I am told ---one of the main reasons RH wanted to seed was to get 6 games without traveling(3 of which are home games) each year

The 64th district is not signing a lease Scooterbob. Call the KHSAA for clarification then post their reply for all of us to enjoy.

I don't see how Fairview has been "betrayed", They will not be butchered by all three teams year in and year out. Have you seen BC play and their younger teams? EVerybody will have to play each other and that leaves room for everyone to play their way out of the "last place" slot. EVERY team has their own destiny in their own hands.

 

Plain and simple, if you want to advance to the Regions. You have to win at least one game (opening round of districts), so why is it so difficult to win 1, maybe 2, game during the regular season to be seeded 3rd instead of 4th? If you can't win a game or two in the regular season, then you're not going to win in that district first round, No matter what size of school or talent you have now or in the future.

I would agree with your logic.

In fact if you look at R.H. during years when their talent level was much lower they never made it to the region with a draw.

You have to have enough talent to win.

I realize the draw seems to hold out a THEORETICAL wild card that you could make it to the regions without having a good team, however if you cant beat the 3rd seed during the season why would you think you would win in the post season.

I think the better advantage would be if you were the second or third best team and do not have to meet the best team on the first round of the districts

Well, then, all of you seed supporters, why don't we just be consistent and seed the state tournament? If your reasoning applies to the district, surely it should apply to the big event.

 

Why should we have tough draws for the 6th, 7th, 10th, and 11th regions and have the 15th play the 16th?

The 64th district is not signing a lease Scooterbob. Call the KHSAA for clarification then post their reply for all of us to enjoy.

 

Although this may be getting a little too deep, a lease is a contract and an agreement among subject schools is a contract. We will not agree on this issue. However, I feel rather certain that the KHSAA has no documented provision which would prohibit what I suggested. I would believe that, as with any other reasonable agreement (ie: contract) reached by the subject schools, the KHSAA would not interfere. Why should it?

Well, then, all of you seed supporters, why don't we just be consistent and seed the state tournament? If your reasoning applies to the district, surely it should apply to the big event.

 

Why should we have tough draws for the 6th, 7th, 10th, and 11th regions and have the 15th play the 16th?

Not to get off topic, but it would have to be a ranking and not seeding.....for the Sweet 16.

 

I'm for Seeding, in Districts across the board, in all levels of competition. Makes regular season games important, teams that don't play would most likely do a home/home and gives a chance, for those teams that endure an upset to retain upper seed.

 

Draws, are all about "luck" and not deserving placement.

Ranking for the state tournament sounds good to me. As they say, a rose by any other name is just as sweet.

Ranking for the state tournament sounds good to me. As they say, a rose by any other name is just as sweet.

Rankings are subjective and based on many factors, while Seeding is determined through the competition on the floor, during regular season play.

All state selections and Mr. Basketball are all subjective. Although it would be opinion, it would certainly be educated opinion. there would be some difficult choices but it isn't too hard to "sort out" most of the contenders from the pretenders.

All state selections and Mr. Basketball are all subjective. Although it would be opinion, it would certainly be educated opinion. there would be some difficult choices but it isn't too hard to "sort out" most of the contenders from the pretenders.

Be impossible to rank the Sweet 16, since we can't agree whose poll is accurate, why are they ahead in one and behind in the other, etc....

 

Seeding is simple in Districts, if teams play during the season and has more positives, than negatives in my book. Consistency and uniformity, would make all Districts in same format.

Well, then, all of you seed supporters, why don't we just be consistent and seed the state tournament? If your reasoning applies to the district, surely it should apply to the big event.

 

Why should we have tough draws for the 6th, 7th, 10th, and 11th regions and have the 15th play the 16th?

 

Because to seed the state tournament, the whole state would have to play against one another. That would pose some sort of time issue, wouldn't it?

Be impossible to rank the Sweet 16, since we can't agree whose poll is accurate, why are they ahead in one and behind in the other, etc....

 

Seeding is simple in Districts, if teams play during the season and has more positives, than negatives in my book. Consistency and uniformity, would make all Districts in same format.

 

Fortunately, the little schools have the Class A.

Seeding is the only way to go in my book. If a team has proven to be the top of their district, they should be rewarded with a "slightly" easier path to the regional tournament.

The best teams are supposed to be at the regional tournament.

Let's try one more time:

 

1. At least three teams vote to seed for, let's say, four years after which it is clearly understood that the issue will come up for reconsideration.

 

2. As part of the item being voted on above, it is clearly understood that, if the issue fails to get at least three votes at the meeting four years later, the format goes back to a draw.

3. Let's use an easy example. You sign a lease for a four year period. After four years, you decide again whether to continue the lease or move out. Continue the lease means continue seeding. Moving out represents going back to a draw.

 

4. The KHSAA rule that you cited does not address seeding for a definite period of time one way or the other. Certainly, it is not prohibited by that rule. Therefore, if three of the teams wanted to do this, it could be done.

 

5. Ashland and Boyd County will always vote to seed. However, to make any change from the status quo (draw), it took three votes. Therefore, it was my position that Rose Hill should have proposed a seed for a definite time (as explained above) rather than forever.

 

6. Whether or not Ashland (Boyd County from my experience at these meetings merely echoes Ashland) would have "bought into" the seeding for a definite period of time is something I obviously cannot answer.

 

7. However, if Ashland wanted its seed situation, it would be forced to accept Rose Hill's proposal. Otherwise, Rose Hill would have joined Fairview in producing a 2-2 vote meaning we stick to the draw.

 

Is that a little clearer?

 

This is where the logic (in bold) seems flawed to me. If it takes a 3-1 or 4-0 vote to change the format, why doesn't it take the same (a majority) to change back? What am I missing?

 

Being a supporter of a "district powerhouse" (Mason County); I generally favor the argument that the regular season should be meaningful with respect to post-season play. On the other hand, I can also appreciate that a school like Mason County might not favor six games per year against much smaller schoole; particularly in years where they are ranked in the upper echelon of the Commonwealth. There is little to gain - monetarily or competitively - from six (probable) blowouts with only a few hundred fans in attendance.

 

Question: Is it possible to have a seeded district where each team only plays each other only once in the regular season? Easy when the teams fall out 3-0, 2-1, 1-2 and 0-3; but how to handle the seeding when that's not the case? Does this occur in other districts?

 

As I posted yesterday, it seems to me that Rose Hill has everything to gain by seeding the 64th for many years to come, with two standout freshmen and three middle-school teams that have steamrolled through their schedules.

This is where the logic (in bold) seems flawed to me. If it takes a 3-1 or 4-0 vote to change the format, why doesn't it take the same (a majority) to change back? What am I missing?

 

Being a supporter of a "district powerhouse" (Mason County); I generally favor the argument that the regular season should be meaningful with respect to post-season play. On the other hand, I can also appreciate that a school like Mason County might not favor six games per year against much smaller schoole; particularly in years where they are ranked in the upper echelon of the Commonwealth. There is little to gain - monetarily or competitively - from six (probable) blowouts with only a few hundred fans in attendance.

 

Question: Is it possible to have a seeded district where each team only plays each other only once in the regular season? Easy when the teams fall out 3-0, 2-1, 1-2 and 0-3; but how to handle the seeding when that's not the case? Does this occur in other districts?

 

As I posted yesterday, it seems to me that Rose Hill has everything to gain by seeding the 64th for many years to come, with two standout freshmen and three middle-school teams that have steamrolled through their schedules.

 

What you are missing is that the teams agree as part of the original limited seed arrangement that, if three votes cannot be garnered at the next applicable meeting (in my example it would be four years), the district automatically goes back to a draw. They can agree to such an arrangement if they so choose.

 

If this proposal were presented by Rose Hill or Fairview, either Ashland and/or Boyd County would have to go along with it to get their seed, though limited, or they lose out and the existing draw arrangement remains in effect.

 

The point is that, as long as they act responsibily, I believe the schools in a district can make pretty much whatever arrangement they want.

 

You are correct that Rose Hill should prosper from a seed for the next six or seven years. I was looking at the longer range which, I admit,is probably "stretching" the relevance of the issue.