The important question is not whether or not they vote each year. It is in regard to which method wins in case of a tie vote. Are the little schools stuck with eternal seeding because one of them showed a lack of wisdom?

 

As to my understanding of the voting process, once a seed or non-seed majority vote is made it remains that way year after year until another majority vote changes it. This is why I am baffled at RH's decision to vote to seed. I could possibly see the reasoning if the boys and girls had to make the same decision - the girls might sacrifice for the boys who look to have some very strong years ahead of them. But, according to Jay Bilas, this isn't the case.

 

Scooterbob, Himmelfarb, or anyone else close to the RH scene - can you help explain Rh's vote?

The issue can be voted on each year but it would take a majority vote to change anything.

As to my understanding of the voting process, once a seed or non-seed majority vote is made it remains that way year after year until another majority vote changes it. This is why I am baffled at RH's decision to vote to seed. I could possibly see the reasoning if the boys and girls had to make the same decision - the girls might sacrifice for the boys who look to have some very strong years ahead of them. But, according to Jay Bilas, this isn't the case.

 

Scooterbob, Himmelfarb, or anyone else close to the RH scene - can you help explain Rh's vote?

 

The boys and the girls decide the issue individually. One can vote to seed and the other to draw. There is absolutely no legitimate reason for Rose Hill or any other small school located in a district with two or more large schools to vote to seed. There is no justification for such a vote by the boys or by the girls. Period.

 

My question in both this forum and in the boys's forum is as to whether Rose Hill agreed to seed for only a specific time period after which it went back to a draw unless three or more voted to renew the seed arrangement. I have still gotten no answer to this question.

 

For a small school to vote to seed for only a certain time is not justifiable but, at least, it is not a death sentence. To vote to give, in reality and forever, absolute control of the issue to Boyd County and Ashland is unconscionable.

 

I have continually opposed seeding, boys and girls, because it is not in the best interests of Rose Hill. I oppose it for many of the same reasons I opposed Rose Hill playing Ashland a couple of weeks ago. "Circumstances" have proven that I was right then. I am right now. If Rose Hill doesn't conduct its affairs according to its own best interests, just who will do it? Slick me once, shame on you. Slick me continually, shame on me.

This forces Ashaland to play twice every year no more dodging the hill, I think Rose Hill stepped up to the plate and said lets play...

The boys and the girls decide the issue individually. One can vote to seed and the other to draw. There is absolutely no legitimate reason for Rose Hill or any other small school located in a district with two or more large schools to vote to seed. There is no justification for such a vote by the boys or by the girls. Period.

 

My question in both this forum and in the boys's forum is as to whether Rose Hill agreed to seed for only a specific time period after which it went back to a draw unless three or more voted to renew the seed arrangement. I have still gotten no answer to this question.

 

For a small school to vote to seed for only a certain time is not justifiable but, at least, it is not a death sentence. To vote to give, in reality and forever, absolute control of the issue to Boyd County and Ashland is unconscionable.

 

I have continually opposed seeding, boys and girls, because it is not in the best interests of Rose Hill. I oppose it for many of the same reasons I opposed Rose Hill playing Ashland a couple of weeks ago. "Circumstances" have proven that I was right then. I am right now. If Rose Hill doesn't conduct its affairs according to its own best interests, just who will do it? Slick me once, shame on you. Slick me continually, shame on me.

 

 

Clear your Folder dude! I want to PM you

One reason to vote yes for seeding is it forces the district teams to play each other or forfit your spot in the district. For Rose Hill that could mean that they'll actually have a full slate of games starting next year, and more than just a hand full of home games. Ashland, Boyd Co. and Fairview will have to play them.

Hopefully, this will keep some teams from ducking other teams. I for one like to see everyone playing each other.

Scooterbob, while I understand your reasoning for small schools not seeding, I think you also are overlooking the advantage seeding has for the years those small school teams are the one's dominating. Looking at Rose Hill the past couple of years, if they get a bad draw and have to play someone they have matchup problems with, then a blind draw is not productive. But if they get the top one or two seeds because they've proven they can beat the other two teams in the district, it is much more benificial for them. Unfortunately, both the blind draw and seeding have advantages and disadvantages. I think small schools do themselves an injustice when they just give up and hope for a lucky draw rather than working hard in middle school and throughout high school to get better. It doesn't matter what size school you are at, the well is going to run dry some times and your kids have to learn to battle through that.

I can understand the point of view of the smaller schools, but I think seeding is the best way to go. I think that seeding gives the regular season a little more meaning.

Scooterbob, while I understand your reasoning for small schools not seeding, I think you also are overlooking the advantage seeding has for the years those small school teams are the one's dominating. Looking at Rose Hill the past couple of years, if they get a bad draw and have to play someone they have matchup problems with, then a blind draw is not productive. But if they get the top one or two seeds because they've proven they can beat the other two teams in the district, it is much more benificial for them. Unfortunately, both the blind draw and seeding have advantages and disadvantages. I think small schools do themselves an injustice when they just give up and hope for a lucky draw rather than working hard in middle school and throughout high school to get better. It doesn't matter what size school you are at, the well is going to run dry some times and your kids have to learn to battle through that.

 

 

Your post has some validity but you are way off base about kids working hard in Elementary and Middle School. The girls at RH middle school works extremely hard, when others are out at the Mall, or getting prettied up, the girls at RH are in the gym because they know they have to in order to compete...this where there is a big disagreement. SIZE does matter. When you are a larger school you have more kids to choose from, RH doesnt have that luxury. RH is limited in their talent, whereas Ashland and Boyd always has many more athletes to choose from, so size does matter. Take Ashland for example. They have the Luxury of having how many 6th grade girls teams. 5-7. RH has one. That 5-7 is producing a talent pool for the next year of 12-15 prime athletes out of a field 70 kids, RH is lucky to have 70 enrolled throught the whole school. To say size doesnt matter and that kids nned to work harder is just ludicrous!

Clear your Folder dude! I want to PM you

 

Done.

This forces Ashaland to play twice every year no more dodging the hill, I think Rose Hill stepped up to the plate and said lets play...

 

 

It didn't "force Ashland to play twice" in 2002-2003, now did it? That argument is nothing but fertilizer and you should know it.

Big Bubba, I wasn't necessarily referring to Rose Hill and believe me I do understand that small schools have issues when it comes to enrollment. I come from that area. What I was saying, is that's why it is even more important for small school especially, but every school to develop quality feeder programs whether that is RH's one team or Ashland's five teams. It is more about the quality you are building and not the quantitiy. I think that is why you see some of these bigger county schools not produce b/c the coaches are not that involved in the feeder programs. My main point was that I think all districts should seed regardless of what size school you are at. If you're working hard to build a program I think you will reap the benefits.

The boys and the girls decide the issue individually. One can vote to seed and the other to draw. There is absolutely no legitimate reason for Rose Hill or any other small school located in a district with two or more large schools to vote to seed. There is no justification for such a vote by the boys or by the girls. Period.

 

My question in both this forum and in the boys's forum is as to whether Rose Hill agreed to seed for only a specific time period after which it went back to a draw unless three or more voted to renew the seed arrangement. I have still gotten no answer to this question.

 

For a small school to vote to seed for only a certain time is not justifiable but, at least, it is not a death sentence. To vote to give, in reality and forever, absolute control of the issue to Boyd County and Ashland is unconscionable.

 

I have continually opposed seeding, boys and girls, because it is not in the best interests of Rose Hill. I oppose it for many of the same reasons I opposed Rose Hill playing Ashland a couple of weeks ago. "Circumstances" have proven that I was right then. I am right now. If Rose Hill doesn't conduct its affairs according to its own best interests, just who will do it? Slick me once, shame on you. Slick me continually, shame on me.

 

 

I can clear it up for you SB, seeding CANNOT be voted in just for a certain period of time, when 3 out of the 4 schools vote it in the ONLY 2 ways it can be changed is if 3 out of the 4 schools vote it out OR new district realignments happen, it is automatically taken out whenever this occurs.

The boys and the girls decide the issue individually. One can vote to seed and the other to draw. There is absolutely no legitimate reason for Rose Hill or any other small school located in a district with two or more large schools to vote to seed. There is no justification for such a vote by the boys or by the girls. Period.

 

My question in both this forum and in the boys's forum is as to whether Rose Hill agreed to seed for only a specific time period after which it went back to a draw unless three or more voted to renew the seed arrangement. I have still gotten no answer to this question.

 

For a small school to vote to seed for only a certain time is not justifiable but, at least, it is not a death sentence. To vote to give, in reality and forever, absolute control of the issue to Boyd County and Ashland is unconscionable.

 

I have continually opposed seeding, boys and girls, because it is not in the best interests of Rose Hill. I oppose it for many of the same reasons I opposed Rose Hill playing Ashland a couple of weeks ago. "Circumstances" have proven that I was right then. I am right now. If Rose Hill doesn't conduct its affairs according to its own best interests, just who will do it? Slick me once, shame on you. Slick me continually, shame on me.

 

 

I can clear it up for you SB, whenever seeding is voted in there are ONLY 2 ways it can be taken out, 3 out of the 4 schools vote to go back to a blind draw OR if district realignment happens, then it automatically goes back to a blind draw.

Scooterbob, while I understand your reasoning for small schools not seeding, I think you also are overlooking the advantage seeding has for the years those small school teams are the one's dominating. Looking at Rose Hill the past couple of years, if they get a bad draw and have to play someone they have matchup problems with, then a blind draw is not productive. But if they get the top one or two seeds because they've proven they can beat the other two teams in the district, it is much more benificial for them. Unfortunately, both the blind draw and seeding have advantages and disadvantages. I think small schools do themselves an injustice when they just give up and hope for a lucky draw rather than working hard in middle school and throughout high school to get better. It doesn't matter what size school you are at, the well is going to run dry some times and your kids have to learn to battle through that.

 

 

You display a complete lack of understanding of small schools vs. large schools. While it is true that small schools are "up" on occasion, the "down" years are far more likely. A small school will, at best, have a run of a couple of years. The Rose Hill girls are an excellent example. Until 2004-2005, they had never been out of the district. With the draw, they will most likely make their third consecutive trip to the regional tournament. After this year, it will be a quick trip back to the past and the trip will be lengthy and not brief.

 

You vote for the overall good of your school. You must be an advocate and not a consensus builder. Small schools don't gain by a seed. If they are "up", neither the draw or the seed should matter. If they are, as is usually the case, "down", the seed seals the tomb whereas the draw may provide a lucky break.