I too am for seeding across the board. Every sport in the 62nd district now seeds. Basketball is usually pretty even in the 62nd, girls b-ball and baseball is a different story, nonetheless all sports will seed starting this year.

The hypothetical issue of a "sundown" clause on seeding in the 64th is a non-issue.

 

As far as I know, the schools didn't even discuss such a scenario, so it is a moot point.

 

Someone feel free to correct me, if I am wrong.

 

Frances

I would venture to say a 3 or 4 year seeding plan would not have passed anyway. I know Fairview would not go for it, and Boyd would probably not want that either. It would mean Boyd and Fairview would most likely play RH and Ashland every year for the life of the so-called lease. The only way to get Boyd to agree would be long term, and I don't blame them.

Well, Frances, it is, most likely, now a non-issue. However, at the district meeting, it could have well been the main issue. Rose Hill chose not to make it an issue.

 

If you will read recent posts you will find that various and sundry questions have been forthcoming concerning how this would work and whether or not it is "legal". Most recent posts on the subject have been concerning those issues.

 

Rose Hill's actions have probably made it, as well as the draw, moot points until the makeup of the district changes. That, in my opinion, was a mistake on the part of Rose Hill. For the relatively short term, it should work well for them. However, over the long run, it will not. Of course, if the near future is as bright for them as some observers seem to think, both the seed and the draw will be of no measurable consequence.

 

The talent will not end with the graduation of Euton and Jackson. The undefeated seventh grade team just won the KBA state tournament which included 39 schools from around the state. This group has easily handled most every other local seventh grade team and, for that matter, almost all local eighth grade teams.

 

I understand that the sixth grade team and the fifth grade team are at or near the top of the area. I also understand that, even though some local systems have feeders into the next level, that should make little difference.

 

Therefore, I would say the next six or seven years are "promising". Thereafter, who knows? I was concerned about the "thereafter" which, as I said, is possibly a little ridiculous on my part.

I would venture to say a 3 or 4 year seeding plan would not have passed anyway. I know Fairview would not go for it, and Boyd would probably not want that either. It would mean Boyd and Fairview would most likely play RH and Ashland every year for the life of the so-called lease. The only way to get Boyd to agree would be long term, and I don't blame them.

 

You are quite possibly correct. In that case, you continue to draw. Remember, I am looking solely at what is best for Rose Hill. Others can and do take care of themselves. Rose Hill had it in its power to get either the limited seed or the draw. Either is better for it than is the "eternal" seed.