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.

 

Rex Cooksey is a prime example of what we are talking about at Fairview. His teams work hard. Practice smart and play with passion but he is in the same boat we are at RH. I bet he was hot.

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.

 

 

Scooterbob, I will agree to disagree with you. I have been very involved in small school athletics in different sports in Kentucky. Before I was invovled the school had success and has had success since I've been invovled. It is the smallest school in the district and one of the smallest in the region, yet they have had more successful years than down years. They have had their down years as "all" schools will. I do understand Rose Hill is a bit different in that they are one of the smaller schools in the state, but I am referring to smaller schools in general. Is it a tougher task to maintain competitive programs? No doubt. But, this is my competitive drive and coaching insticts talking, I think by electing to blind draw and hope for the best whether you are up or down is not asking for your players to be the best. I want my team to be the best and earn their way if they deserve to be there.

 

Again, this is my opinion. I understand your point on the blind draw and it not affecting you when you're up and helping when you're down, we just have different philosophies. I wouldn't say it is a lack of understanding.

Scooterbob, I will agree to disagree with you. I have been very involved in small school athletics in different sports in Kentucky. Before I was invovled the school had success and has had success since I've been invovled. It is the smallest school in the district and one of the smallest in the region, yet they have had more successful years than down years. They have had their down years as "all" schools will. I do understand Rose Hill is a bit different in that they are one of the smaller schools in the state, but I am referring to smaller schools in general. Is it a tougher task to maintain competitive programs? No doubt. But, this is my competitive drive and coaching insticts talking, I think by electing to blind draw and hope for the best whether you are up or down is not asking for your players to be the best. I want my team to be the best and earn their way if they deserve to be there.

 

Again, this is my opinion. I understand your point on the blind draw and it not affecting you when you're up and helping when you're down, we just have different philosophies. I wouldn't say it is a lack of understanding.

 

 

What region do you coach in?

What region do you coach in?

 

Two different sports in two different regions. Regions 10 and 11 and both are small schools.

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.

 

Actually, it can. It was done about ten years ago in the 64th District.

Rex Cooksey is a prime example of what we are talking about at Fairview. His teams work hard. Practice smart and play with passion but he is in the same boat we are at RH. I bet he was hot.

 

 

Your last sentence is, shall we say, an understatement. He has every reason to be hot.

Scooterbob, I will agree to disagree with you. I have been very involved in small school athletics in different sports in Kentucky. Before I was invovled the school had success and has had success since I've been invovled. It is the smallest school in the district and one of the smallest in the region, yet they have had more successful years than down years. They have had their down years as "all" schools will. I do understand Rose Hill is a bit different in that they are one of the smaller schools in the state, but I am referring to smaller schools in general. Is it a tougher task to maintain competitive programs? No doubt. But, this is my competitive drive and coaching insticts talking, I think by electing to blind draw and hope for the best whether you are up or down is not asking for your players to be the best. I want my team to be the best and earn their way if they deserve to be there.

 

Again, this is my opinion. I understand your point on the blind draw and it not affecting you when you're up and helping when you're down, we just have different philosophies. I wouldn't say it is a lack of understanding.

 

I respect your post and your experience. I am talking about the 64th District and only the 64th District. Your experience doesn't apply to the situation here. We have two relatively large schools and two extremely small schools. For any leverage, the two small schools must stick together. My loyalties have been with Rose Hill. However, part of the fallout is that Rose Hill shafted Fairview. This is an obvious conclusion. And, in doing so, Rose Hill displayed a total lack of integrity.

I respect your post and your experience. I am talking about the 64th District and only the 64th District. Your experience doesn't apply to the situation here. We have two relatively large schools and two extremely small schools. For any leverage, the two small schools must stick together. My loyalties have been with Rose Hill. However, part of the fallout is that Rose Hill shafted Fairview. This is an obvious conclusion. And, in doing so, Rose Hill displayed a total lack of integrity.

 

 

Scooterbob, I understand. We were talking about the same things, just putting them in two different scenarios. I don't know much about the situation there. I know a little about the teams. I have been in those meetings with those votes and they are never fun situations. I hope everything works out in the end. Good Luck the rest of the way.

...I have continually opposed seeding, boys and girls, because it is not in the best interests of Rose Hill.

 

Scooterbob, I completely agree with you about the seeding issue. I can see no reason how it favors Fairview or RH to seed. I am not saying that I believe that Ashland and Boyd are such powerhouses that in certain years seeding would not favor RH or Fairview. I am just looking at the reality of the situation. Most years the bigger school will have the athletic advantage. Not to make a big issue about this, but personally I am just curious to know who made this decision at RH and why??????

Scooterbob, I completely agree with you about the seeding issue. I can see no reason how it favors Fairview or RH to seed. I am not saying that I believe that Ashland and Boyd are such powerhouses that in certain years seeding would not favor RH or Fairview. I am just looking at the reality of the situation. Most years the bigger school will have the athletic advantage. Not to make a big issue about this, but personally I am just curious to know who made this decision at RH and why??????

 

I'm sure I have made my share of "detractors" at Rose Hill with my remarks on this subject. Nonetheless, I stick by what I have said and I believe it needed to be said. However, it is best that I refrain from answering your query. These are good people with whom I happen to seriously disagree with on this issue. We probably agree about 99 percent of the time.

I'm sure I have made my share of "detractors" at Rose Hill with my remarks on this subject. Nonetheless, I stick by what I have said and I believe it needed to be said. However, it is best that I refrain from answering your query. These are good people with whom I happen to seriously disagree with on this issue. We probably agree about 99 percent of the time.

 

I understand and respect your decision to let this subject drop. Just curious and a bit amazed at this turn of events on both the boys and girls sides of the 64th.....

Actually, it can. It was done about ten years ago in the 64th District.

 

I am aware of that and it was also done the same way a few years ago in the 61st district and both were done illegally, KHSAA by-laws plainly describe the only 2 ways that this can happen, plus I personally spoke to Larry Boucher about this, he conferred with the other commissioners and there is no "sundown" clause as he called it on seeding.

I will certainly accept your information. Mr. Boucher would be a definitive source. Of course, it could be argued that the lack of a stated "sundown" clause doesn't in and of itself mean that one isn't available. Often, the lack of a stated prohibition of an act can be interpreted to mean that the action is, therefore, not prohibited and actually allowed because there is no express prohibition.

 

The fact that it has been done on a couple of occasions locally, and maybe more so around the Commonwealth, gives some precedence for it. I suppose we would need to know if the practice has ever been tried and "stricken down" as "illegal". I would guess that it hasn't. I respect Mr. Boucher's opinion but I don't automatically accept it as law set in stone.