If they set the playoffs up with districts 1-4 in one bracket and 5-8 in the other, who, other than maybe LCA would have the firepower to challenge Beechwood or Mayfield?? Maybe they should reconsider the playoff set up to keep the integrity of the championship game intact. However, if they were worried about the "integrity of a championship" we wouldnt be moving to a 6 class system, now would we?

If they set the playoffs up with districts 1-4 in one bracket and 5-8 in the other, who, other than maybe LCA would have the firepower to challenge Beechwood or Mayfield?? Maybe they should reconsider the playoff set up to keep the integrity of the championship game intact. However, if they were worried about the "integrity of a championship" we wouldnt be moving to a 6 class system, now would we?

 

You may have a point, I'd rather see Beechwood in the title game but I can appreciate the excitement ole billyboy and others in the east must be feeling now that the Northern KY road block is gone.

Did you catch the wink there, CoachJ?

Yes. But winks can mean different things. Could've been an "I-know-what's-REALLY-up" wink...could've meant something else. Regardless, there's a little truth to every joke -- otherwise, the joke wouldn't have been thought up.

 

On the surface--wink notwithstanding--the comment comes across as Oliver Stone type stuff.

 

Actually, my complaint is more with the six-class format than anything else and the geographical issues it can cause, like a third-round game against a district with no school less than a three-hour drive from all but one team in the other.

Valid point...but the "maybe-they-have-an-insider" comment seemed to be your concluding point since you closed with it.

 

I would comment to the (very valid) geographical concerns in a couple of ways...

1. In the CURRENT alignment, there are several cases where three-hour-drives or more must occur for regional championships (2A Region 3 vs. Region 4, for example). Our SECOND-ROUND game last year at Somerset took 3 hours.

2. There are discussions about PLAYOFF NEUTRAL SITES going on with people whose input is taken seriously by the KHSAA (namely, the Ky. FB Coaches Association) and the people that make the ultimate decisions up the line (Football Committee and KHSAA). IF neutral sites for 3rd and 4th round games ARE allowed, I think you'd see something more like a LOUISVILLE site for a Beechwood vs. Mayfield game.

 

Nevertheless, I can see why the eastern Kentucky teams would love the proposed new Class A setup.

We're not opposed to it. But since I've been at Pikeville -- maybe the school with the most reason not to want to be with Beechwood -- I've never heard ANYONE here complain about having to be on Beechwood's side of the bracket...and CERTAINLY nobody associated with our current football staff or administration.

 

I've just heard ONE thing..."figure out what we need to do to be able to COMPETE BETTER with them and get that job done."

 

...and we're making some DRASTIC changes to that end (off-season work, facilities/equipment, etc.)...THAT'S why we're not opposed to ANY set-up (including if we'd been moved to 2A...which is what we were expecting...and you would've heard ZERO complaints from our program if it had happened; just comments about how in the long run, the increased competition would make our program BETTER!).

Your posts come across as whining

Only to you, apparently.

Yes. But winks can mean different things. Could've been an "I-know-what's-REALLY-up" wink...could've meant something else. Regardless, there's a little truth to every joke -- otherwise, the joke wouldn't have been thought up.

 

On the surface--wink notwithstanding--the comment comes across as Oliver Stone type stuff.

Or maybe it's simply the observation that the east side caught a break.

Please stick to the issues and not each other.

I would comment to the (very valid) geographical concerns in a couple of ways...

1. In the CURRENT alignment, there are several cases where three-hour-drives or more must occur for regional championships (2A Region 3 vs. Region 4, for example). Our SECOND-ROUND game last year at Somerset took 3 hours.

Those things happen sometimes, CoachJ ... but in this case, it's a situation in which there is a guaranteed three-hour trip for a state quarterfinal unless District 1 is won by Russellville. Then there a likely 300-mile trip for the semifinals, again by anyone other than Russellville.

And it's obvious why the western Kentucky teams hate it.

Our criticism is based on geography and travel, with nothing to do with the competition level of the opponent.

Our criticism is based on geography and travel, with nothing to do with the competition level of the opponent.

 

I agree with this...I haven't sensed any "whining" on the part of people out west for any reason OTHER than the travel. Only thing I disagreed with was the assertion that maybe we in EKy. wanted Beechwood out of our semi-state so much due to our lack of recent success against them that we might have used some kind of "pull" within the KHSAA to achieve it.

 

Again, I hope the travel issues brought up will help further the discussion of neutral sites in the playoffs (BUT...with the caveat that the SCHOOLS making those games would split the gate after expenses as is currently done in rounds 3 and 4 -- NOT that the gate should go to the KHSAA as happens in the finals).

 

Or maybe it's simply the observation that the east side caught a break.

Understandable.

 

...and sorry if my reply seemed to be "personal" toward Westsider...just wanted to respond to the ISSUE that we had an "in" to sway the realignment "our way" ... or that we would even have pushed for the realignment the way it came out.

I agree with this...I haven't sensed any "whining" on the part of people out west for any reason OTHER than the travel.

Thank you.

Only thing I disagreed with was the assertion that maybe we in EKy. wanted Beechwood out of our semi-state so much due to our lack of recent success against them that we might have used some kind of "pull" within the KHSAA to achieve it.

Frankly, it was a joke, not an assertion.

Again, I hope the travel issues brought up will help further the discussion of neutral sites in the playoffs (BUT...with the caveat that the SCHOOLS making those games would split the gate after expenses as is currently done in rounds 3 and 4 -- NOT that the gate should go to the KHSAA as happens in the finals).

I don't like the concept of neutral-field playoff games. I think the crowds and atmosphere are likely to be better at home sites.

Understandable.

 

...and sorry if my reply seemed to be "personal" toward Westsider...just wanted to respond to the ISSUE that we had an "in" to sway the realignment "our way" ... or that we would even have pushed for the realignment the way it came out.

No offense taken.

Yes. But winks can mean different things. Could've been an "I-know-what's-REALLY-up" wink...could've meant something else. Regardless, there's a little truth to every joke -- otherwise, the joke wouldn't have been thought up.

 

On the surface--wink notwithstanding--the comment comes across as Oliver Stone type stuff.

 

 

Valid point...but the "maybe-they-have-an-insider" comment seemed to be your concluding point since you closed with it.

 

I would comment to the (very valid) geographical concerns in a couple of ways...

1. In the CURRENT alignment, there are several cases where three-hour-drives or more must occur for regional championships (2A Region 3 vs. Region 4, for example). Our SECOND-ROUND game last year at Somerset took 3 hours.

2. There are discussions about PLAYOFF NEUTRAL SITES going on with people whose input is taken seriously by the KHSAA (namely, the Ky. FB Coaches Association) and the people that make the ultimate decisions up the line (Football Committee and KHSAA). IF neutral sites for 3rd and 4th round games ARE allowed, I think you'd see something more like a LOUISVILLE site for a Beechwood vs. Mayfield game.

 

 

We're not opposed to it. But since I've been at Pikeville -- maybe the school with the most reason not to want to be with Beechwood -- I've never heard ANYONE here complain about having to be on Beechwood's side of the bracket...and CERTAINLY nobody associated with our current football staff or administration.

 

I've just heard ONE thing..."figure out what we need to do to be able to COMPETE BETTER with them and get that job done."

 

...and we're making some DRASTIC changes to that end (off-season work, facilities/equipment, etc.)...THAT'S why we're not opposed to ANY set-up (including if we'd been moved to 2A...which is what we were expecting...and you would've heard ZERO complaints from our program if it had happened; just comments about how in the long run, the increased competition would make our program BETTER!).

 

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

I think Bellevue and Ludlow are praying that Beechwood moves up to 2A considering the makeup of that District

 

Doubt it. Can't speak for Bellevue fans but I'm sure most in Ludlow could care less one way or the other..

I hope Mayfield and Beechwood both stay in 1A. I also believe Mayfield was the better team in 95. They won.