A state championship is a state championship I don't care how many classes there are, each kid that has won one will remember it for the rest of their life. I love the playoffs because I love seeing upsets and well get every now again and it gives seniors a chance to expand their season 1 game longer.

:thumb:

 

What damage does it do to have 6 state champs instead of 4? Who is harmed? This isn't about 'everyone gets a trophy'. We only have 6 state champion squads out of a couple hundred schools playing football. I have no problem with the current system. If they went to 5, I would be okay with that as well.

 

I am not sure I like most team's getting in the playoffs. Either about 1/2 of the teams should get in OR do like every other sport in the state where everyone gets in. Those in 4 team districts get in no matter if they lose very game 70-0, but those in 5-7 team districts may have some decent teams who don't get in.

 

I do not think it is the number of classes that is the problem, but the number of teams that make it to the playoffs. In 2A just about every team goes to states because they take 4 teams from each district. Just about all of the 2A districts only have 4 teams. Although anything can happen, the #1 & #2 teams win in the first round and many time there are way to many teams that are 0-10 and 1-9. If they can not compete in their own district, they surely won't compete in the state playoffs.

 

Going to 5 classes or just combining some of the districts would be another option. Just stop letting just about everyone in the state make it into the playoffs.

But shouldn't the playoffs be a reward and a privilage? Not a gift?

 

Teams from each class at .500 or worse last year

1A - 19 teams

2A - 19 teams

3A - 13 teams

4A - 17 teams

5A - 14 teams

6A - 13 teams

 

If where talking about the classes being water down, it starts with these teams. Why should a team make the playoffs....if you can't win more than half of you games?

 

:thumb::banana::taz::thumb::dancingpa

And before 2007 I guess they had to say "Oh, gee, we're state champs! ...and so are...three other teams." :confused:

 

What state doesn’t have multiple state champions?

 

:thumb::clap:

Here's an idea, lets just just leave things the way they are until the KHSAA changes it and then argue about it when they do.

 

:laugh:You're on a roll, baby!

I like 6 classes.

How exactly do they determine how many boys are in a school? Who turns in the numbers to whom? I know we are smaller than a couple of schools that have more boys than us but we have a really lazy administration! Our Super hasn't even been to school yet and it's a month in! Finally got a new Principal thank God! It's a shame!

Now, I'm going to have to disagree here, because of my aforementioned example. If you've got a traditionally powerful 2A school such as Bardstown who comes off a great year into the next schedule cycle, why is it fair to them to keep them out of the playoffs just because the only schools they could get to agree to play them were 5A and 6A teams? In 2007, Bardstown finished the regular season 4-6, yet got to the region final and gave eventual 2A champ Ft. Campbell their toughest test of the playoffs.

 

I would be more inclined to agree with your premise if there were some guarantee of required games against other schools in their class, such as the district they're matched up with in the playoffs. But as it stands now, if we had your scenario, all that would do is reward a team for loading up their schedule with cupcakes, and the playoffs would be even more watered down than they already are.

 

 

This is resolved by using the district record rather than the overall record. Some schools schedule the bigger schools on purpose, others have no choice. Either way, teh majority of the schools that lose over half of their games are not in this situation and should not be in the playoffs.

I understand that the issue isn't easy I just think the current solution makes 5/6ths happy at the detriment to the 1/6th, which I see as wrong.

 

A no class system would work regionally like most of the other sports. Probably in this case you would have 32 districts of 6 or 7 teams, the top two of each district go to the playoffs.

 

If they had a hard number structure you would most likely have three classes with a small number little class and a small number big class with a huge middle class but I don't see why that would have to be a problem.

 

Isn't it more fair to make 5/6ths happy and 1/6 unhappy rather than make it where around 5/6 of the teams have almost no shot to ever win a state title? A 1 class system for football is ridiculous. :ohbrother:

 

All that would guarantee is a lot of smaller schools dropping the sport because they have little to no shot of making the playoffs each year, let alone competing for a state championship.

I'm fine with 4, 5 or 6.

 

It's a good thing for all teams to be in the playoffs. In order for programs to develop, they need to play games. I believe Indiana does it that way. Basically, if you don't win during the final week of the "season", you're done.

 

Kentucky has only one class in basketball, and every year, each and every one of them makes the playoffs.

While a single class for football is not workable like basketball may be, 6 classes for 220+ schools is way too watered down IMO. Everyone keeps referencing states like Texas, California and Florida when making their arguments; but that's like comparing grapes to watermelons. All of those states have 1000+ schools, many of which make Trinity and X look like an "A" school in size.

 

Ohio has six classes as well, but has 718 high schools!! An average of only about 36-38 schools per class is simply too few to crown a champion?? And there is still a majority out there that would like to add a couple more "private school" classes to this mix. When do we get to the "Give Everyone a Trophy" mentality?? :confused:

 

I know the KHSAA braintrust have no idea what to do with two large all boys schools with about 1400+ boys each, when the average school in their class has around 500-600. Don't I remember seeing some state with a similar issue creating a "Super Class" where they placed the largest group of schools, along with any others that aspired to join them in quest of their championship?

 

Slightly off topic, but I do get a kick out of seeing some on here trumpeting the validity of the six class champions (1 of 36); that on other threads will passionately argue that an All "A" champion in whatever sport (One who has just bested 120+ teams in a district, regional & four games in four days format--hoops) is not worthy of a "State Championship" because "it's not KHSAA sanctioned"?? :irked:

Isn't it more fair to make 5/6ths happy and 1/6 unhappy rather than make it where around 5/6 of the teams have almost no shot to ever win a state title? A 1 class system for football is ridiculous. :ohbrother:

 

All that would guarantee is a lot of smaller schools dropping the sport because they have little to no shot of making the playoffs each year, let alone competing for a state championship.

Under your logic the rest of 6A should probably just go ahead and fold football because they have very little shot at winning the championship. If winning the championship is the only reason you play the game your playing the game for the wrong reason IMHO.

 

Why on earth should I as a fan of a 6A school care that smaller schools would have unsurmountable odds when they obvioulsy don't care about our situation. I mean if the situation is okay for us to deal with it should be okay for everyone.

But shouldn't the playoffs be a reward and a privilage? Not a gift?

 

Teams from each class at .500 or worse last year

1A - 19 teams

2A - 19 teams

3A - 13 teams

4A - 17 teams

5A - 14 teams

6A - 13 teams

 

If where talking about the classes being water down, it starts with these teams. Why should a team make the playoffs....if you can't win more than half of you games?

 

Because then you would have all teams watering down their schedules with teams they know they can beat. There wouldn't be as many good non district matchups or anything like that. Some teams might be a really good team and just play a very hard non district schedule. So there record could end up .500 or worse by the end of the year, even if they do very well in district.

 

I don't like how some teams can make the playoffs without winning a game, however going by overall record here is not a fair stat to talk about with this. I do see what your saying, but shouldn't use overall record because that really does not show how good a team may be, even if they have a bad overall record. I do think every district should have to have at least 6 teams in it if possible. This way it makes you in most cases have to win at least 2 of your district games, and in some cases 3. So you really are actually earning your way into the playoffs then.

Because then you would have all teams watering down their schedules with teams they know they can beat. There wouldn't be as many good non district matchups or anything like that. Some teams might be a really good team and just play a very hard non district schedule. So there record could end up .500 or worse by the end of the year, even if they do very well in district.

 

 

On post #68

 

If you was to take a look at last year and only let the District Champion and Runner-up, go to the post season. I think you would only find a few teams with a sub 500 record and not half the class. Make the playoffs something special and not taken for granted.

I don't like the current system at all. Another element of this that no one is mentioning is the increase in travel that as happened under this system. I know they moved this year, but last year Bryan Station was in a district with Johnson Central. Thats crazy! I think a 5 class system would be best. That way its not as watered down. The way I look at what they are doing with football is its like there is a child with a toy and the child keeps changing things around for no rhyme or reason just for fun.