Take the district winner and runner up and let them advance. That gets you 16 teams if my math is correct. Now have 16 at large bids based on a point system similar to Ohio and West Virginia.

 

Now all games on your schedule are important. You need to win your district games to finish 1st or 2nd. But if you play in a strong district play a tough non district schedule to get the points to get an at large bid.

 

The higher the class team you beat the more points you earn

 

Beat a Class A team - 1 point

Beat a Class AA team - 2 points

Beat a Class 3A team - 3 points

Beat a Class 4A team - 4 points

Beat a Class 5A team - 5 points

 

Yes I say we only have 5 classes to make this worthwhile

 

Now to help break ties you need bonus points. If a team you beat defeats a Class A team you get one bonus point. If a team you beat defeats a Class AA team you get two bonus points.

 

I'm with DaddyCat in that this is the system in place so don't knock the 0 fers and 1 fers that are in because they earned the right to play in the playoffs. They followed the rules that are in place.

 

Daddy Cat you have put forth the best argument / explanation as to why you can't use injuries as an excuse to not play a team / round of playoffs. It's football - everytime you put the pads on (practice or games) you take a chance of injury. Your chances of getting hurt go up when you play scared or tentatively.

 

The opening post wanted another possible system for the playoffs so here is mine. I might go back and edit some of it after I proofread it.

Looks good, TigerFan.

Thanks for the support.

I give up. :lol:

 

I agree. See you in another thread. Sorry I brought this up.

i would like to see this...

1. instead of six classes go down to five classes

2. instead of four teams from each district going to the play-offs, i would like to see three from each district with first place team having first round bye

sidelinedoc, don't leave it now, the input you wanted is starting to come in now.

I still say cut it down to the District winners if we are going to fool with it, though.

Short playoffs with the healthiest/best teams possible. They have already earned it, no need to prove anything else with the 2nd/3rd/4th place teams being eligible. 1 or 4. System as is or just winners.

A few points that do not solve the playoff debate, but are never the less sometimes overlooked:

 

1. No playoff system is perfect. With any system there will always be debate and argument for or against why certain teams make or don’t make the playoffs. This is pretty much true for all levels and all sports.

 

2. Ohio’s high school playoff system is dramatically different then Kentucky’s because they have 3 times the number of schools. If Ohio allowed every team in the playoffs they would be playing high school football in March.

 

3. Football is not basketball, basketball is not baseball, baseball is not soccer, etc… I do not believe we can equate one sport’s system to another’s. This is also true for different sports at all levels, high school through professional.

 

4. Allowing all the Kentucky teams to make the playoffs would create a playoff week 1 scheduling problem and probably add an additional week to the playoffs since some classes have an odd number of teams. To have a “clean” bracket there has to be an even number of teams: 8, 16, 32, etc…. This is especially true for football since you can’t play two games without a significant break in between.

 

IMO the two solutions are to keep the current system of 32 teams per class or the suggestion that they only take the top three teams from each district with the number 1 seed getting a bye week.

A few points that do not solve the playoff debate, but are never the less sometimes overlooked:

 

1. No playoff system is perfect. With any system there will always be debate and argument for or against why certain teams make or don’t make the playoffs. This is pretty much true for all levels and all sports.

 

2. Ohio’s high school playoff system is dramatically different then Kentucky’s because they have 3 times the number of schools. If Ohio allowed every team in the playoffs they would be playing high school football in March.

 

3. Football is not basketball, basketball is not baseball, baseball is not soccer, etc… I do not believe we can equate one sport’s system to another’s. This is also true for different sports at all levels, high school through professional.

 

4. Allowing all the Kentucky teams to make the playoffs would create a playoff week 1 scheduling problem and probably add an additional week to the playoffs since some classes have an odd number of teams. To have a “clean” bracket there has to be an even number of teams: 8, 16, 32, etc…. This is especially true for football since you can’t play two games without a significant break in between.

 

IMO the two solutions are to keep the current system of 32 teams per class or the suggestion that they only take the top three teams from each district with the number 1 seed getting a bye week.

 

 

FC I pretty much agree with all of this - especially the part about no system is perfect. Regardless how you do your playoffs there will be teams left out that shouldn't be. You can't include everyone (although Kentucky has tried and came close).

 

Although after reading my scenario a couple of times I really like it - but I also think I can date Jessica Alba.

Take the district winner and runner up and let them advance. That gets you 16 teams if my math is correct. Now have 16 at large bids based on a point system similar to Ohio and West Virginia.

 

Now all games on your schedule are important. You need to win your district games to finish 1st or 2nd. But if you play in a strong district play a tough non district schedule to get the points to get an at large bid.

 

The higher the class team you beat the more points you earn

 

Beat a Class A team - 1 point

Beat a Class AA team - 2 points

Beat a Class 3A team - 3 points

Beat a Class 4A team - 4 points

Beat a Class 5A team - 5 points

 

Yes I say we only have 5 classes to make this worthwhile

 

Now to help break ties you need bonus points. If a team you beat defeats a Class A team you get one bonus point. If a team you beat defeats a Class AA team you get two bonus points.

 

I'm with DaddyCat in that this is the system in place so don't knock the 0 fers and 1 fers that are in because they earned the right to play in the playoffs. They followed the rules that are in place.

 

Daddy Cat you have put forth the best argument / explanation as to why you can't use injuries as an excuse to not play a team / round of playoffs. It's football - everytime you put the pads on (practice or games) you take a chance of injury. Your chances of getting hurt go up when you play scared or tentatively.

 

The opening post wanted another possible system for the playoffs so here is mine. I might go back and edit some of it after I proofread it.

 

Too heavily class oriented. Class 5a teams are not 5 times better than class 1a teams. Maybe go 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5 and i'd agree. 2 automatics and some wildcards based on a point system is interesting. Also I would divide the bracket into 4 regions by geography but then seed each region based on the point system for homefield and matchups.

Didn't someone post a mock 5A alignment on here once? What does it look like?

But are there any on your schedule? Most teams have one or two.

We play up a lot, also, but we can be perceived as a "cupcake" by the likes of Whitley and Middlesboro and Harlan County HS. We don't play the traditional "cupcakes" either, very often. We pay the price very often for a tough schedule. Now we're getting to the root of something. A small school plays up out of need or desire, but using the logic we have used all day, this makes them undesireable, yet another team DOES play the traditional cupcakes, finishes 3rd (or 2nd) with a 6-4 record is now considered better than the other team that finishes 4-6/5-5 against a much tougher schedule. Is the 6-4 team really more deserving to be in the playoffs with this scenario?

I'm not even talking about records. I'm just talking about lousy teams. If you can't beat anyone in your own district, no matter who you schedule the rest of the year, I don't think you have a place in the playoffs.

But that is what I am saying, BF. Some are saying if you get 2nd in your district and only win 2 or 3 games, but they were all district games, and went 1-rest of the schedule, you have not earned the spot. If you lose to all cupcakes, yeah. If, like many small teams, you play up and a tough schedule, this same logic ruins you but rewards a team that does not even try themselves.

Central without their forfeit win would be 5-5. I say we keep them out! Sounds great to me.

Too heavily class oriented. Class 5a teams are not 5 times better than class 1a teams. Maybe go 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5 and i'd agree. 2 automatics and some wildcards based on a point system is interesting. Also I would divide the bracket into 4 regions by geography but then seed each region based on the point system for homefield and matchups.

 

 

See I like a lot of this. The reason I went with Class 5A worth 5 and A with one point is I feel that if you take ten 5A teams and play ten A teams the 5A teams would win at least 8 of the games. Granted a lot depends on the teams being matched up but on average the 5A teams would be better. But I can see where you are going with it.

 

I thought about the geographic region thing too. Put 8 teams in the east, 8 from the north, 8 from the west and 8 from the south. Then two regions meet for semis and those two winners meet for championship. Maybe even try to play the semis at U of L and the Championship at UK. U of L's turf field could handle two games easier than UK's grass field.

 

That's a good idea on using the points to determine seeding for the playoffs.

 

Of course we got to realize that this is dreaming because the KHSAA is not going to get on here and read this and make the switch.

I like what we do here in Ohio teams must earn their way in.

Every year here we see a school or four fill the non-league schedule with cupcakes and then cry when they are not playing in week 11.

 

More times then not if you follow the game you can tell which team will be good or bad. Yes, at times a team will struggle in one season and be great the next. Logan Elm went 0-11 last season and this year they are playing in week 12. Nobody I know thought they would be this good but everyone seem to think they were going to be better.

 

Is the system perfect here? No, but with over 700 schools playing varsity football it works.

Ohio's system sucks because it leaves off too many deserving teams and it is too subjective to criteria out of your control.

 

Kentucky lets in too many underserving teams, but that problem solves itself in 1 week.

 

I'll take our system over theirs any day.

 

 

(btw, this topic didn't belong in the factoid thread, so I gave it its own thread)

 

I disagree. Deserving teams? The fact that a team may win a couple of ball games and play a bunch of weak opponents shouldn't qualify them for anything. Yeah, Ohio's sytem isn't perfect, and I'm sure those that felt like they should have gotten in are complaining about THEIR system. But, at least they're not dealing with winless and losing teams qualifying for the "playoffs".