I would like to hear why people want 4 classes instead of 6.

First of all, I could be wrong but aren't you a fan/alum from one of KY's Largest schools and perennial powers? Makes sense to you then but not to most.

 

Secondly, Is there any other state in the Union that has 1 football tourney/champion? My guess is no.

 

As to the Basketball example: There is one big difference. That tourney started in the 1910's and has stayed that way ever since. Football playoffs in KY have ALWAYS been divided in classes: From 3 to 4 to 6 since 1959.

 

From that logic, the NCAA Tournament would still have 16 teams, the NBA and MLB playoffs would have only conference championships and finals, and college football would still use polls to determine their champion.

That's bordering on blasphemy and may well result in your expulsion from Kentucky.

 

Like I said, I'm in the minority. But I've had the opportunity to see firsthand, how it's done in other states. The quality of play in KY's one champion, one class tourney is no better than what you see in classed state tourneys. If bringing an outside perspective is worthy of expulsion, then so be it. Just calling it the way I see it. And since this is about football, again, one (or 3 or 4 classes) doesn't fix the problem. Less classes makes it worse.

I would like to hear why people want 4 classes instead of 6.

 

So you can put the 2 other teams down that didn't win a championship.

One class is actually very bad for basketball in KY.

 

Maybe not "very bad", but certainly not ideal. But it's the sacred cow, and won't be changed, even if it is the right thing to do.

Under six classes 2.7% of the teams win state championships. The "everybody gets a trophy" statement is absolute nonsense.

 

The "everybody gets a trophy" statement is more a commentary on all the teams making the playoffs rather than more teams winning state titles. If we're talking literally trophies, there are 16 more district champions, 16 more district runner-ups, 8 more region champions, 8 more region runner-ups, and so forth. But it's the playoff argument that most people latch onto. The principal of a winless team making the playoffs is particularly galling to many.

Baseball is the same, but it isn't a "sacred cow" & they aren't looking to change that into classes anytime soon, although it doesn't create the revenue that basketball does.

 

Maybe not "very bad", but certainly not ideal. But it's the sacred cow, and won't be changed, even if it is the right thing to do.

Now that I have stirred the pot really well let me tell you what I'd really like to see.

 

Return to 4 classes with only district winners and runners up making the playoffs.

 

I love football but football season is to long for teams that go deep into the playoffs. However any time the subject of reducing the number of participants in football playoffs is brought up someone will inevitably cry foul because everyone in basketball makes the playoffs, thus my repeated references to basketball in this thread.

 

Comparisons of football to basketball are ludicrous as I hope some of my posts illustrated.

 

and *GASP* I would have no problem with classifying basketball and I also believe that the teams that opt to participate in the All A shouldn't be in the district structure for the Sweet 16.

Now that I have stirred the pot really well let me tell you what I'd really like to see.

 

Return to 4 classes with only district winners and runners up making the playoffs.

 

I love football but football season is to long for teams that go deep into the playoffs. However any time the subject of reducing the number of participants in football playoffs is brought up someone will inevitably cry foul because everyone in basketball makes the playoffs, thus my repeated references to basketball in this thread.

 

Comparisons of football to basketball are ludicrous as I hope some of my posts illustrated.

 

and *GASP* I would have no problem with classifying basketball and I also believe that the teams that opt to participate in the All A shouldn't be in the district structure for the Sweet 16.

 

You think the season is too long for teams that play deep into playoffs? November football and early December football is the best of football IMO.

You think the season is too long for teams that play deep into playoffs? November football and early December football is the best of football IMO.

 

And if you reduce the number of teams those games would be played only 2 weeks earlier.

While we are on this subject let me just vent about something else.

 

This whole "the teams who always win should be forced to play up in a class against each other" stuff gets on my nerves.

 

What kind of distribution of wealth bull manure is this???? People complain about how "everyone gets a trophy" then in the same breathe they want to do this?

 

First of all, how would you quantify who has to play up? If it is based off winning a championship then EVERYONE would eventually have to play up.

 

I hate to break it to you folks, but you know what causes programs to evolve.... HAVING SOMEONE WHO IS BETTER THAN YOU.

 

You know why Bowling Green is a State Power? Because for years they were coming up short.

 

You know why Belfry is a State Power? Because for years they were coming up short and Central was eating their lunch.

 

You know why DeSales is a State Power? They got tired of being "that Catholic school noone remembers" in Louisville

 

If you are going to complain about a watered down system, heaven help us if we went this direction. Every other class except the "Champion's" class is basically a glorified consolation bracket.

 

In addition... why in the world should a school like Beechwood, Mayfield, or Danville be asked to play schools 5 to 6 times their size as a punishment for being good and getting the most they can out of their talent pool?

 

Just never understood this way of thinking... if a team feels like they want to step up they should have that right, but at no point should teams be handicapped for doing exactly what they were supposed to.

While we are on this subject let me just vent about something else.

 

This whole "the teams who always win should be forced to play up in a class against each other" stuff gets on my nerves.

 

What kind of distribution of wealth bull manure is this???? People complain about how "everyone gets a trophy" then in the same breathe they want to do this?

 

First of all, how would you quantify who has to play up? If it is based off winning a championship then EVERYONE would eventually have to play up.

 

I hate to break it to you folks, but you know what causes programs to evolve.... HAVING SOMEONE WHO IS BETTER THAN YOU.

 

You know why Bowling Green is a State Power? Because for years they were coming up short.

 

You know why Belfry is a State Power? Because for years they were coming up short and Central was eating their lunch.

 

You know why DeSales is a State Power? They got tired of being "that Catholic school noone remembers" in Louisville

 

If you are going to complain about a watered down system, heaven help us if we went this direction. Every other class except the "Champion's" class is basically a glorified consolation bracket.

 

In addition... why in the world should a school like Beechwood, Mayfield, or Danville be asked to play schools 5 to 6 times their size as a punishment for being good and getting the most they can out of their talent pool?

 

Just never understood this way of thinking... if a team feels like they want to step up they should have that right, but at no point should teams be handicapped for doing exactly what they were supposed to.

 

PREACH!!

 

I have never understood the logic of "they are too good move them out of our division". That is like saying we want to be the best of the worst, hooray!

How many times has this been argued on here? It usually happens when the playoffs start. 4 classes would be ideal but the bad teams would still be bad and still blown out in the playoffs.

How many times has this been argued on here? It usually happens when the playoffs start. 4 classes would be ideal but the bad teams would still be bad and still blown out in the playoffs.

 

There would be less bad teams in the playoffs, and consolidating the good teams into smaller groupings creates more of a grind for the favorites, creating more opportunities for upsets. How many champions have we had in the six class system that were literally untested because they were so far above everyone else? As in not even one close game. To use a local example, in 2015, South Warren won every game by 27 points or more in the playoffs. Would that have happened if region 1 looked like:

 

South Warren vs. Graves County

Christian County vs. Greenwood

 

Owensboro vs. Franklin-Simpson

Bowling Green vs. Hopkinsville

 

That opening game between South Warren and Graves County could have been potentially a better game than any South Warren received in their run, and I 100% know that a matchup against Christian County would have been.

 

How might Johnson Central's 2016 run have looked (where they won all games by 47 points or more) if they had to play Pulaski County in the second round before squaring off against the winner of Ashland and Southwestern in the region finals? To say nothing of eventually running into Bowling Green in the finals.

 

Those may not all be 100% accurate in terms of enrollment, but you get an idea of how a champion would go through a lot more, how there'd be more suspense and possibility for a favorite to fall. Almost everything done now is because Trinity and X (and Male to a lesser extent) were messing up other teams, so the load was reduced so that less teams were trapped with them.

 

Blowouts would still happen in a four class system. And maybe a team might still win multiple games by ridiculous amounts. But in four classes, they're almost certainly going to run into someone who can push back along the way. In 2006, every champion ran into someone that played them within single digits during the playoffs. Every last one, including two in the state title games that won by three points each. Last year, only two of six had a single score game in the playoffs, and only one was in the state title game. The average margin of victory in the state title game in 2006 was 29.5 PPG. In 2006? 14.75 PPG, owed almost entirely to the 34 points that Trinity won by over Ryle in the title game.

I'm old school and played in the end of the 4 class system. Where I played is always a contender and has been since the early 2000s. If we were to do the top two teams from each district only, my team would've missed the playoffs 2 out 3 of my varsity years. I originally thought the 6 class system would give the really small schools hope of fielding competitive teams. Over the past 12 seasons or so it has proven me wrong. Even with the four class system the only teams winning were Trinity, X, and Male in 4A. Highlands was a machine in 3A with others breaking through every few years. The only wide open class was 2A, and that only really changed once Mayfield went to 1A and Danville followed suit (or vice Versa). 1A was Dominated by Beechwood in the 90s. One factor of the same teams winning has to do partly with more small city schools losing people to suburbs and consolidation. Also some schools that play literally dress all the boys in the school and can barely field a team. 10 classes or two classes means zip in Ky bc the football is SO TOP HEAVY. Yes the teams may win more or less (depending number of classes) but it'll still be the same names at the top of the list on each class.