It's archaic, bordering on the ridiculous, when it comes down to a number of points scored in a game, and when something like this can be allowed to happen. Hope they come up with a better system, for the kids' sake.

 

I'm not sure how else you could establish tiebreakers. In high school you can count wins for opponents, but everyone in middle school is playing the same teams. Perhaps a change is needed, but I'm not sure what...

 

By the way, I proposed to the middle school athletic director at Garrard last year that all seven teams should make the playoffs, with the best team getting a bye. What would be wrong with giving middle schoolers one more game of football?

I'm not sure how else you could establish tiebreakers. In high school you can count wins for opponents, but everyone in middle school is playing the same teams. Perhaps a change is needed, but I'm not sure what...

 

By the way, I proposed to the middle school athletic director at Garrard last year that all seven teams should make the playoffs, with the best team getting a bye. What would be wrong with giving middle schoolers one more game of football?[/QUOTE]

 

Nothing, but that's all you'd be doing, so then most would view it as an extra week. Three teams would win, w/ the bye team still being around for the "second week of the playoffs", and yet it would be just like the first week of the playoffs is right now with 4 teams...:confused:

Wow, I wouldn't be able to play in that playoff game. That's classless.

How is it one more game. One more game would have been playing the last regular season game.

I agree the coach seems like a less than qualified individual if this is the message he wants to teach his kids.

By the way, I proposed to the middle school athletic director at Garrard last year that all seven teams should make the playoffs, with the best team getting a bye. What would be wrong with giving middle schoolers one more game of football?

I think that would be a much better situation.

I'm not sure how else you could establish tiebreakers. In high school you can count wins for opponents, but everyone in middle school is playing the same teams. Perhaps a change is needed, but I'm not sure what...

 

By the way, I proposed to the middle school athletic director at Garrard last year that all seven teams should make the playoffs, with the best team getting a bye. What would be wrong with giving middle schoolers one more game of football?

 

Agreed. :thumb:

Is there anyone from Casey Co. on this site? What has happened with this? Has the administration condoned this act? Has anyone called for the coaches job? Anyone?

CCRebel87 seemed to have some insight regarding the high school program in the preseason thread on Casey County. You might try messaging him and see if he knows anything about it.

Any system that determines playoff participants that uses points scored as a criterion is fraught with problems, IMO.

 

Have a "play-in" game, flip a coin for home field if necessary. No seeding system should encourage running up scores; or worse, forfeiting a game to make the playoffs.

Any system that determines playoff participants that uses points scored as a criterion is fraught with problems, IMO.

 

Have a "play-in" game, flip a coin for home field if necessary. No seeding system should encourage running up scores; or worse, forfeiting a game to make the playoffs.

 

AGREED! :thumb:

Average Joe was so kind as to direct me here. Casey did not forfeit any game. They played Danville on that Saturday and lost. It was agreed that the game would be moved for fall break and Danville decided to change there minds the only thing they could do was play it on Saturday. (LSU vs UK Saturday)