My solution:

 

4 regular classes - one super class. Short but simple.

 

It gets the Ts and Xs out of the way of the smaller "big" schools which is the crux of the issue IMO.

 

If 6 is a requirement, then you MUST let everyone in. Its silly to exclude the very few from the playoffs.

But if we got to a 1A and 6A with just 16 schools doesn't that reduce the impact of 6 classes and almost make it what it is now? IE you can have your cake and eat it too? I don't think that there are enough votes to do one or the other by themselves, but do both and alot of people raise an eyebrow. THe majority of 1,2,3,and 4A teams I think would be receptive to this idea, and you would solve the upper and lower class issues as well.

3) Choose playoff teams not by the current method of sending the top 2 or top 4 teams from each district (which has its own problems of letting really poor teams in from weak districts and shutting out worthy teams from strong districts), but rather by some kind of power rating system. If you let enough teams in the playoffs from each class, I can't imagine anyone making a valid argument that a team legitimately capable of winning the championship would get shut out. After all, the goal of having playoffs is to crown a champion--it's not to boost the spirits of teams that finished the regular season at 2-8. Seed the playoffs by power ranking.

Great... the BCS of high school football. Not to criticize but I think that is opening more problems than solutions.

I like the top 16 and bottom 16 fightin it out and the middle 4 classes being based on male enrollment.:thumb:

Here is what I would would look at doing in 2011 when the system may get updated:

 

1. Reduce the number of teams that make the playoffs from each district from 4 teams to 2 teams.

 

2. Make both 1A and 6A super classes with only 16 teams in each class. There would be no district games and all 16 teams would advance to the playoffs.

 

3. Go to neutral semi-final sites run by the KHSAA to reduce travel time.

 

Maybe you like some of those ideas, maybe you don't but one thing is for sure, they would reduce a lot of the complaints being voiced about the 6 class proposal.

 

Your thoughts? What solutions do you have (for the future)?

 

 

I like No. 1, but I doubt it happens. I'd be in favor of a super class for 6A, but not 1A. It would turn 1A into a JV or eight-man football division.

 

I'd prefer to keep the playoff format like it was until this year, so you have true regional champions each year, then alternate the home field for the semifinals depending on odd or even years.

But if we got to a 1A and 6A with just 16 schools doesn't that reduce the impact of 6 classes and almost make it what it is now? IE you can have your cake and eat it too? I don't think that there are enough votes to do one or the other by themselves, but do both and alot of people raise an eyebrow. THe majority of 1,2,3,and 4A teams I think would be receptive to this idea, and you would solve the upper and lower class issues as well.

 

The big issue with 1A in a 6 class system is that the boogeyman (Beechwood) is still in 1A. What exactly has that solved?

The big issue with 1A in a 6 class system is that the boogeyman (Beechwood) is still in 1A. What exactly has that solved?

They wouldn't be in a 16 class situation.

here would be the super 1A class, using the KHSAA's realignment #'s:

148 Hazard

145 Raceland

144 Bethlehem

140 Fairview

138 Bellevue

133 Harrodsburg

127 Fulton County

121 Paintsville

117 Caverna

117 Paris

116 Kentucky Country Day

109 Williamsburg

97 Eminence

91 Pineville

82 Jenkins

55 Evangel Christian

Here is what I would would look at doing in 2011 when the system may get updated:

 

1. Reduce the number of teams that make the playoffs from each district from 4 teams to 2 teams.

 

2. Make both 1A and 6A super classes with only 16 teams in each class. There would be no district games and all 16 teams would advance to the playoffs.

 

3. Go to neutral semi-final sites run by the KHSAA to reduce travel time.

 

Maybe you like some of those ideas, maybe you don't but one thing is for sure, they would reduce a lot of the complaints being voiced about the 6 class proposal.

 

Your thoughts? What solutions do you have (for the future)?

 

With all due respect to the poster and to the idea of a free-exchange of ideas, AND with an agreement on several of the "corrections" posted, I would submit that before we propose "solutions" to something that hasn't even been allowed to "fail" in any area (other than in people's OPINIONS as to what MAY be bad about it) we give it at least two years on its own.

 

As someone that has had to try to work with people to make a change a POSITIVE when most people RESIST change, I have found that the first step is to try and get everybody to be as POSITIVE as possible about it in the beginning and ELIMINATE NEGATIVITY about it. Then, once problems do arise, all involved -- including those that were the most positive about the changes -- be HONEST and ANALYTICAL about what the problems are that need correction.

 

But to try to propose "corrections" to it before it ever even gets started seems to imply that it's definitely flawed, and thus, will only ENCOURAGE those that think it's the wrong way to go and may potentially BLIND them to any positives that occur in the future.

With all due respect to the poster and to the idea of a free-exchange of ideas, AND with an agreement on several of the "corrections" posted, I would submit that before we propose "solutions" to something that hasn't even been allowed to "fail" in any area (other than in people's OPINIONS as to what MAY be bad about it) we give it at least two years on its own.

 

As someone that has had to try to work with people to make a change a POSITIVE when most people RESIST change, I have found that the first step is to try and get everybody to be as POSITIVE as possible about it in the beginning and ELIMINATE NEGATIVITY about it. Then, once problems do arise, all involved -- including those that were the most positive about the changes -- be HONEST and ANALYTICAL about what the problems are that need correction.

 

But to try to propose "corrections" to it before it ever even gets started seems to imply that it's definitely flawed, and thus, will only ENCOURAGE those that think it's the wrong way to go and may potentially BLIND them to any positives that occur in the future.

 

Amen Brother!

With all due respect to the poster and to the idea of a free-exchange of ideas, AND with an agreement on several of the "corrections" posted, I would submit that before we propose "solutions" to something that hasn't even been allowed to "fail" in any area (other than in people's OPINIONS as to what MAY be bad about it) we give it at least two years on its own.

 

As someone that has had to try to work with people to make a change a POSITIVE when most people RESIST change, I have found that the first step is to try and get everybody to be as POSITIVE as possible about it in the beginning and ELIMINATE NEGATIVITY about it. Then, once problems do arise, all involved -- including those that were the most positive about the changes -- be HONEST and ANALYTICAL about what the problems are that need correction.

 

But to try to propose "corrections" to it before it ever even gets started seems to imply that it's definitely flawed, and thus, will only ENCOURAGE those that think it's the wrong way to go and may potentially BLIND them to any positives that occur in the future.

 

:thumb:

 

Nice post.

What if we got away from classes by size and changed to divisions by ability. 3 divisions with the best teams in the upper division, the worst teams in the lower division. Your division is based on prior year performance. You win the top division championship and you are the true state champion.

 

Ok, go ahead and tear it up.

here would be the super 1A class, using the KHSAA's realignment #'s:

148 Hazard

145 Raceland

144 Bethlehem

140 Fairview

138 Bellevue

133 Harrodsburg

127 Fulton County

121 Paintsville

117 Caverna

117 Paris

116 Kentucky Country Day

109 Williamsburg

97 Eminence

91 Pineville

82 Jenkins

55 Evangel Christian

 

If these are the teams in the 1A class then why call it super? It should be called the Small 1A. There is nothing super about it.

Keep the 6 classes but only crown 3 state champions. A vs 2A, 3A vs 4A, 5A vs 6A. Hold each class final and state championship on consecutive weekends, possibly at the same location and it will turn your basketball "cash cow" into a wet mule...

 

BTW, that's just a thought. I'm not sure I would even go for it. I'm truly not sure what I think about 4 classes vs 6 classes.

Here is what I would would look at doing in 2011 when the system may get updated:

 

1. Reduce the number of teams that make the playoffs from each district from 4 teams to 2 teams.

 

2. Make both 1A and 6A super classes with only 16 teams in each class. There would be no district games and all 16 teams would advance to the playoffs.

 

3. Go to neutral semi-final sites run by the KHSAA to reduce travel time.

 

Maybe you like some of those ideas, maybe you don't but one thing is for sure, they would reduce a lot of the complaints being voiced about the 6 class proposal.

 

Your thoughts? What solutions do you have (for the future)?

 

I like this idea. I also would allow a 1A superclass team who wants to play up in 2A to do so IF the smallest 2A school is willing to step down into 1A so that you maintain 16 in the 1A class. There should be very little disparity between the highest 1A and the lowest 2A in enrollment.

With all due respect to the poster and to the idea of a free-exchange of ideas, AND with an agreement on several of the "corrections" posted, I would submit that before we propose "solutions" to something that hasn't even been allowed to "fail" in any area (other than in people's OPINIONS as to what MAY be bad about it) we give it at least two years on its own.

 

As someone that has had to try to work with people to make a change a POSITIVE when most people RESIST change, I have found that the first step is to try and get everybody to be as POSITIVE as possible about it in the beginning and ELIMINATE NEGATIVITY about it. Then, once problems do arise, all involved -- including those that were the most positive about the changes -- be HONEST and ANALYTICAL about what the problems are that need correction.

 

But to try to propose "corrections" to it before it ever even gets started seems to imply that it's definitely flawed, and thus, will only ENCOURAGE those that think it's the wrong way to go and may potentially BLIND them to any positives that occur in the future.

 

:thumb: Good Call!!!!

CoachJ,

 

That is not my intention at all with this thread.

 

I also agree we all need to give 6 classes a couple of years in practice and then look at how it can be improved. All I am trying to do is make some positive out of 6 classes and give everyone food for thought for the future.