If we go to only 5 classes how is it going to be much different than our current 4 class system?

 

If we are going to make the change, we need to go with 6 classes instead of just 5. At a minimum, if we do only go to 5 classes, Class 5A needs to be a smaller class (have fewer teams) than the other four classes not too much will change. Even if we go to 6 classes, I would still like to see 6A limited to the top 16 teams.

 

What say you?

I say yes but the only tweak Id make to the proposal you made in your previous thread is I would make 1a a little bigger but not too much.

I've always though three classes would work best in a state as small as Kentucky.

 

But after looking over the various proposals, I agree with theguru that you might as well go to six classes instead of five. You aren't really any better off with some of the problems with five classes than you were with four.

 

I don't like having only 16 teams in Class A though. I think you should divide 1A through 5A into equal or fairly equal divisions. When you have only the 16 smallest schools, it's almost like the 8-man football title. It would basically make the Class A championship like a junior varsity division. Competing against the smallest 35 to 40 schools in the state should be reasonable for any school big enough to have football.

 

I know there are only 16 teams in the 6A proposal, but those are the biggest and several of the best programs in the state. That championship would mean a lot, even though the field was small.

If we go to all of the trouble and change for 6 classes, I hope that we do so to get out of the heat- but there is very little support for that. If are not going to use 6 classes to shorten the regular season to 9 games, allowing game 10 for most teams to be the first playoff game, we might as well stay at 4 classes.

 

The rationale for staying at 10 is financial- 5 home and 5 away every season.

I say yes but the only tweak Id make to the proposal you made in your previous thread is I would make 1a a little bigger but not too much.

The problem is this, if you "tweak" any proposed 1A class setup to include more than 16 teams, Beechwood (23rd smallest I believe), a perenial 1A power will be in the mix. They will undoubtedly reign supreme, (as they quite often have already)and the change would have been for naught.

I agree Guru; if there is any addition of classes, there needs to be one placed at both ends of the size spectrum.

What about a 5A solution where the biggest and smallest schools are placed in 16 team classes and the rest are divided equally into three classes.

Why stop at 6? If 6 is good, wouldn't 8 be better? What about 10?

Why stop at 6? If 6 is good, wouldn't 8 be better? What about 10?

OB, I'm just saying if you make a change because of the inequities in for the smallest schools and the largest schools, then IMO we could go back to three main classes. I've heard more than one person complain that they hate this or that. But those that complain either A.) ignore the issues that are responsible for this debate, or B.) don't reside at a school that is effected one way or another. I wonder how many more titiles HHS would get if we went back to a three class system today and let HHS "play up". I wonder what side of the issue HHS fans would be on.

When I played, only the top two teams from each district made the playoffs and it really meant something to make the playoffs. Now, in some districts, you are pretty much a shoe-in regardless of what kind of season you had.

 

Likewise, I think 6 classes would water the level of competition down so much that winning a state championship would lose some of its luster. If you only had to beat a field of teams half as large as previous state champions, are you really as much of a state champion as the previous champs?

RR,

 

I agree four classes is probably enough as it is but the issue is not that simple. I would much rather have six classes than I would like to see a public/private split...

If we are going to do 6 classes, then why not go ahead and have some kind of post-championship class champ games? Like, 1A vs. 2A, 3A vs. 4A, 5A vs. 6A. Or some sort of variation. Sound like a feasible plan?

No, it makes the season too long and we don't want to crowd basketball.

If you want to name one overall champion then what is the reason for classifications in the first place?

When I played, only the top two teams from each district made the playoffs and it really meant something to make the playoffs. Now, in some districts, you are pretty much a shoe-in regardless of what kind of season you had.

 

Likewise, I think 6 classes would water the level of competition down so much that winning a state championship would lose some of its luster. If you only had to beat a field of teams half as large as previous state champions, are you really as much of a state champion as the previous champs?

Just curious, what was the disparity in school sizes back in the day. To me it's not so much an issue of amount of teams, or what would work better in the post season, but 1.) believing that their is a numbers issue in 1A and 4A. and 2.) most importantly, I don't want to see a public private split, which is what you are going to get if something doesn't change. If that happens, you'll be lucky if we have 6 classes, more like 8 and talk about watered down competition! I wonder if "back in the day" there was more than 45 schools in a class.