The problem that you have with the all-state teams is human neglect and error. (AP is voted on by the media and the CJ is voted on by the coaches.)

 

The media don't see as many games as you would hope. Some of the sports writers have preferences in sports and naturally have a greater interest. If football is not their primary interest then they are less likely to do their job well, so they end up calling their "sports writing buddy", often from another media outlet in a different area and say something like "hey, who are you voting for on all-state?" This stacks the ballot for the area of the guy who is actually paying attention to football in his area but leaves gaps in the state and also puts people on from a writers favorite teams who may be less deserving.

 

All the while the fans cry foul with better hopes for the coaches vote in the CJ.

 

The coaches on the other hand are human as well and often do a less than stellar job. Here is how that works. Many coaches will clique together and pool votes...scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Also many of the coaches for the have-nots would rather take a beatin' than vote for the coaches of the have-lots schools. Some coaches are just so entranced with their team and their schedule that they don't really know about many statewide players and vote only for the ones they have seen. Some coaches are so worn out at the end of the season from listening to crazy parents and irate boosters that voting for the all-state team is not a big priority. Granted coaches should do a conscientious job of voting but, as you see, there are many reasons why they don't and that is just a few.

 

Those of you complaining the most about omissions need to do one of two things--1. Come to grips with the fact that these are opinion polls, accept it, and move on. or 2. Encourage your head coach to be a little more socially graceful and do the things needed to get your players some attention even if it means associating with coaches from less blessed schools, or maybe try and win with the students from your own district and stop encouraging transfers, and possibly stop beating up on high school teams so badly when you don't have to. etc, etc, etc,.

I have made this comment several times, and I will restate it here:

 

I would like to see a committee formed to evaluate players for All-State and for Mr. Football. Every team in the state would have to be evaluated at least once through the course of the season, by several of the committee members. And if a certain team or player is in need of being evaluated again, then several other committee members would be required to evaluate that team or player again. The second evaluation could even be done by tape if needed.

 

This is possible 220 schools playing football in the state, 11 week season, virtually ever team that is being evaluated is playing another KY school who could be evaluated as well. You would need roughly 40 members for the committee, for 2 man evaluation teams. Then several meetings could be held to discuss the players, each evaluator could give a report on the teams that they evaluated, then it could be decided which players needed to be reevaluated. The committee could then vote not only using stats and word of mouth, but also use the evaluation that was done by the other committee members.

 

This committee could be made up of members of the press, retired coaches, retired officials, or other people who have showed to process a great deal of football knowledge. They should be assigned to districts or regions away from their home area.

 

Would this system be perfect? No. Could some players have a bad game, while being evaluated? Yes. But, if that player is putting up big stats, then they would qualify for reevaluation. Could some players still fall through the cracks? Yes. But, we at least could say that all players were evaluated for the All-State, and Mr. Football awards. It's not perfect, but I think it would be more fair to all players, and would make a lot of people feel better about the process.

I think the BGP all-state team will be the most fairly represented. The input they get from all around the state is much better than the biased and skewed newspaper polls. But I want to sincerely congratulate the kids named. It's truly an honor to be mentioned...no matter where on list your name appeared. To the SR's not mentioned, be fulfilled with the contributions you made and opportunities granted. There are many without the talent, skill, or physical capability to ever step onto a football field. Remember...it's the memories and comraderie, not the awards, that you will cherish later in life! To the underclassmen...work harder! Get BSF (Bigger-Stronger-Faster)! Can't wait until next year!

I think the BGP all-state team will be the most fairly represented. The input they get from all around the state is much better than the biased and skewed newspaper polls. But I want to sincerely congratulate the kids named. It's truly an honor to be mentioned...no matter where on list your name appeared. To the SR's not mentioned, be fulfilled with the contributions you made and opportunities granted. There are many without the talent, skill, or physical capability to ever step onto a football field. Remember...it's the memories and comraderie, not the awards, that you will cherish later in life! To the underclassmen...work harder! Get BSF (Bigger-Stronger-Faster)! Can't wait until next year!

 

 

I think your point about the BGP team is pretty dang accurate. They get a lot of input and that input is pretty unbiased from my view point. No disrespect to the sportswriters but they don't get to see all the schools and while some do try to get outside input, not all do. Plus there is some homerisms in their voting. The coaches generally only know the kids on their opponents squads. Some make the effort to call around and talk to other coaches, but not all of them do. Plus, the coaches' likes and dislikes for other coaches and programs do effect they way they vote. It shouldn't, but it does with some. I truly thing the people selecting the BGP team do a very good job trying to eliminate those flaws. Plus the BGP team seems to focus only on high school performance and doesn't take into consideration what may happen in college which is critically important to undersized linemen and running backs whom might have done a studly job in high school but don't have the size to play major college football. They still do rely on the nominating process I think, so if a really good player isn't nominated by a coach or fan (unfortunately and in my mind incredibly, there are some coaches that are not fans of BGP and don't want to assist the BGP selection process) , that can flaw the BGP team though. But all in all, the BGP team is the best and no the Ru isn't paying me to say that. Heck, I've probably given the Ru the most grief over the years:D.

I have made this comment several times, and I will restate it here:

 

I would like to see a committee formed to evaluate players for All-State and for Mr. Football. Every team in the state would have to be evaluated at least once through the course of the season, by several of the committee members. And if a certain team or player is in need of being evaluated again, then several other committee members would be required to evaluate that team or player again. The second evaluation could even be done by tape if needed.

 

This is possible 220 schools playing football in the state, 11 week season, virtually ever team that is being evaluated is playing another KY school who could be evaluated as well. You would need roughly 40 members for the committee, for 2 man evaluation teams. Then several meetings could be held to discuss the players, each evaluator could give a report on the teams that they evaluated, then it could be decided which players needed to be reevaluated. The committee could then vote not only using stats and word of mouth, but also use the evaluation that was done by the other committee members.

 

This committee could be made up of members of the press, retired coaches, retired officials, or other people who have showed to process a great deal of football knowledge. They should be assigned to districts or regions away from their home area.

 

Would this system be perfect? No. Could some players have a bad game, while being evaluated? Yes. But, if that player is putting up big stats, then they would qualify for reevaluation. Could some players still fall through the cracks? Yes. But, we at least could say that all players were evaluated for the All-State, and Mr. Football awards. It's not perfect, but I think it would be more fair to all players, and would make a lot of people feel better about the process.

 

Who would be on this committee? How much time would they have to put into it? Would they get some sort of renumeration for their time?

Who would be on this committee?

This plan is its infancy. The answers to your questions are open for suggestions. As I stated, the members could be made up of some journalist, retired coaches, retired officials, other people who have a great Kentucky high school football knowledge, possible some people from this site. You can make some suggestions on who should be on the committee.

How much time would they have to put into it? ?

As far as time involved, they would have to attend a Friday night football game every week for three hours and say one hour travel to and one hour travel from the game. That is 5 hours a week. Add, say two or three meetings with the other committee meetings at say three hours per meeting, and two or three hours travel to and two or three hours travel from the meetings for 21 hours, that breaks down in an 11 week schedule to roughly 2 hours per week, add that to 5 previous hours and you have roughly 7 hours per week.

Would they get some sort of renumeration for their time?

I could see the committee members at least getting a snippet for their time. Possible reimbursement for travel expenses. That would be up to someone else. If they fell under the KHSAA or the Football Coaches Association, that would be up to them. Make a suggestion.

I think your point about the BGP team is pretty dang accurate. They get a lot of input and that input is pretty unbiased from my view point. No disrespect to the sportswriters but they don't get to see all the schools and while some do try to get outside input, not all do. Plus there is some homerisms in their voting. The coaches generally only know the kids on their opponents squads. Some make the effort to call around and talk to other coaches, but not all of them do. Plus, the coaches' likes and dislikes for other coaches and programs do effect they way they vote. It shouldn't, but it does with some. I truly thing the people selecting the BGP team do a very good job trying to eliminate those flaws. Plus the BGP team seems to focus only on high school performance and doesn't take into consideration what may happen in college which is critically important to undersized linemen and running backs whom might have done a studly job in high school but don't have the size to play major college football. They still do rely on the nominating process I think, so if a really good player isn't nominated by a coach or fan (unfortunately and in my mind incredibly, there are some coaches that are not fans of BGP and don't want to assist the BGP selection process) , that can flaw the BGP team though. But all in all, the BGP team is the best and no the Ru isn't paying me to say that. Heck, I've probably given the Ru the most grief over the years:D.

 

You have some very good points that I agree with. I'm not anti- sportswriters. They do a great job reporting in there area. They do a poor job with the AP poll. I think they have made some outstanding selections for Mr. Football even though some kids are eliminated based on the area of the state they play in. I have spoken to several of the AP guys about this and they have no idea who the kids are outside there reporting area. I don't hold that against them. They get paid to report on the kids in their area.

The problem with all-state teams is that there isn't enough spots available for every decent player in the state. There are plenty of threads and posts griping about players left off the all-state teams.

 

The biggest problem is how the system works. There are too few legitimate AP votes to make their all-state team as good as it once was. Not to mention the homer votes.

 

If every coach voted for a legitimate All-State team (such as the C-J), that would be the best team out there. However, not every coach bothers to return a ballot. Plus, you have some regions of the state who decide to block vote for their part of the state instead of voting the best player.

 

We've already read posts of Highlands fans who felt slighted. Louisville fans who think Trinity and St. X should comprise half the selections, and a few other fans scattered across the state who think their team or player got slighted.

 

Bottom line -- there will never be a perfect system for selecting an All-State team. Never. There will always be someone left off and someone will be unhappy.

 

In the overall scheme of things, does the importance of the All-State team really necessitate a top notch, blue-ribbon task force to gather names and vote on a team? Is it really that important?

 

Name a team who won the state title in 1983. 1992. Now, name the All-State quarterback or defensive lineman from those same years without looking it up.

 

You can never make everyone happy.

The problem with all-state teams is that there isn't enough spots available for every decent player in the state. There are plenty of threads and posts griping about players left off the all-state teams.

 

The biggest problem is how the system works. There are too few legitimate AP votes to make their all-state team as good as it once was. Not to mention the homer votes.

 

If every coach voted for a legitimate All-State team (such as the C-J), that would be the best team out there. However, not every coach bothers to return a ballot. Plus, you have some regions of the state who decide to block vote for their part of the state instead of voting the best player.

 

We've already read posts of Highlands fans who felt slighted. Louisville fans who think Trinity and St. X should comprise half the selections, and a few other fans scattered across the state who think their team or player got slighted.

 

Bottom line -- there will never be a perfect system for selecting an All-State team. Never. There will always be someone left off and someone will be unhappy.

 

In the overall scheme of things, does the importance of the All-State team really necessitate a top notch, blue-ribbon task force to gather names and vote on a team? Is it really that important?

 

Name a team who won the state title in 1983. 1992. Now, name the All-State quarterback or defensive lineman from those same years without looking it up.

 

You can never make everyone happy.

 

Great post and I agree with your sentiments. Is it really that important in the grand scheme of things? No. But I have to tell you, it is very important to the senior players at the time. Plus I'm of the mentality if you're going to do something, do it the best you can. Based on conversations I've had with the Ru, I honestly believe the BGP people making the selections truly do it the best they can and put more time into the selection process than the AP voters and coaches seem to do. And to be fair to the writers and coaches, the writers have real jobs and deadlines to deal with. The coaches by the end of the season are tired, have banquets to deal with and just want to spend much deserved time with their families; they don't want to look at tapes and spend hours on the phone trying to determine the best players to vote for (although I'm sure some do, they are probably in the minority).

I have made this comment several times, and I will restate it here:

 

I would like to see a committee formed to evaluate players for All-State and for Mr. Football. Every team in the state would have to be evaluated at least once through the course of the season, by several of the committee members. And if a certain team or player is in need of being evaluated again, then several other committee members would be required to evaluate that team or player again. The second evaluation could even be done by tape if needed.

 

This is possible 220 schools playing football in the state, 11 week season, virtually ever team that is being evaluated is playing another KY school who could be evaluated as well. You would need roughly 40 members for the committee, for 2 man evaluation teams. Then several meetings could be held to discuss the players, each evaluator could give a report on the teams that they evaluated, then it could be decided which players needed to be reevaluated. The committee could then vote not only using stats and word of mouth, but also use the evaluation that was done by the other committee members.

 

This committee could be made up of members of the press, retired coaches, retired officials, or other people who have showed to process a great deal of football knowledge. They should be assigned to districts or regions away from their home area.

 

Would this system be perfect? No. Could some players have a bad game, while being evaluated? Yes. But, if that player is putting up big stats, then they would qualify for reevaluation. Could some players still fall through the cracks? Yes. But, we at least could say that all players were evaluated for the All-State, and Mr. Football awards. It's not perfect, but I think it would be more fair to all players, and would make a lot of people feel better about the process.

 

This is a great idea to achieve the aims you stated. But the big question is funding. Who is going to pay for this? That's a lot of travel, tickets, expense vouchers, etc. Who foots the bill? You can't say, "It will be made up of people who just love the game." That won't work in the real world with real costs. I think it's a nice idea in theory but can't see one or all or any groups paying the bill for this extensive of a selection committee.

The problem with all-state teams is that there isn't enough spots available for every decent player in the state. There are plenty of threads and posts griping about players left off the all-state teams.

 

The biggest problem is how the system works. There are too few legitimate AP votes to make their all-state team as good as it once was. Not to mention the homer votes.

 

If every coach voted for a legitimate All-State team (such as the C-J), that would be the best team out there. However, not every coach bothers to return a ballot. Plus, you have some regions of the state who decide to block vote for their part of the state instead of voting the best player.

 

We've already read posts of Highlands fans who felt slighted. Louisville fans who think Trinity and St. X should comprise half the selections, and a few other fans scattered across the state who think their team or player got slighted.

 

Bottom line -- there will never be a perfect system for selecting an All-State team. Never. There will always be someone left off and someone will be unhappy.

 

In the overall scheme of things, does the importance of the All-State team really necessitate a top notch, blue-ribbon task force to gather names and vote on a team? Is it really that important?

 

Name a team who won the state title in 1983. 1992. Now, name the All-State quarterback or defensive lineman from those same years without looking it up.

 

You can never make everyone happy.

 

I agree the weight of the world does not lay with the All-State Team, but I think the the players deserve to have it done the right way. A agree with most of your points, and do not think that my way of doing things is necessarily the best or only way.

 

You have not read, myself of many people from my area complaining about the All-State Team. That is because, to be honest, not many people from North-Eastern Kentucky expect it. I have not heard any, ever, from this area even mention it, unless someone make the HM list. That is because not many people from this area ever make it. Other then HM, Aaron Pettrey made it four years ago, then to name the last Raceland player who made the All-State Team, you have to go back to the 70's. Does that mean that no one deserved it? No, there have been some great players from Raceland, Greenup Co, Russell, Ashland, Fairview, and Boyd Co, that have not made it.

 

I work with one players father who made the HM list this year. I told him yesterday that his son made the All-State HM Team, he said, "really". He did not know, he had not even considered it as a possibility.

 

I agree with you that I can not name the DL that made the All-State Team from 1980, but the DL that made the team can tell you. And that is what it is about - the players. Plus, it helps with scholarships, and recognition for the state.

 

Like has been said before, to promote Kentucky high school football the State Championship needs to be made a huge event. That is true with any and all things football in the state. Including the All-State selection. If players in certain parts of the state do not even consider All-State a possibility then what are we doing it for. Every player going in to the season should think that he has an opportunity, and right now that is not the case. Like I said, most players from North-Eastern Kentucky do not even think about, or consider it as a real possibility.

 

If the process was changed, would that mean that people from this area would make it on the team? No. There may be better players from across the state, but they would think that they have an opportunity, and would know that the best players made it. I just think that for the sake of the players and for Kentucky football as a whole, they deserve to have it done the right way, or at least the best way that we can.

This is a great idea to achieve the aims you stated. But the big question is funding. Who is going to pay for this? That's a lot of travel, tickets, expense vouchers, etc. Who foots the bill? You can't say, "It will be made up of people who just love the game." That won't work in the real world with real costs. I think it's a nice idea in theory but can't see one or all or any groups paying the bill for this extensive of a selection committee.

 

Your right, and I honestly don't have all the answers to how it should be ran. I was thinking it could be part of the Coaches Association. I don't know if they have the funding to support it or not. Or it could be under the KHSAA. As for the members, I don't know, past coaches, past officials, other people who have had association with high school football, possibly some members of the media, I'm not sure.

 

I like the idea, but don't know if it would be any better or not, just an idea for discussion.

I have always said if you are going to do something that effects the lives of others you had better do it the best you can.

 

If anyone thinks for one minute that these selections don't mean anything to the kids think again. We all know who does the best job in selecting an all state team. BGP of course. They take their time. Have lots of input. They argue with each other. ECT. So why do we care what some sports reporter from Louisville or Covington or Ashland thinks? Because we like seeing our name in the paper. It's human nature. We don't take into consideration that the guy making this list of players may be biased, having a bad day, hates Highlands, or wants to make his cronies happy.

I have always said if you are going to do something that effects the lives of others you had better do it the best you can.

 

If anyone thinks for one minute that these selections don't mean anything to the kids think again. We all know who does the best job in selecting an all state team. BGP of course. They take their time. Have lots of input. They argue with each other. ECT. So why do we care what some sports reporter from Louisville or Covington or Ashland thinks? Because we like seeing our name in the paper. It's human nature. We don't take into consideration that the guy making this list of players may be biased, having a bad day, hates Highlands, or wants to make his cronies happy.

Good post, and exactly right. BGP's Team is much better, because you have people who honestly love Kentucky High School Football and want to do the best job that they can. With the other teams, you have journalist who have limited knowledge of football, on the state level, not knocking the reporters, but they do not have the time to cover football across the state and do not have the desire to research players from all over the state.

 

In my opinion, if you want the best job done, in anything, you have to have people involved that have a vested interest in that particular thing. And with high school football across the state of Kentucky BGP is as close as you are going to get.

With that being said, when will BGP post their team?