will rotate next year (and it won't. It won't exist next year.) This was a rigged game to get the Big 3 away from everyone else, and to do it, someone had to be left holding the bag.

 

And I would actually be OK with it if it wasn't 10 feet of manure. The bracket was set up with the strength of the Big 3 in mind. They may not be #1 seeds de jure... but they are #1 seeds de facto, by action of the KHSAA.

 

I don't want the brackets created with strength of opponents in mind. But if the KHSAA is going to do it, I want my fair consideration.

 

Is that plain enough for you, Woodster?

Some people would answer along the lines of

 

"You're not my mother,"

 

but I don't see a reason to go that route.

 

I did answer the question. The KHSAA is already altering the bracket for the specific reason of keeping other schools from having to face too many of the Big 3... why should my school be any different? I would prefer we go back to a bracket that didn't seem to have the strength of the Big 3 in mind (the last one) but if we aren't going to do that, I want the same consideration as the rest of the state.

 

Someone else DID suggest an idea, but I pointed out the flaws in the statement which made it untenable. No one has responded.

 

You, on the other hand, are making a different point. You don't need a basis for wanting X and T on seperate sides of the state- you just want it to happen. There's no arguing with preference, though, so there's not much I can say.

 

I will say that your REASONING for wanting them on seperate sides of the state is flawed. There's always going to be a divide SOMEWHERE, where teams that are near each other are placed on seperate sides of the bracket, so long as the bracket is done geographically. If you don't want to do the bracket geographically, then your reasoning suddenly holds no water, since it's geographically based.

 

In response to your argument about the 3/4 place teams, couldn't the same be said for the second place finisher? They don't HAVE to advance... we choose for them to. I never said they have an inalienable right to the playoffs. I said it was my preference. Again, you can't argue with preference.

 

As for your mildly boring, pedantic, and stock response at the end, I would have no problem if this were just the way of things. But this arrangement has come about for one reason:

 

The state is scared to play two of the Big 3.

 

Which is what most of them had to do to win the title before. Some schools, in region 2, had to play possibly three of them to win the title. So, instead of that frightening possibility, the KHSAA has thrown out some poppycock about this being the 'blind draw,' (only FOUR districts in the ENTIRE state affected!) and it will rotate next year (and it won't. It won't exist next year.) This was a rigged game to get the Big 3 away from everyone else, and to do it, someone had to be left holding the bag.

 

And I would actually be OK with it if it wasn't 10 feet of manure. The bracket was set up with the strength of the Big 3 in mind. They may not be #1 seeds de jure... but they are #1 seeds de facto, by action of the KHSAA.

 

I don't want the brackets created with strength of opponents in mind. But if the KHSAA is going to do it, I want my fair consideration.

 

Is that plain enough for you, Woodster?

 

It's nice you don't "feel the need to go that route" because no one would understand what in the world that has to do with our exchange of opinions.

 

Since you DO admit that you favor the KHSAA strategy of looking at teams strengths and THEN specifically making up the bracket so that NO other teams will have to play those predetermined powers several weeks in a row.

We can stop right there - you're views are based on that premise.

I disagree with your premise and feel the KHSAA should NOT make up the playoff schedule based on who is good or not good enough. If Lou folks want to think I prefer having all Lou schools play each other first b/c they are within afew miles of each other and THEN play statewide schools because I dislike Lou then so be it. It's just my opinion that an arrangement like that is no more out of line than what we have had the last few years.

 

As I said before just because some teams have had the luxury of a certain setup the last few years does NOT mean that is the standard from which everything flows. Just look at it in terms of you've been lucky to have the chance to win ONE playoff game (though I'm not sure how many times you've even done that?). When we go to the 5or6A next year? then maybe you can escape the big bad bullies in your backyard, but they "are" in your backyard - no one elses. Hey maybe you'll even get to be in their class "again" - that will be fun won't it:laugh:

 

Woody Jr

It's nice you don't "feel the need to go that route" because no one would understand what in the world that has to do with our exchange of opinions.

 

Since you DO admit that you favor the KHSAA strategy of looking at teams strengths and THEN specifically making up the bracket so that NO other teams will have to play those predetermined powers several weeks in a row.

We can stop right there - you're views are based on that premise.

THAT.

 

IS.

 

NOT.

 

WHAT.

 

I.

 

SAID.

 

If you're incapable or unwilling to read what I write, then don't bother responding to my posts. I said, in SEVERAL places:

I don't want the brackets created with strength of opponents in mind. But if the KHSAA is going to do it, I want my fair consideration.

Normally, I DON'T WANT is construed as a negative in the English language. A denial.

 

A few examples:

I don't want brocolli. I don't want to do my homework. I don't want the state to alter the playoff system based on the strength of certain schools.

 

See how that works? Good.

 

I don't like it, but if the state is going to do it, I want just consideration for my team. Just like everyone else is getting.

 

Sorry to yell, but to be so blatently misrepresented really raises my hackles. The fact is, you wanted a certain answer, and even though you didn't get it you went full speed ahead.

Run along gt, you're not my mom:sleep:

 

you are the boss of no one - get over it

 

 

Woody Jr

:laugh: :thumb:

I may have missed it, but I got sort of lost in the "name calling" and skipped to the end. Ignore if it's already been suggested:

 

What would be wrong w/ using the new format for RD 1 and RD 2 and then keeping the "random draws" in RD 3 and RD 4 (w/ current geographical limits in RD 3). Example:

 

* - RD 1 & RD 2 determine Playoff District Champion

 

* - RD 3 is randomly drawn before season for the 4 Regions in each 1/2 of the state. E.g., R3D5 (HHS/Cov Cath) could face R3D6 (Lex Cath) OR R4D7 (Rockcastle/Bell) OR R4D8 (Ashland), rather than R3D6 every year. However, R3D5 COULD NOT play the other 1/2 of the state (R1D1 [Hoptown], R1D2 [bG], R2D3 [bullitt East] or R2D4 [boyle]) in Round 3.

 

* - RD 4 is completely random (and possibly neutral site since you can't EARN home field in RD 4 currently). This would allow R3 to play R1, R2 or R4 rather than playing R4 every year.

 

* - RD 5 is 2 teams left standing.

 

POSITIVES - changes things up; doesn't insure a X v. T finals each year; saves even more on travel $ because in RD 3 you stay in your 1/2 of the state

 

NEGATIVES - stale, repetitive district matchups in RD 1 & RD 2; X v. T cannot happen in RD 3, but remains likely for RD 4 or RD 5; potentially longer trips in RD 4; possible mismatches/blowouts in RD 5

 

Thoughts?

MY QUESTION TO YOU:

So is it your argument basically that before a playoff bracket is setup, that the powers to be(KHSAA) examine the strength of teams and then make sure that those teams are not aligned in a way that some other team would have to play them several weeks in a row?

That seems to be your argument as I see it - do I have it correct before I proceed?

 

YOUR Response?:

I did answer your question, and I'm sure there are plenty of posters that can see that.

QUOTE]

 

MY REPLY:

Sorry, I guess I just missed the answer to my previous question that you say plenty of posters can see. Was it a yes or a no ?

 

YOUR CONFIRMING? YOUR Answer to my question:

I did answer the question. The KHSAA is already altering the bracket for the specific reason of keeping other schools from having to face too many of the Big 3... why should my school be any different? I would prefer we go back to a bracket that didn't seem to have the strength of the Big 3 in mind (the last one) but if we aren't going to do that, I want the same consideration as the rest of the state.

 

MY RESPONSE to Your Afirmative answer:

Since you DO admit that you favor the KHSAA strategy of looking at teams strengths and THEN specifically making up the bracket so that NO other teams will have to play those predetermined powers several weeks in a row.

We can stop right there - you're views are based on that premise.

I disagree with your premise ....

 

You can stop taking things so personal and making it personal.

The above shows that I did not twist anything. We just have a different opinion of how one should set up the playoffs.

 

You want the same consideration as the rest of the state. Well you arent the rest of the state; you are a 4A school sitting in the backyard of some power programs. Quit trying to run away from them and blame others for not wanting to come take care of the bully next door for you guys.

 

P.S. big letters do not make your points better or right:p

 

Woody Jr