First negative I see is that teams will be traveling more often and further just for district games. Is this really a good idea, especially in these times of high fuel prices?

We don't have enough bandwidth for my list ... :lol:

 

Seriously, watered-down competition and travel concerns are among the biggest problems with this decision.

Lloyd has had the travel concerns you mention with the old system. Now they are fixed. For every good, there is a bad. I can't find many negatives with 6 classes...

Lloyd has had the travel concerns you mention with the old system. Now they are fixed. For every good, there is a bad. I can't find many negatives with 6 classes...

Sorry, we're only talking about negatives in this thread. Please take all positive comments to What positives do you see with 6 classes?

Sorry, we're only talking about negatives in this thread. Please take all positive comments to What positives do you see with 6 classes?

Sorry. I didn't see the disclaimer that was in the other thread in the first post...

Sorry. I didn't see the disclaimer that was in the other thread in the first post...

:lol: Neither did I!

:lol: Neither did I!

:sssh:

 

Since I agree, for the most part, with the change, I'll leave one passing thought. Giving more 14-18 year old kids a chance is a great thing IMO...

:sssh:

 

Since I agree, for the most part, with the change, I'll leave one passing thought. Giving more 14-18 year old kids a chance is a great thing IMO...

To me, its teaching the 14-18 year olds that if they can't get what they want in this world, then ignore or change the rules because you deserve to be a winner, even if you're not the best.

To me, its teaching the 14-18 year olds that if they can't get what they want in this world, then ignore or change the rules because you deserve to be a winner, even if you're not the best.

There are only 2 more titles added, and most will be nothing more than the old 4 class powers for the first few years. It makes me wonder if there would be a Boyle or Beechwood in the old 3 class system. It seems some kids from those programs benefited a great deal from the last move over the long term. I know this is a different thread, but I wonder what would have become of those two powers if there was never a 4A. Yes travel is a concern, but it was in a 3A and 4A system as well. That's never going to change in a state this small IMO...

:sssh:

 

Since I agree, for the most part, with the change, I'll leave one passing thought. Giving more 14-18 year old kids a chance is a great thing IMO...

 

See, the problem here is you're not giving more kids a CHANCE. They all have a chance now. You are just GIVING kids. Big difference.

There are only 2 more titles added, and most will be nothing more than the old 4 class powers for the first few years. It makes me wonder if there would be a Boyle or Beechwood in the old 3 class system. It seems some kids from those programs benefited a great deal from the last move over the long term. I know this is a different thread, but I wonder what would have become of those two powers if there was never a 4A. Yes travel is a concern, but it was in a 3A and 4A system as well. That's never going to change in a state this small IMO...

 

What makes you think it would have made a difference. In the 31 years since the state went to four classes, less than one school a year has been added to mix. Essentially we have the same numbers now as we did in 1975.

See, the problem here is you're not giving more kids a CHANCE. They all have a chance now. You are just GIVING kids. Big difference.

You are giving nothing more than a first round loss from where you stand. How is that bad? In weeks 7-10 are they not still trying to get better for the playoffs? In the old system, the tent is folded, and the bags are packed far more often than a KID should experience...

What makes you think it would have made a difference. In the 31 years since the state went to four classes, less than one school a year has been added to mix. Essentially we have the same numbers now as we did in 1975.

I think there is an obvious change in overall talent in the state since 1975. Is it because more teams have a chance? I can't say for sure, but if I had to put $$ on it, I know where it would go. I think the same number of schools producing more talent says enough...

You are giving nothing more than a first round loss from where you stand. How is that bad? In weeks 7-10 are they not still trying to get better for the playoffs? In the old system, the tent is folded, and the bags are packed far more often than a KID should experience...

 

Should we just give everyone a ring then?:confused:

 

I'm giving them a chance from where I stand. If they lose in the first round, then they had their chance.

I think there is an obvious change in overall talent in the state since 1975. Is it because more teams have a chance? I can't say for sure, but if I had to put $$ on it, I know where it would go. I think the same number of schools producing more talent says enough...

 

Not sure what difference the talent level makes? We're talking about basically the same amound of schools competing against one another. If they all got better, then fine. It's a numbers thing.