I'd agree with that if independents are in that class too. They have many of the advantages the privates enjoy but don't have to charge the huge tuition privates do.

Independents don't have any advantage that county schools don't have.

I appreciate all the effort you are putting into this Ashland but in my opinion anything less than four classes would be absolutely horrible. If the goal is to shrink classes, in the interest of fairness to all schools the most you could do in my opinion is this.

 

Keep the smallest class and the largest class at 32 teams. Split all the teams in between into two equal classes. And I still want every team possible to make the playoffs so football playoffs are run the same way the playoffs are in every other sport.

The numbers indicate otherwise.

Below is the # of independents / Privates / Total of the two in the state final game since 2010 (12 total spots available each year)

2015: 6 / 2/ 8

2014: 5 / 3 / 8

2013: 5 / 2 / 7

2012: 5 / 2 / 7

2011: 6 / 2 / 8

2010: 4 / 3 / 7

 

This shows that Independents and Privates are not on the same playing field as other schools, regardless of size. They compose more than half of state final participants every year. They need to be in their own league.

Regardless there are going to be haves and haves not teams. Respect to Ashland for coming up with a plan to think about. Kentucky is so backwards in everything from industry to politics no wonder our High School Football is nuts.

 

I suggest 4 classes. Put the Privates in their own playoff bracket but leave publics and independents the opportunity to schedule the privates during the regular season.

 

Then, when Male (top Public big school at this point in time) runs off 5 championships in 8 years we'll want to do it all over again. :isurrender:

The numbers indicate otherwise.

Below is the # of independents / Privates / Total of the two in the state final game since 2010 (12 t..otal spots available each year)

2015: 6 / 2/ 8

2014: 5 / 3 / 8

2013: 5 / 2 / 7

2012: 5 / 2 / 7

2011: 6 / 2 / 8

2010: 4 / 3 / 7

 

This shows that Independents and Privates are not on the same playing field as other schools, regardless of size. They compose more than half of state final participants every year. They need to be in their own league.

 

If this is what this discussion is all about, I am out of here. I thought you wanted more competition and a hard-earned championship against the best.

My original proposal has publics, privates, and independents together. In regard to your comment about competition, I do, but the advantages that privates and independents have over public schools makes competition, in most cases, almost impossible.

 

The numbers clearly show this is true.

The numbers indicate otherwise.

Below is the # of independents / Privates / Total of the two in the state final game since 2010 (12 total spots available each year)

2015: 6 / 2/ 8

2014: 5 / 3 / 8

2013: 5 / 2 / 7

2012: 5 / 2 / 7

2011: 6 / 2 / 8

2010: 4 / 3 / 7

 

This shows that Independents and Privates are not on the same playing field as other schools, regardless of size. They compose more than half of state final participants every year. They need to be in their own league.

Just so we know what we are discussing, who are you counting as private/independent for 2015 and 2014?

 

I only count 6 for 2015. Pikeville, Beechwood, Bowling Green and Mayfield are public independent schools. Newport Catholic and Lexington Catholic are private schools.

 

Pulaski Co, Male, Lafayette, Belfry, Johnson Central and South Warren are all public schools.

2015: actually had 6 i screwed up. Got mixed up on Belfry, so all my #'s are 1 off.

Pikeville, Beechwood, BG, mayfield, Newport Catholic, Lex Cath

You had 8

One option that I've heard a few times is to base classification on total roster size 9-12 over a four year average, rather than on total male population. Obviously schools would try to game this by cutting players. To combat this, you could make a rule that if you cut players, you are classified one class higher than you would be if you did not cut players. Possible that this method would provide a more balanced system.

One option that I've heard a few times is to base classification on total roster size 9-12 over a four year average, rather than on total male population. Obviously schools would try to game this by cutting players. To combat this, you could make a rule that if you cut players, you are classified one class higher than you would be if you did not cut players. Possible that this method would provide a more balanced system.

 

Trying to manage whether kids are cut would be difficult to manage and track. How would you verify whether every team in the state is cutting kids or not?

I think you put it on the schools. They state the are / aren't cutting kids. The KHSAA spot checks randomly or when allegations of cutting are made. Tricky for sure.

I think you put it on the schools. They state the are / aren't cutting kids. The KHSAA spot checks randomly or when allegations of cutting are made. Tricky for sure.

That would be a nightmare and unworkable.

 

One way around it is teams would just have tryouts and only pick kids they wanted others would never be on the team to be cut.

My original proposal has publics, privates, and independents together. In regard to your comment about competition, I do, but the advantages that privates and independents have over public schools makes competition, in most cases, almost impossible.

 

The numbers clearly show this is true.

1. Independents are Public Schools

2. What are these advantages you keep bringing up

 

Only advantage that I see is that most Independent Football teams have been around longer and have more tradition than most "County Schools", which in and of itself breeds a winning attitude and tradition for most of those teams.

Holding tryouts and only picking kids you want is what I mean by cuts. So that wouldn't be allowed.