KHSAA to consider multipliers and success factors for football realignment - What might it look like?

[theguru]

The KHSAA is considering adding multipliers for football classification.  From the KHSAA's 1-15-26 release:

The Board also asked for additional data on the potential adoption of multipliers, including their enrollments prior to classification, and for consideration of a "success factor" to be included in the realignment considerations. The Board will continue to study this information and consider options, with implementation no earlier than the 2029 season, using data from the 2027 and 2028 seasons.

We don't know what it might look like in 2029 (using 2027 and 2028 data) but we can offer some informed opinions on what it could hypothetically look like in 2026 (using 2024 and 2025 data).

Class 1A
Kentucky Country Day and Sayre both move to 2A.  Both teams have a championship and performed well the other year.  Raceland moves up to 2A.  I know the Rams didn't win a championship but they came very close twice and the Rams are clearly heads and above almost all of the 1A teams. Pikeville has been right in the mix too and they would also move up to 2A.

Class 2A
Beechwood and Lexington Christian Academy both move to 3A.  Like Raceland above, Owensboro Catholic moves up to 3A.  With Belfry, between their 3A success in 2024 and 2A success in 2025, the Pirates move back up to 3A.  

Class 3A
3A is unlike any other class, it is Christian Academy of Louisville and everyone else.  With CAL winning both the 2024 and 2025 state championships, CAL would move up 2 (two) classes to 5A.  All other teams will remain in 3A.

Class 4A
Paducah Tilghman and Boyle County both move up to 5A.  Franklin County (like Raceland and Owensboro Catholic) moves up to 5A. 

Class 5A
Owensboro and Bowling Green both move up to 6A.  All other teams remain in 5A.

Class 6A
Not Applicable. 

Since the KHSAA is only going to use data from a two year period I believe that makes any state championship winner an automatic move up in class.  Additionally, if a team wins both state championships in the two year data period, that could very well mean an automatic move up of two classes like I have positioned CAL above. 

Do you agree or disagree with the teams/movements I have listed?  Why?  What are thoughts on which teams would move up in this hypothetical exercise?

[PP1]

IF they move teams up to 2A, do any teams from 2A move down to 1A?

[DearToday]

I think this thought is insane.. What happened to just getting better?! I don't like it. 

[theguru]

Just now, PP1 said:

IF they move teams up to 2A, do any teams from 2A move down to 1A?

Hard to say but having the KHSAA delineate the worst teams from each class (other than 1A because it is N/A) would be a slippery slope. 

[theguru]

On 1/16/2026 at 12:28 PM, DearToday said:

I think this thought is insane.. What happened to just getting better?! I don't like it. 

Ultimately it says the KHSAA will "punish" the teams that get better. 

[theguru]

One thing after looking back at what I posted, 5A would be loaded!!

[Voice of Reason]

I'm okay with having multipliers or whatever it is called that move teams up in class when they have consistent high-level success over time. Moving a team up a class because they won a title last year is ridiculous. 

You have to look at least two years and probably four years deep for factors that would cause you to move a team up in class. e.g. a team is in the semifinals 4 staight years, or a team wins back to back championships. The key for me is one great season should have zero impact a team's class the next year.

Edited January 16 by Voice of Reason

[theguru]

1 minute ago, Voice of Reason said:

I'm okay with having multipliers or whatever it is called that move teams up in class when they have consistent high-level success over time. Moving a team up a class because they won a title last year is ridiculous. 

You have to look at least two years and probably four years deep for factors that would cause you to move a team up in class. e.g. a team is in the semifinals 4 staight years, or a team wins back to back championships. The key for me is one great season should have zero impact a team's class the next year.

Again, from the release:

The Board will continue to study this information and consider options, with implementation no earlier than the 2029 season, using data from the 2027 and 2028 seasons.

[Calico Jack]

34 minutes ago, DearToday said:

I think this thought is insane.. What happened to just getting better?! I don't like it. 

Nick Saban, Cig, and any other coaches that come to mind could come into many of these places (with what they have, who they are competing against, etc) and .500, on average, would be nothing short of miraculous.

It's so much deeper than "getting better", and that's a two way street. To those that oppose a multiplier, many in favor could say the same thing. "Just get better...step it up a bit."

I'm not a fan of a multiplier/success factor because it wouldn't apply to 6A.   Just like things are now with how the class system is...many things I'm not a fan of, but Class A and 6A always only having 32 teams, while the others 38-40? Makes no sense.

 

[Calico Jack]

6 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

I'm okay with having multipliers or whatever it is called that move teams up in class when they have consistent high-level success over time. Moving a team up a class because they won a title last year is ridiculous. 

You have to look at least two years and probably four years deep for factors that would cause you to move a team up in class. e.g. a team is in the semifinals 4 staight years, or a team wins back to back championships. The key for me is one great season should have zero impact a team's class the next year.

Where I'm at with it as well as it not being able to be applied to all classes. 

[theguru]

6 minutes ago, Calico Jack said:

Where I'm at with it as well as it not being able to be applied to all classes. 

Would you agree if you are only looking at a two year data set and you are not going to automatically move up a state championship winner, it would be nearly impossible to justify moving anyone up?

[Calico Jack]

6 minutes ago, theguru said:

Would you agree if you are only looking at a two year data set and you are not going to automatically move up a state championship winner, it would be nearly impossible to justify moving anyone up?

Not necessarily....could make the muliplier over a four year period, so those would take an effect every other realignment. Just a mere thought.

I don't know how they'd do it, justify it? I've never heard one (that made sense) in almost 20 years of 6 classes how they've justified 32 for ONLY both ends of the 6 class system. 🤣

[theguru]

Something else here, and I am serious about this, if the KHSAA comes up with a "Multiplier/Success Factor Index" to move teams between classes, that index should immediately replace the RPI for playoff seeding. 

[theguru]

Just now, Calico Jack said:

Not necessarily....could make the muliplier over a four year period, so those would take an effect every other realignment. Just a mere thought.

I don't know how they'd do it, justify it? I've never heard one (that made sense) in almost 20 years of 6 classes how they've justified 32 for ONLY both ends of the 6 class system. 🤣

I agree, we already have a deeply problematic system and the KHSAA would be tweaking it more to make a few, but vocal, crybabies happy. 

Fruit of the poisonous tree anyone?

[Hydration-coach83]

9 minutes ago, theguru said:

Something else here, and I am serious about this, if the KHSAA comes up with a "Multiplier/Success Factor Index" to move teams between classes, that index should immediately replace the RPI for playoff seeding. 

At this point, KHSAA either needs to completely move away from the RPI system or take the time to seriously fix it. Using RPI for only part of the postseason like second-round matchups that I saw be mentioned in another post doesn’t make much sense and only creates more confusion. If RPI is going to matter, then it should be used to seed the entire postseason bracket, similar to an NCAA-style format, and let teams play it out from there. Otherwise, it shouldn’t be used at all.

The current system is flawed, especially when teams are essentially penalized for scheduling and competing against strong out-of-state opponents. Programs should not be discouraged from challenging themselves simply because it might hurt their RPI. A ranking system should reward competitive scheduling and quality wins, not punish them. Right now, the approach lacks consistency, and that’s why so many people are frustrated.