KY state playoffs are stupid...

[Eta Rho]

From Ryan Ernst:

 

Am I the only one who feels this way?

 

Basically, a team can lose twice in the playoffs (once in the district finals and once in the best-of-three semi-state series) and still win the state title. Doesn't that seem contrary to the entire point of the postseason?

 

District title games are a joke. Both teams are going to the regional tournament. The atmosphere is weak.

 

Also, it's way too long. The state finals aren't scheduled until June 14, a full month after a lot of seniors graduate. (And that's if you have good weather). It just drags on and on and on. For a lot of the teams in the postseason, especially those that bow out before the state tournament, their bodies are on the field but their minds are on Senior Trip in Florida. I've seen it happen and I've talked to coaches about it. I remember one coach telling me that after his team won the region, some kids went on senior trip and didn't come back for the rest of the playoffs.

 

All the back-and-forth travel for the semi-state series is ridiculous and unnecessary ... for teams and for fans ... and for the media.

 

And there's also this: there aren't enough top teams to make the present system necessary. It's not like every year we're seeing teams battling back from two (or even one) loss to win the title. In the last decade, guess how many postseason losses we've seen by state championship teams? Three ... in 10 years. That's it.

 

So, how do we fix it? Make it one-and-done. If you don't win your district, you don't go to the regional tournament. Simple. The eight-team regional tournament becomes a four-team, three-game, two-night affair. Then you make the semi-state a one-game event the weekend after the regional tournaments. Then you play the state tournament the next weekend and the whole thing is wrapped up the first week of June.

 

Now, does that make too much sense or what?

 

http://beta.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog06&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ade3ab7e7-5e43-4e32-8612-155786b59a09Post%3a041e1929-c64c-41de-8d6d-428c6bc23204&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

[Eta Rho]

What does everyone else think??

[A-Flex]

I think it should just be the same format as the state tournament in basketball. I still think district winner and runnerup should go to region, but make it a sweet 16, one and done state tournament.

[mooremiller31]

I like the way it was when I was in high school. There was no best of three series at semi state four teams made it to semi state and the winner got to the state finals. At the time only four teams made it to the state tournament which was then played at Cliff Hagan. No need for a best of three series also I agree with the district runner up not making it. Look at it this way Scott County upset Henry Clay in district championship this year. So Henry Clay, a top 10 team all year, draws a winner not very fair to a winner if you ask me. The district runners up affects the 11th region very harshly, as well as the 6th and 7th region.

[DMZ76]

I agree with Ernst...lose and go home.

[The Scribe]

From Ryan Ernst:

 

Am I the only one who feels this way?

 

Basically, a team can lose twice in the playoffs (once in the district finals and once in the best-of-three semi-state series) and still win the state title. Doesn't that seem contrary to the entire point of the postseason?

 

District title games are a joke. Both teams are going to the regional tournament. The atmosphere is weak.

 

Also, it's way too long. The state finals aren't scheduled until June 14, a full month after a lot of seniors graduate. (And that's if you have good weather). It just drags on and on and on. For a lot of the teams in the postseason, especially those that bow out before the state tournament, their bodies are on the field but their minds are on Senior Trip in Florida. I've seen it happen and I've talked to coaches about it. I remember one coach telling me that after his team won the region, some kids went on senior trip and didn't come back for the rest of the playoffs.

 

All the back-and-forth travel for the semi-state series is ridiculous and unnecessary ... for teams and for fans ... and for the media.

 

And there's also this: there aren't enough top teams to make the present system necessary. It's not like every year we're seeing teams battling back from two (or even one) loss to win the title. In the last decade, guess how many postseason losses we've seen by state championship teams? Three ... in 10 years. That's it.

 

So, how do we fix it? Make it one-and-done. If you don't win your district, you don't go to the regional tournament. Simple. The eight-team regional tournament becomes a four-team, three-game, two-night affair. Then you make the semi-state a one-game event the weekend after the regional tournaments. Then you play the state tournament the next weekend and the whole thing is wrapped up the first week of June.

 

Now, does that make too much sense or what?

 

http://beta.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog06&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ade3ab7e7-5e43-4e32-8612-155786b59a09Post%3a041e1929-c64c-41de-8d6d-428c6bc23204&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

 

Ryan should make a trip to western Kentucky sometime and watch Hopkinsville and Christian County play for the district title. Or watch Madisonville and Hopkins County Central.

 

Other than that I agree. I think they should scrap the best of three series and go to a Sweet 16 format. Play games on Monday and Tuesday, rest on Wednesday and come back on Thursday and Friday.

[Eta Rho]

I have to agree with Ernst as well. I think the best way to do it is make it a sweet 16 one and done.

[STRIKE3]

If time is his concern, start covering another sport. The best interest of the student-athlete, is supposed to be paramount and not make it quick, for quick sake.

 

Same thing in Basketball, District Runner-ups get to advance and compete, for Regional titles. Some would argue for double-elimination and some, one/done.

[gchs_uk9]

In my opinion, it should be four double-elimination tournaments. Follow me on this:

 

District Tournaments

Keep the existing districts, but make it double elimination. Only the winner advances.

 

Region Tournaments

Four district winners compete in a double elimination tournament. Again, only the winner advances.

 

Sectional Tournaments

Four region winners (1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16) compete in a double elimination tournament. Winner of each of the four sectionals go to the state tournament.

 

State Tournament

Four sectional winners compete in a double elimination state tournament with one team emerging victorious.

 

Now, you might not like this idea but I'm throwing it out there. The current problem is that you can lose in the district and semi-state, but you can't lose in the region or state. Why not allow losses in all or losses in none? This system is similar to the college system, which in theory should produce the absolute best champion.

[MTNSportsGuy]

The current setup is slanted toward the larger schools with more pitching.

[STRIKE3]

In my opinion, it should be four double-elimination tournaments. Follow me on this:

 

District Tournaments

Keep the existing districts, but make it double elimination. Only the winner advances.

 

Region Tournaments

Four district winners compete in a double elimination tournament. Again, only the winner advances.

 

Sectional Tournaments

Four region winners (1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16) compete in a double elimination tournament. Winner of each of the four sectionals go to the state tournament.

 

State Tournament

Four sectional winners compete in a double elimination state tournament with one team emerging victorious.

 

Now, you might not like this idea but I'm throwing it out there. The current problem is that you can lose in the district and semi-state, but you can't lose in the region or state. Why not allow losses in all or losses in none? This system is similar to the college system, which in theory should produce the absolute best champion.

Looks good and would allow more games, for all early.

[EARLE]

In my opinion, it should be four double-elimination tournaments. Follow me on this:

 

District Tournaments

Keep the existing districts, but make it double elimination. Only the winner advances.

 

Region Tournaments

Four district winners compete in a double elimination tournament. Again, only the winner advances.

 

Sectional Tournaments

Four region winners (1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16) compete in a double elimination tournament. Winner of each of the four sectionals go to the state tournament.

 

State Tournament

Four sectional winners compete in a double elimination state tournament with one team emerging victorious.

 

Now, you might not like this idea but I'm throwing it out there. The current problem is that you can lose in the district and semi-state, but you can't lose in the region or state. Why not allow losses in all or losses in none? This system is similar to the college system, which in theory should produce the absolute best champion.

 

Looks good. Each phase would have the exact same format once you got to the region, 4-teams, double elimination. Seeding would not be a big issue in districts if it was double elimination.

[gchs_uk9]

Looks good. Each phase would have the exact same format once you got to the region, 4-teams, double elimination. Seeding would not be a big issue in districts if it was double elimination.

 

Well you would probably still want to see the district, but it wouldn't be a pressing issue.

[FarBeyondDriven]

I am surprised that Mr. Ernst has a concern how the State Tournament format is played, considering the fact his myopic view of high school sports usually does not extend beyond Boone, Kenton, or Campbell Counties.

[Butterfingers]

I am surprised that Mr. Ernst has a concern how the State Tournament format is played, considering the fact his myopic view of high school sports usually does not extend beyond Boone, Kenton, or Campbell Counties.

 

Not sure, but isn't that what he gets paid to cover??

 

 

Look at the college level of tournament play, or professional level neither has a one and out. Baseball is a different game than football and basketball. One pitcher can dominate a game. Think, do we want the best teams or the one with a dominating pitcher to win? The region imo should be two and out as well. just like the College WS, Super Regionals and conferance tournaments. I do agree they may need to shorten the season similar to Ohio.

Edited June 4, 2008 by Butterfingers
spelling