Not going to say that my way is right, but here's my general feeling about it all. For starters, I like seeding the districts just simply to make something about the regular season count for something. I do believe that there should be consistency throughout the state. Either all districts seed or no districts seed. I could live with either way, but all districts should be on the same page. As forgiving and unusual as it seems, I somehow like that district runner-ups advance to the Regional tournament. 1) Because it's been a tradition for so long and makes Ky High School Basketball unique. 2) Because sometimes districts really have more than one quality team (In the NCAA a team can lose their conference tourney and still advance) and 3) It's exciting to see teams such as Newport rebound from their district championship loss, and prove that they're still worthy of playing in their Regional tourney. I like how the results of the district championship games are utilized to seed the regional tourney combined with a partial blind draw to make the district championship game count for something as well considering the runner-ups advance. When it comes to the Sweet 16, I like the blind draw of regions to add the element of surprise to the tournament. I think seeding if could perhaps make it too predictable or dull somehow. At this point we're talking about 16 quality teams from around the state. Maybe not the best 16, and not the Little Sisters of the Poor, but 16 teams who have proved themselves as being competitive enough to be the only team left standing within their own region. Giving a lesser team a 'lucky draw' is not in essence crowning them until they've still proven themselves again by winning 4 games in a row against some of the state's best, and likely would have to beat some super team in the process. Making every year's lesser entrants always have to look down the barrel of a gun by seeding would dramatically lesson any possibility of Cinderella ever again winning the Sweet 16. Not that it would be impossible, but now even more so improbable. Takes a little luck along the way and a blind draw helps sometimes aid in that luck. Sure, if they seeded and Cinderella still won that would even be more amazing, but still less likely to ever happen and I don't know about you, but I'm not gonna live forever, so I'd like to see Cinderella have a chance of winning a little more than less. So again, that's just my general feeling about it. Obviously it could be split a million different ways and still not satisfy everyone. The way it is now doesn't completely work for me since every district doesn't seed, but if it stays that way, I can live with it. Generally, it all still plays out year after year as being pretty darn exciting. :thumb:

When I bring up classing basketball, everyone throws up the tradition. Yet every year, someone brings up this discussion about seeding the tournament. So which is it?

 

I don't understand.

Most people seem to oppose classification and seeding. What do they have to do with each other?

I don't know if this has been debated on here or not, but what about seeding the Sweet 16 teams rather than having a blind draw? It seems like there is usually one bracket, as is the case this year, which is loaded with the top teams in the field. More often than not, this seems to be the case.

 

Who would be in favor of using some computer system of seeding the 16 teams that advance to Rupp Arena? Maybe use a combination of several of the models already used(Cantrell, LIT, BGP, Massey, and others).

 

Scott County and Ballard may play in this year's tourney, but it won't be in the championship. That would be a heck of a title game. Does anyone know if the idea of seeding has ever been discussed? I'm not even necessarily saying that I would favor such an idea, but it would eliminate the possibility of all the top teams squaring off in the first couple of rounds.

 

Maybe a far-fetched idea, but what do you think?

 

 

 

You're right, far-fetched idea, why change anything? Makes no sense at all. I agree with what Scribe said.

I don't understand.

Most people seem to oppose classification and seeding. What do they have to do with each other?

People say they want the Sweet 16 to stay the same because of history and tradition. Yet, the question of seeding comes about from the same people who like the tradition.

OK. I see what you're saying.

I'm guessing most people still want to keep it like it is on both counts though.

 

That's not as bad as the "I have this new brilliant idea to have four classes but have the winners play at the end to have the best of both worlds."

 

I hate that one.

The NCAA seeds 65 teams. Here you are seeding 16 teams and it isn't that hard to get it right. Not to mention you are not even seeding the top 16 teams in the state, which makes it even easier.

 

Funny how no one wants to seed the state tourney, but everyone wants a district tourney to be seeded.

 

Huge and I mean huge difference between what you are wanting to do with the Sweet Sixteen (based on pure speculation) and what happens to get seeded for the district (you play to see who get seeded).

 

Really a very, very, very poor example!

The Khsaa has been playing around with football playoffs the last several years. So why not do something with two inconsistencies they have in basketball? One, get rid of the few 3 team districts. If football can be recalculated every 2 or 4 years, they can move teams into other districts. Two, step in and seed all districts. In football, all district teams play each other and are seeded against another district in their class. So why not make all districts seed? They seem to be very active in the state of football but in basketball, they seem to fear a little change.

The NCAA seeds 65 teams. Here you are seeding 16 teams and it isn't that hard to get it right. Not to mention you are not even seeding the top 16 teams in the state, which makes it even easier.

 

Funny how no one wants to seed the state tourney, but everyone wants a district tourney to be seeded.

Districts are seeded by head to head competition, not some phantom ratings system.

Edited March 14, 201016 yr by FarBeyondDriven

Using the latest Cantrell, for example, you would have something like:

 

1. Scott Co.

16. East Carter

 

8. Corbin

9. Shelby Co.

 

5. West Jessamine

12. North Hardin

 

4. Christian Co.

13. Muhlenburg Co.

 

-----------------------------------

 

3. Ballard

14. Butler

 

6. Mason Co.

11. Paducah T.

 

7. Warren Central

10. Knott Co. Cent.

 

2. Shelby Valley

15. Newport

 

I actually kind of like this!:banana:

Huge and I mean huge difference between what you are wanting to do with the Sweet Sixteen (based on pure speculation) and what happens to get seeded for the district (you play to see who get seeded).

 

Really a very, very, very poor example!

 

I didn't realize that everyone had to play to seed a tourney. You better inform the NCAA selection committee, because I don't think all 65 have played.

 

Really, a very, very, very, very, (I met your verys and raised you one) poor response.

Not going to say that my way is right, but here's my general feeling about it all. For starters, I like seeding the districts just simply to make something about the regular season count for something. I do believe that there should be consistency throughout the state. Either all districts seed or no districts seed. I could live with either way, but all districts should be on the same page. As forgiving and unusual as it seems, I somehow like that district runner-ups advance to the Regional tournament. 1) Because it's been a tradition for so long and makes Ky High School Basketball unique. 2) Because sometimes districts really have more than one quality team (In the NCAA a team can lose their conference tourney and still advance) and 3) It's exciting to see teams such as Newport rebound from their district championship loss, and prove that they're still worthy of playing in their Regional tourney. I like how the results of the district championship games are utilized to seed the regional tourney combined with a partial blind draw to make the district championship game count for something as well considering the runner-ups advance. When it comes to the Sweet 16, I like the blind draw of regions to add the element of surprise to the tournament. I think seeding if could perhaps make it too predictable or dull somehow. At this point we're talking about 16 quality teams from around the state. Maybe not the best 16, and not the Little Sisters of the Poor, but 16 teams who have proved themselves as being competitive enough to be the only team left standing within their own region. Giving a lesser team a 'lucky draw' is not in essence crowning them until they've still proven themselves again by winning 4 games in a row against some of the state's best, and likely would have to beat some super team in the process. Making every year's lesser entrants always have to look down the barrel of a gun by seeding would dramatically lesson any possibility of Cinderella ever again winning the Sweet 16. Not that it would be impossible, but now even more so improbable. Takes a little luck along the way and a blind draw helps sometimes aid in that luck. Sure, if they seeded and Cinderella still won that would even be more amazing, but still less likely to ever happen and I don't know about you, but I'm not gonna live forever, so I'd like to see Cinderella have a chance of winning a little more than less. So again, that's just my general feeling about it. Obviously it could be split a million different ways and still not satisfy everyone. The way it is now doesn't completely work for me since every district doesn't seed, but if it stays that way, I can live with it. Generally, it all still plays out year after year as being pretty darn exciting. :thumb:

 

This is a lot of words, obviously I didn't read all of this but I'll give you an "E" for effort.