The top 96 go dancing - regardless of class. 

Using hsratings.com rankings, the top 96 teams statewide are slotted into six 16-team Divisions (Div. I–VI) based solely on strength, not enrollment. It’s a modern, merit-based “open division” approach similar to California or New Jersey. No class lines. No districts. The 11-game season becomes a true proving ground, with statewide competition dictating playoff placement.

Why it works:

• Merit over enrollment

• True competitive parity

• Sparks statewide intrigue (e.g., Pikeville vs. Paducah & Pikeville to Paducah)

 

10 minutes ago, Calico Jack said:

The top 96 go dancing - regardless of class. 

Using hsratings.com rankings, the top 96 teams statewide are slotted into six 16-team Divisions (Div. I–VI) based solely on strength, not enrollment. It’s a modern, merit-based “open division” approach similar to California or New Jersey. No class lines. No districts. The 11-game season becomes a true proving ground, with statewide competition dictating playoff placement.

Why it works:

• Merit over enrollment

• True competitive parity

• Sparks statewide intrigue (e.g., Pikeville vs. Paducah & Pikeville to Paducah)

 

Hmmmmm. Interesting.

I really like Beechwood and Cooper possibly meeting in round 2.

My number 4 and 5 teams in NKY.

Beechwood 4 and Cooper 5. This would settle a good debate there.

Alot of tough matchups all the way across the board.

Trinity and Highlands round 1 though. My goodness.

CAL and Boyle round 1. Geez.

Bourbon with a realistic shot at winning state in this setup.

I was actually thinking about this type of format while reading a thread last week about first-round forfeits.  Thanks for laying out how this could work.  Interesting.

19 minutes ago, Honey Badger said:

Trinity and Highlands round 1 though. My goodness.

People would be parking down the hill into Dayton 2.5 hours before kickoff wouldn't they? ?

The best thing I like about using computer rankings (which, by the way @Tigerpride94 ?! Yours are all over it, too, more so than our current RPI format)? It makes any format laid out FUN...the unknown year to year on who you would play round 1 and throughout. Whereas the current system? Anybody want to go ahead and project next year's region finalists and/or the next 10 for that matter under the current and previous realignment(s) if they ran that long? ?

I love this! Thanks @Calico Jack for putting the work in.

30 minutes ago, Honey Badger said:

Hmmmmm. Interesting.

I really like Beechwood and Cooper possibly meeting in round 2.

My number 4 and 5 teams in NKY.

Beechwood 4 and Cooper 5. This would settle a good debate there.

Alot of tough matchups all the way across the board.

It'd settle many of those.

1 minute ago, fatsnbul said:

I love this! Thanks @Calico Jack for putting the work in.

Absolutely! More than welcome! I'd have gotten them out sooner, but with work, kid's schedules....annnddddd, um, the November Smallmouth & Walleye bites in the rivers?! Priorities and all.   Heavy on the last part this week. ?

So, Friday it is. ?

24 minutes ago, Honey Badger said:

CAL and Boyle round 1. Geez.

People talk about using "Neutral sites" (which, I see some merit too, but prefer them at the home school)? Might not be an option with a matchup like this. 

Calling Cardinal Stadium/Kroger Field.

Using Division 2 as the example: if Male loses their starting LB, they’ve got a JR/SR ready who may not be the same but close enough to mask it. If Belfry loses theirs, the drop off is way bigger just because of numbers. That’s the reality, though as a fan of the game this is brilliant.

At least with the current format everybody deals with the same roster limitations, so it’s consistent across the board. Too many schools would get exposed in terms of depth, they’d never vote for it and I can’t really blame them.

 

As a fan and competitor I like the format. Statewide intrigue, yes. Statewide travel budget nightmares....also yes.

9 minutes ago, TheBallCoach said:

Using Division 2 as the example: if Male loses their starting LB, they’ve got a JR/SR ready who may not be the same but close enough to mask it. If Belfry loses theirs, the drop off is way bigger just because of numbers. That’s the reality, though as a fan of the game this is brilliant.

At least with the current format everybody deals with the same roster limitations, so it’s consistent across the board. Too many schools would get exposed in terms of depth, they’d never vote for it and I can’t really blame them.

 

All fair points.

However, we have the same thing going on within classes. I think we are closer in parody across multiple classes (and, not saying this is the best one, but even the '2x3 Model) than we think.

Male in a 'normal year'? I'd agree. Male vs. Belfry this year? Game on (hsratings.com actually has in their "project a match up" feature.... 28-26 Belfry.

Granted, a projection is just that, but considering their 83.2% projection accuracy for this year through last night, I tend to give those the benefit of the night.

Oh...and the irony in those weekly averages? The lowest projection accuracy numbers for Kentucky? Week 1 -5, aka 'before most district grids start=people playing who they want'.

Week 1-5 ranged from 66%-81%.  Since week 6 (district grid)? 87.1%-92%.  

(Little plug for the 'do away with districts there) ?

1 hour ago, Honey Badger said:

Bourbon with a realistic shot at winning state in this setup.

Any team outside of the Div 1 tournament is playing for 17th-21st place. No thanks! How does this sound, "congrats we took all the good teams and put them in one tournament so you your program has a chance to play past the 3rd round."

This is almost embarrassing to call your self a state champion if you dodge all the good teams that is supposed to be in you class.