No offense to any team mentioned, and I am sure they are glad to still be playing, but here are ten reasons I think the football playoffs are bad:

 

1. Garrad County (2-8)

2. Pulaski County (2-8)

3. Ballard Memorial (3-7)

4. Carroll County (3-6)

5. Glasgow (3-7)

6. Casey County (3-7)

7. Cawood (3-7)

8. Grant County (3-7)

9. Grayson County (3-7)

10. Nelson County (3-7)

 

Ten teams with the records listed above will get to continue on in the playoffs. This does not include the 6 playoff teams who are (4-6) or the 20 who are (5-5). Out of the 222 football playing schools, 128 make the playoffs, or 58%. Out of the 128 who make it, 36 are .500 or less, or 28%.

 

Plain and simple, the playoffs are too long and drawn out. You can't play an entire district tournament in less than a week, like basketball. Football season begins on July 15 and truly can run 5 months. If people want the state championship to end before December, reduce the number of playoff games.

 

Here is my solution:

 

1. Begin the season on the last Friday in August (This year would be Aug. 25)

 

2. Play ten games and get rid of the open date (this year means the last game would have been played on 10/27)

 

3. Top two teams out of the district make the playoffs. They play each other for the right to make the Regional Finals. This means instead of three games, there is one. (This year, would be played on 11/3)

 

4. One game for the Regional championship. (This year, would be played on 11/10)

 

5. One game to determine Sectional Championship and the right to make the finals. (This year would be 11/17)

 

6. Championship game played on 11/24.

I have long said that football should end Thanksgiving weekend. I agree... cut out a week of the playoffs.

I agree...too many teams make the playoffs and that it should not be like basketball (yes I know in Kentucky that statement might be blasphemy) in which everyone, or near everyone makes the playoffs. The top two teams should make the playoffs.

 

When I was playing we only had two teams making the playoffs and nothing like eating Thanksgiving dinner early in the day and then loading the bus to make the trip to Louisville and then play the state finals on the day after Thanksgiving.

Why is everyone always looking to slight football. Why mess with something that hae been working. As far as teams that get in with loosing records, you can go 0-28 in basketball and win 1 district tournament game and egt into the region. Yeah, that really works.

Not slighting football. Just pointing out that the playoffs take WAY too long. To fix it, you need to examine how many poor record teams are making the playoffs and figure out a solution to it.

 

Just sit back, relax, and imagine how long basketball would take if you began the district tournament and played one round of games per week. Then take the Regional tournament and play one round of games per week. Then take the Sweet 16 and play one round of games per week. It would not end until May, huh? Thus, the issue with football.

Not slighting football. Just pointing out that the playoffs take WAY too long. To fix it, you need to examine how many poor record teams are making the playoffs and figure out a solution to it.

 

Just sit back, relax, and imagine how long basketball would take if you began the district tournament and played one round of games per week. Then take the Regional tournament and play one round of games per week. Then take the Sweet 16 and play one round of games per week. It would not end until May, huh? Thus, the issue with football.

Football and Basketball are apples and oranges. You shouldn't physically play more than one football game per week, not even mentioning the preparation time that football takes. Basketball can be played several days in a row and takes much less preparation time. EVERYONE makes the "playoffs" in basketball, no matter what their record. You play 15 games in football if you make the state finals. IMO, thats not too many games.

My personal opinion is that sports seasons should not overlap. That is a whole other can of worms though.

The biggest problem I have with this playoff system is that of the best three 4A football teams in the state (Male, St. X, Trinity), only one will make the semi-finals of the playoffs.

 

I think these are the schools that should have the biggest gripe with the new system.

Why is everyone always looking to slight football. Why mess with something that hae been working. As far as teams that get in with loosing records, you can go 0-28 in basketball and win 1 district tournament game and egt into the region. Yeah, that really works.

 

The state basketball tournament always works itself out. No "1-28" teams ever make it to Rupp. The same will happen for football. But comparing the two is an impossible/unnecessary task.

The biggest problem I have with this playoff system is that of the best three 4A football teams in the state (Male, St. X, Trinity), only one will make the semi-finals of the playoffs.

 

I think these are the schools that should have the biggest gripe with the new system.

 

Are you of the notion that seven Jefferson County schools should go to Rupp Arena in March, while the mountain regions and western Kentucky are completely left out. Male and St. X have been knocking each other out of the playoffs early for years. Just play who is in front of you and don't worry about anything else.

I agree with shortening the season. The bye week can go, and thre really should only be two district teams in the playoffs. But this will never happen in Kentucky. There is too much support for the concept of letting as many kids play as possible play, for as long as possible.

The playoff system should stay as it is.

 

There have been cases, Bourbon County when they won 2A in 1997 was a #4 seed. Under a 4 week playoff, they would have been sitting at home.

 

The problem with letting only 2 teams from a district into the playoffs is that teams in a tough district are completely screwed. For instance, a team such as Manual (#3 seed) would be left out of the playoffs because they got beat by Male and Saint X in district play, yet they are still a top 10 4A team.

 

Another scenario that would be problematic is a 3-way tiebreaker. If team A beats team B, team B beats team C, and team C beats team A, and they all go undefeated in non district play, that leaves each of them at 9-1. Under a three way tie, one of those teams will be left out of the playoffs. That would be wrong.

 

While I don't think 1-9 teams or 2-8 should be in the playoffs, it really doesn't hurt too much playing an extra week. High school basketball plays around 25-30 games a year so why don't they not start until a week or two later or cut out some games. I guess the KHSAA doesn't want to mess with it's baby.:sssh:

High school basketball plays around 25-30 games a year so why don't they not start until a week or two later or cut out some games. I guess the KHSAA doesn't want to mess with it's baby.:sssh:

 

Good point. I think Indiana has a rule that basketball can only play 20 games (correct me if I'm wrong), and then they move to the postseason. Up until classification in 1997, the Indiana system worked great. But it seems like Kentucky doesn't want to even hear about dropping a couple games off the hoop schedule. Makes no sense.

In California, we played our first game the second Friday in September (following 1 scrimmage week). Each "League" was composed of approximately six to eight teams, meaning you played five to seven league games. You scheduled three to five non-league games. There was no off- week. Non-league games were played before league games. The league champion (the team with the best league record) was guaranteed a spot in the playoffs. There were six leagues (approximately 42 teams). Polling determined the two at-large teams (where non-league performance was important), for a total of eight playoff teams. Playoffs were seeded. There was a first round quarterfinal, a second round semifinal, and then the North Coast Section finals were played at the Oakland Coliseum the first Friday and Saturday in December. The quaterfinals and semifinals were played at neutral sites. This was done for each of 6 classes (A-6A).

 

Of course, California is divided into about 8 sections, so there is no real true state champion out there, but then again there are a heck of a lot more schools then there are in Kentucky. Winning the Section title was a remarkable accomplishment.

 

Public and private schools competed with one another just as they do here. In fact, my high school always seemed to get beat in the Finals by DeLaSalle, except for 1987 when we beat them.

 

The system seemed to work very well, and caused very few problems. In fact, "League Titles" were very meaningful, and honors and accolades were awarded on a League basis, as well as Sectional basis. So you had "1st team All East Bay Athletic League" as well as "2nd Team All-North Coast Section," and then on a statewide basis "1st Team All North Counties" which would be all the sections North of San Jose.

 

I think we need to expand the Districts and contract the number of playoff teams.

Of course, California is divided into about 8 sections, so there is no real true state champion out there, but then again there are a heck of a lot more schools then there are in Kentucky. Winning the Section title was a remarkable accomplishment.

 

I think that has changed this year. I think they are playing a state championship game, pitting the "nothern" champion and the "southern" champion at the new soccer stadium in Carson. I believe the two representatives come from power points. It may not be a "playoff" to get to the title game, though. Go to this website a click around. Pretty interesting.

 

http://www.cifstate.org/