The big negative with Ohio is the eight teams in each region. What has happened is an Ohio school can play a locked in schedule within their own conference (let's say, nine league games) and go undefeated (10-0) and not make the computer playoff system? Remember, only eight in each region make it.

 

In Kentucky, the converse is true. A team could go 0-10 and make the playoffs.

 

That is why I used Ohio as a model, but did not carbon copy it. With the method I proposed, you would have two teams from each district, not eight teams from each Region. And the Power Ranking would only be used for a tie breaker, not to determine all the teams that make the playoffs.

 

This encourages strength of schedule and put more emphasis on the regular season.

 

That is why I think this format would be an improvement for what Ohio currently does and would also be an improvement in what Kentucky currently does.

I am not familiar with other state's sytems as to who has the best model.

 

I know that in Michigan you have to win 6 games to make the playoffs.

What was KHSAA reason for switching the classes as it was?

KHSAA is interested in one thing and 1 thing only:$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I AGREE. One thing I would like to see is this:

 

If a school has 3A enrollment, they should be 3A. Allowing schools to petition and dictate their districts is ridiculous. They can whine all they want about rivalries and travel. When you allow certain schools to jump up a class (2 in some cases), then the school with the lowest enrollment for that class in that district should be allowed to drop down a class if they so choose. Why have a class system if you don't make schools play that way. I think some schools may have looked at their alignment and thought they would have a better shot at a championship if they jumped up a class or two.

I know your not talking about the team from Ft. Thomas.....

I don't think we have a problem by permitting as many kids as possible to get to play football another week a year. It doesn't bother me one bit that a lot of teams get in the playoffs.

 

I also disagree that the regular season games are meaningless. I was raised to want to win every game I participated in for, if nothing else, the sake of winning. I sincerely doubt that if you ask any kid strapping his chin strap for a regular season game, "does this game matter to you?", any one of them would say "no" in response. Furthermore, hosting the first round of the district playoff against the worst team in the district means a lot to most coaches. Besides the obvious benefit of getting to play at home, the competition will in most cases be a little easier than the second placed team playing the third placed team. If a team is beat up at that time of year (as a lot are), the ability to get some rest and recovery for the starters in that first game is very meaningful. Furthermore, in the second round when the first placed team plays the second placed team (assuming the higher placed teams win), the first placed team getting to play that game at home is also very meaningful. I've said it before and I'll say it again: if Highlands had beaten CovCath in the regular season game, Highlands would have beaten them in the playoffs and may have won state. That regular season game was critical. Thus I totally, but respectfully, disagree with your underlying premise of what is wrong with the KHSAA's model.

I don't think you were to harsh. I never meant to imply that the regular season was meaningless to the players. I know that all players want to win games. But, what I was saying was that the regular season was meaningless as far as determining what team makes the playoffs, if you have four or less teams in your district.

What's wrong about Ohio's system is that while an Ohio coach may have thought he's scheduled tough teams that will get him a bunch of Harbin points so his team qualifies for the playoffs, he never really knows how tough his opponents will be. Look at the Ohio teams that scheduled CovCath this year. Unless CovCath improves dramatically, CovCath may only end up with 3 or 4 wins. LaSalle's win over them doesn't help LaSalle get many Harbin points. While those close to CovCath may have predicted a down year for CovCath, I doubt LaSalle could have predicted it. Furthermore, since most contracts are for a two year period, it makes it really tough (almost impossible) for coaches putting a schedule together to predict how strong their opponent will be two years down the road. On the flip side, an Ohio coach must be very wary about scheduling too tough of competition. If he overschedules and loses, those losses may cost him a berth in the playoffs. Whereas in Kentucky, teams like Highlands, Trinity and CovCath can schedule really tough out of state competition without worrying if the loss will cost them the playoffs. All they have to be concerned with is playing very tough competition to improve themselves. I actually think Ky's rule encourages teams to play much tougher competition, it just a matter of the Ky coaches having the guts to do so or having the money to travel for some of the Ky schools located in remote areas.

 

Hope that didn't come across too brash. Was not my intent.

This is why I think my proposed model would be an improvement over what Ohio and Kentucky currently does. The only time the Power Ranking would be used would be for tie breakers, so it would encourage a stronger schedule, but would not penalize everyone, for strength of schedule.

I AGREE. One thing I would like to see is this:

 

If a school has 3A enrollment, they should be 3A. Allowing schools to petition and dictate their districts is ridiculous. They can whine all they want about rivalries and travel. When you allow certain schools to jump up a class (2 in some cases), then the school with the lowest enrollment for that class in that district should be allowed to drop down a class if they so choose. Why have a class system if you don't make schools play that way. I think some schools may have looked at their alignment and thought they would have a better shot at a championship if they jumped up a class or two.

 

There is one and only one reason the KHSAA allowed schools to jump a class or classes...LOGISTICS!!!

I think some schools may have looked at their alignment and thought they would have a better shot at a championship if they jumped up a class or two.

Which schools would those be?

 

I know of several schools who moved up for travel reasons. There may have been one or two that moved up to be more competitive in their district.

 

If you're referring to a state championship, though, I think you're sadly mistaken.

There is one and only one reason the KHSAA allowed schools to jump a class or classes...LOGISTICS!!!

Maybe, but I suspect one or two may have used that as a reason when their motivation was something else.

Maybe, but I suspect one or two may have used that as a reason when their motivation was something else.

 

No, definitely. You may be right about their motive, though...

I AGREE. One thing I would like to see is this:

 

If a school has 3A enrollment, they should be 3A. Allowing schools to petition and dictate their districts is ridiculous. They can whine all they want about rivalries and travel. When you allow certain schools to jump up a class (2 in some cases), then the school with the lowest enrollment for that class in that district should be allowed to drop down a class if they so choose. Why have a class system if you don't make schools play that way. I think some schools may have looked at their alignment and thought they would have a better shot at a championship if they jumped up a class or two.

 

 

You are certainly entitled to your opinion as am I. And in my opinion the fans/schools that complain the most about teams moving up are those bigger teams with weaker programs that can't beat or compete with the smaller teams moving up into their class.

 

And the justification for classes in football is solely based on the belief that "size matters" in football and that the larger schools have a definite advantage over the smaller schools. Thus a larger school should never complain about a smaller school moving up a class or even two and competing with them.

 

And before you respond, I think there should be classes for every KHSAA sport. Even basketball.

 

By the way, care to identify which schools requested a move up to have a better shot at winning a championship?

There is nothing, and I mean nothing stopping Ky teams from having tougher schedules. Actually, the Ky method actually encourages tougher schedules because the losses to tougher opponents do not impact your ability to make the playoffs.

 

That is true, their is nothing stopping a team from scheduling a tough team. But, there is no reward for it, it of course does help the team as a whole, but it does not benefit a team as far as playoffs. And, I think you would agree, that not all teams schedule a tough schedule, and that hurts Kentucky football as a whole, remember we are trying to strengthen Kentucky football as a whole not just one team, or one district.

I don't think you were to harsh. I never meant to imply that the regular season was meaningless to the players. I know that all players want to win games. But, what I was saying was that the regular season was meaningless as far as determining what team makes the playoffs, if you have four or less teams in your district.

 

 

But winning those games still can mean a lot in determining which teams get to host the first two rounds of the playoffs. For those programs that are strong, just getting to the playoffs is not their goal. And for the weaker teams, getting into the playoffs and getting to practice/play another week might stimulate additional interest in football.

 

 

This is why I think my proposed model would be an improvement over what Ohio and Kentucky currently does. The only time the Power Ranking would be used would be for tie breakers, so it would encourage a stronger schedule, but would not penalize everyone, for strength of schedule.

 

 

But again my point is that under your system, your fate could be decided upon how well your opponents do, as opposed to how well you do. I understand that you want to provide some disincentive for teams to have weak schedules and I wish teams played tougher schedules. But the best incentive out there is that the teams that historically play the tougher schedules are the ones that win championships. That should be all the incentive needed.

Which schools would those be?

 

I know of several schools who moved up for travel reasons. There may have been one or two that moved up to be more competitive in their district.

 

If you're referring to a state championship, though, I think you're sadly mistaken.

 

All I know is this, when the original alignment came out I studied it and thought "WOW, this really opens the door for a few programs that have struggled to get to L-VILLE in December. When it was said and done, and realignment was final, I studied it again. I saw a few things that didn't jive. IMO it will be the same group of teams at the finals. Don't get me wrong a Powerhouse is still a Powerhouse no matter what class. However, all I meant was that if you say I am 3A, then no matter how much I travel or what former rivalries I may have had, I should still be in a 3A district. By making it 6 classes and reducing the size of the districts, then it should have made it easier for those teams to continue rivalries, because they have more open dates to schedule them. As far as travel goes, schedule your non district games closer to home. With a 5 team district you would have played 2 district games at home anyway. Schools travel from Northern Ky. nearly every week to play in Corbin, London, Ironton, Ashland etc. Louisville Schools come to Cincinnati EVERY year to play in the Ohio vs. USA weekend. Why is travel an issue for a district game?

But again my point is that under your system, your fate could be decided upon how well your opponents do, as opposed to how well you do. I understand that you want to provide some disincentive for teams to have weak schedules and I wish teams played tougher schedules. But the best incentive out there is that the teams that historically play the tougher schedules are the ones that win championships. That should be all the incentive needed.

 

:thumb: Fair enough.