In my mind, no school should ever complain about a smaller school moving up into your class unless you are worrying about getting beaten by a smaller school, which in my opinion, is pretty dang bad and shameful.

I agree with you, but the other side of the coin is schools moving up to avoid being beat by teams in their class. Somerset and Madisonville come to mind.

I'm surprised to see Corbin still in 2A with their enrollment well over 700 this year. I expected to see Corbin move to the 3A district that Somerset is in, which already has 6 teams thus forcing Somerset back to the 2A district that Corbin would vacate.

 

Does anyone have the enrollment cut-off numbers?

You obviously are not a superintendent worrying about fiscal issues. To force teams to play in their size classification would result in several teams (probably 9 or 10) having every district game being at least an hour away. That's big, big transportation costs which the KHSAA has wisely taken into consideration.

 

And for the life of me, I don't understand the motivation of "if you move up you have to go to the top class". Why should that be? In my mind, no school should ever complain about a smaller school moving up into your class unless you are worrying about getting beaten by a smaller school, which in my opinion, is pretty dang bad and shameful. If size matters in football (and I don't see how anyone could logically argue to the contrary) then complaining about having to beat a smaller school is simply a sign of weakness and defeatism. Crud, I'd be embarrassed to say that Beechwood shouldn't be able to move up to Highlands class because I was concerned that we couldn't beat them. If we can't beat a school regularly that is much smaller than us, the problem is not with Beechwood playing up, the problem is in our program and that's what I'd focused on.

 

I will concede and say the highest level with in travel proximity. I just don't think teams should be allowed to pick the district and level they would like to play. I understand logistics and money issues. I liked the old 4 class play were you are suppose to allignment.

You obviously are not a superintendent worrying about fiscal issues. To force teams to play in their size classification would result in several teams (probably 9 or 10) having every district game being at least an hour away. That's big, big transportation costs which the KHSAA has wisely taken into consideration.

And for the life of me, I don't understand the motivation of "if you move up you have to go to the top class". Why should that be? In my mind, no school should ever complain about a smaller school moving up into your class unless you are worrying about getting beaten by a smaller school, which in my opinion, is pretty dang bad and shameful. If size matters in football (and I don't see how anyone could logically argue to the contrary) then complaining about having to beat a smaller school is simply a sign of weakness and defeatism. Crud, I'd be embarrassed to say that Beechwood shouldn't be able to move up to Highlands class because I was concerned that we couldn't beat them. If we can't beat a school regularly that is much smaller than us, the problem is not with Beechwood playing up, the problem is in our program and that's what I'd focused on.

 

If the KHSAA was really concerned about transportation costs, would they have went back to cross district opponents in the first two rounds of the playoffs? Or why go to 6 classes at all? The 4 class system resulted in much closer district games than the 6 class setup. If the the football coaches and the KHSAA are worried about transportation costs, it seems to rank close to the bottom of things they are concerend about.

If the KHSAA was really concerned about transportation costs, would they have went back to cross district opponents in the first two rounds of the playoffs? Or why go to 6 classes at all? The 4 class system resulted in much closer district games than the 6 class setup. If the the football coaches and the KHSAA are worried about transportation costs, it seems to rank close to the bottom of things they are concerend about.

 

 

There only reason (and I don't agree with it) they went back to cross district opponents in the first two rounds is because the football coaches advisory committee screamed and complained for it. I totally agree it is inconsistent and in my opinion wrong.

 

The 6 classes was another thing that the coaches pushed for and got. I totally agree with you that it spread teams out even more, but the desire to provide some "equity" or "level the playing field" by having less size disparity won out over the argument of increased transportation costs.

 

Whereas the only complaint about allowing schools to move up to decrease travel costs is that the bigger schools can't beat the smaller schools moving up, which is a weak, no make that very weak, argument.

You obviously are not a superintendent worrying about fiscal issues. To force teams to play in their size classification would result in several teams (probably 9 or 10) having every district game being at least an hour away. That's big, big transportation costs which the KHSAA has wisely taken into consideration.

 

And for the life of me, I don't understand the motivation of "if you move up you have to go to the top class". Why should that be? In my mind, no school should ever complain about a smaller school moving up into your class unless you are worrying about getting beaten by a smaller school, which in my opinion, is pretty dang bad and shameful. If size matters in football (and I don't see how anyone could logically argue to the contrary) then complaining about having to beat a smaller school is simply a sign of weakness and defeatism. Crud, I'd be embarrassed to say that Beechwood shouldn't be able to move up to Highlands class because I was concerned that we couldn't beat them. If we can't beat a school regularly that is much smaller than us, the problem is not with Beechwood playing up, the problem is in our program and that's what I'd focused on.

 

What if a school in the southeastern part combined. They had 6a numbers and had to drive almost 3 hours to play a district game. Around 4 for the longest. Would you let them play down because of travel? Same circumstances but it wouldn't make it right. Right, wrong or indifferent I just think it should be straight across the board.

I am of the believe that if you want to move up you should have to move up to 6A. Teams that petition to move up get to choose their district (if they are approved) and no other schools get to choose their district. I understand why Cov. Cath and Highlands would want to move up but would they still want to move up if it meant competeing in 6A instead of an easier 5A class? I say no or they would have made that request last year as there is a 6A district in NKY they could walk through also. So I do not believe teams should be allowed to choose who they want to compete with if you want to move up go all the way.

 

My point exactly! When you change from your plan then a lot of wrinkles play out. You let one move up then another and another. Let one move down and so on. This one picks the district and that one isn't allowed to even move. Take the numbers and divide them up and play football in the class you are assigned and we have no problems.

I agree with you, but the other side of the coin is schools moving up to avoid being beat by teams in their class. Somerset and Madisonville come to mind.

 

 

If they can't beat the better teams in their real class, I'd say they'd have a tougher time beating the good teams in the bigger class wouldn't they? I don't recall Somerset or Madisonville winning state last year or for that matter even making a deep move in the playoffs. How far did they advance (honest question)?

There only reason (and I don't agree with it) they went back to cross district opponents in the first two rounds is because the football coaches advisory committee screamed and complained for it. I totally agree it is inconsistent and in my opinion wrong.

 

The 6 classes was another thing that the coaches pushed for and got. I totally agree with you that it spread teams out even more, but the desire to provide some "equity" or "level the playing field" by having less size disparity won out over the argument of increased transportation costs.

 

Whereas the only complaint about allowing schools to move up to decrease travel costs is that the bigger schools can't beat the smaller schools moving up, which is a weak, no make that very weak, argument.

 

 

We've discussed this topic before, but it's a slow day. I don't think the argument is weak in the sense there really isn't that much size difference between CovCath/Highlands and the other schools in the 5A district. There is a big difference in on field success, tradition, and the hard work going into sustaining that level of play. If the hard work goes hand in hand with tradition, which only comes after on field success, the other schools in the 5A district are in a tough spot. There will probably be years where they can beat one of the two, but to beat CovCath/Highlands in back to back playoffs weeks is near impossible (see LexCath), so they will not experience the joy of a championship run. It's hard to go from solid program to an elite program without some tangible success to show for the hard work. As long as CovCath/Highlands are sitting in your district, that tangible success (deep playoff run) is going to be much harder to achieve. If they aren’t in your district, it stands to reason, it will be easier to get to elite level status.

What if a school in the southeastern part combined. They had 6a numbers and had to drive almost 3 hours to play a district game. Around 4 for the longest. Would you let them play down because of travel? Same circumstances but it wouldn't make it right. Right, wrong or indifferent I just think it should be straight across the board.

 

 

Playing down is not an option and hopefully never will because of the size benefit issue. Again, no bigger school should ever complain about playing a smaller school and I'd be embarrassed to have a head coach that made that complaint. Talk about a losing mentality.

We've discussed this topic before, but it's a slow day. I don't think the argument is weak in the sense there really isn't that much size difference between CovCath/Highlands and the other schools in the 5A district. There is a big difference in on field success, tradition, and the hard work going into sustaining that level of play. If the hard work goes hand in hand with tradition, which only comes after on field success, the other schools in the 5A district are in a tough spot. There will probably be years where they can beat one of the two, but to beat CovCath/Highlands in back to back playoffs weeks is near impossible (see LexCath), so they will not experience the joy of a championship run. It's hard to go from solid program to an elite program without some tangible success to show for the hard work. As long as CovCath/Highlands are sitting in your district, that tangible success (deep playoff run) is going to be much harder to achieve. If they aren’t in your district, it stands to reason, it will be easier to get to elite level status.

 

Someone forgot to tell Boyle County and Chuck Smith about that rule.

Playing down is not an option and hopefully never will because of the size benefit issue. Again, no bigger school should ever complain about playing a smaller school and I'd be embarrassed to have a head coach that made that complaint. Talk about a losing mentality.

 

You just told me I wasn't a Super because I wasn't thinking about travel expense and you justified your argument with the money/distance. The money and distance is the same if I have 6a numbers playing down for travel and expense as it would be for 3a and 4a moving up for travel and expense.

 

This is my point as to why I feel everyone should go by numbers and leave it alone.

Someone forgot to tell Boyle County and Chuck Smith about that rule.

 

I must have made a pretty good argument if I didn't get a 6 paragraph response.

 

:banana:

Was this draft alignment done strictly by geographical criteria only, or have the changes in enrollment of each school been taken into account?

 

The Shelby Co. move makes NO sense. How do you put them in that district and not with Ballard and company???

I agree it would make perfect sense for them to switch Seneca and Shelby Co, however Shelby Co is better off then they were before.