Last year might have produced Highlands vs St X also. I think Highlands would have loved it.

last year might a very good LCA team liked to have seen how they compared with the higher classes?

All well thought out pieces. 4 should be the number maybe even 3. I respect Highlands 100%, but the truth is they don't schedule Louisville St. X and/Trinity for a reason and they know it. They are selective whom they schedule and rightfully so. The truth is though they could not play with the larger schools week in and week out and win the way they do now. They would be opposed to a super class. I believe their agenda now is to be recognized on the mythical national stage. The Bluebirds win over Cincy St. X gave them this confidence. I would only point out that this was their lone win over a GCL school in quite some time. The bottom line is Highlands is awesome for the size school they are, but not nearly as powerful as they would try to convince all of the rest of us that they are. They would perhaps win one of 5 vs. Louisville Trinity or Louisville St. X.

 

Fair points History, although I'll disagree with the point that Highlands would be opposed to playing in the Super Class, IF they felt that they were going to consistently be able to truly two platoon in games and practices. While our win loss record hasn't been very good against some of the elite bigger schools over the years, if you look at the games you'll find in almost every case (with the loss to Lou X in 05 being the only exception I can recall), we were either winning or within a point or two at half. In the second half, our lack of depth really came back to hurt us. I truly believe that if we could have truly two platooned in those games with quality athletes (which is the position we were in last year and will be in this year and for several more years to follow), some of those losses would have been wins. How many, I don't and can't have a clue. No one can. But one shouldn't and can't discount the advantage of quality depth and being able to two platoon. Heck just look at the Ryle and JC games against Highlands last year. Both relatively close at half, with Highlands pulling away in the second half due, in my opinion, much better depth and two platooning. I don't care how talented an athlete is, if he's going both ways and playing against kids equally well conditioned but only playing one way, he's going to be at a severe disadvantage from a fatigue stand point if he is giving his all every play. Plus because he's on the field so much, it's almost impossible for him to be telling his coaches what's going on in the game to better make adjustments and it's almost impossible for the coaches to be able to communicate adjustments they see to him.

 

Oh and I also disagree that we aren't as powerful as we think we are!

All well thought out pieces. 4 should be the number maybe even 3. I respect Highlands 100%, but the truth is they don't schedule Louisville St. X and/Trinity for a reason and they know it. They are selective whom they schedule and rightfully so. The truth is though they could not play with the larger schools week in and week out and win the way they do now. They would be opposed to a super class. I believe their agenda now is to be recognized on the mythical national stage. The Bluebirds win over Cincy St. X gave them this confidence. I would only point out that this was their lone win over a GCL school in quite some time. The bottom line is Highlands is awesome for the size school they are, but not nearly as powerful as they would try to convince all of the rest of us that they are. They would perhaps win one of 5 vs. Louisville Trinity or Louisville St. X.

 

Just so I understand your point, can I ask you how you would assign teams to a "super class?" If it is by male enrollment, then Highlands wouldn't be anywhere near the top. If it is as a result of historic success, then why wouldn't you also put the likes of Ft. Campbell and Beechwood (to name only a couple) in the super class?

 

Is the purpose of a super class to segregate out the largest schools (theoretically those with the most athletes) or is it to just ensure that others don't have to compete with perenially strong programs? Or, is there some other system to allocate teams to this super class?

Just so I understand your point, can I ask you how you would assign teams to a "super class?" If it is by male enrollment, then Highlands wouldn't be anywhere near the top. If it is as a result of historic success, then why wouldn't you also put the likes of Ft. Campbell and Beechwood (to name only a couple) in the super class?

 

Is the purpose of a super class to segregate out the largest schools (theoretically those with the most athletes) or is it to just ensure that others don't have to compete with perenially strong programs? Or, is there some other system to allocate teams to this super class?

BG Bird-I am not for a super class. I am for 3 or 4 classes for the reasons you stated. Again I have total respect for Highlands, but do wish they played Louisville St. X or Trinity every couple of years.

Fair points History, although I'll disagree with the point that Highlands would be opposed to playing in the Super Class, IF they felt that they were going to consistently be able to truly two platoon in games and practices. While our win loss record hasn't been very good against some of the elite bigger schools over the years, if you look at the games you'll find in almost every case (with the loss to Lou X in 05 being the only exception I can recall), we were either winning or within a point or two at half. In the second half, our lack of depth really came back to hurt us. I truly believe that if we could have truly two platooned in those games with quality athletes (which is the position we were in last year and will be in this year and for several more years to follow), some of those losses would have been wins. How many, I don't and can't have a clue. No one can. But one shouldn't and can't discount the advantage of quality depth and being able to two platoon. Heck just look at the Ryle and JC games against Highlands last year. Both relatively close at half, with Highlands pulling away in the second half due, in my opinion, much better depth and two platooning. I don't care how talented an athlete is, if he's going both ways and playing against kids equally well conditioned but only playing one way, he's going to be at a severe disadvantage from a fatigue stand point if he is giving his all every play. Plus because he's on the field so much, it's almost impossible for him to be telling his coaches what's going on in the game to better make adjustments and it's almost impossible for the coaches to be able to communicate adjustments they see to him.

 

Oh and I also disagree that we aren't as powerful as we think we are!

 

You are correct LN and that is why I like 3 or 4 classes. Many teams are close at the half and then get worn down by the numbers. Again, and I know you don't take it this way, I am not downing Highlands in the least, as I love what they do, but am not from Ft. Thomas so haven't sipped from the Big Blue Cool Aid cup, but have been offered it many times.

You are correct LN and that is why I like 3 or 4 classes. Many teams are close at the half and then get worn down by the numbers. Again, and I know you don't take it this way, I am not downing Highlands in the least, as I love what they do, but am not from Ft. Thomas so haven't sipped from the Big Blue Cool Aid cup, but have been offered it many times.

 

Forgive me, but the bolded part of that post doesn't make sense to me, unless of course you think it's fair for schools with large enrollment advantages to wear down smaller schools in the same class and pull away in the second half to win (which is more likely to occur when you have 3 or 4 classes than when you have 6). That's not me on Blue Cool Aid; that's common sense talking.

BG Bird-I am not for a super class. I am for 3 or 4 classes for the reasons you stated. Again I have total respect for Highlands, but do wish they played Louisville St. X or Trinity every couple of years.

 

Thanks for clarifying. I have read in a few threads about the thinking behind the super class concept, and the ones that appear to be based on some arbitrary criteria are the most alarming. As for Highlands playing X or T more often, as LN pointed out, if Highlands can continue the two platoon every year, it may be more likely. I think it was '06 when Highlands played Elder, Louisville X and Columbus DeSales all in a row, and with the number of HHS players going both ways, it was a tough stretch.

Forgive me, but the bolded part of that post doesn't make sense to me, unless of course you think it's fair for schools with large enrollment advantages to wear down smaller schools in the same class and pull away in the second half to win (which is more likely to occur when you have 3 or 4 classes than when you have 6). That's not me on Blue Cool Aid; that's common sense talking.

 

LN I was responding to you saying Highlands was close until halftime with bigger schools. That makes perfect sense. We have all been down this road before, but I just think for the population of Kentucky there should certainly not be 6 classes of football. To use your logic then 10 classes would be fairer than 6, and 20 would be fairer than 10. There is no exact science, but I do think one can look at the high school population of other states and see how many classes and state champions they have in football, and then decide what is "fair". The answer won't be six as that is too many.

I understand that mentality; I really do. Some of the first round games aren't good for much other than getting the younger kids (and next year's starters) some playing time. Which I guess isn't that bad of a side-effect. But even if you are correct, how do you justify all the basketball, baseball, volleyball etc teams making the playoffs/tournaments regardless of their records (and associated first game blowouts) but football teams being treated differently under your line of thinking? Isn't the extra week of practice for kids returning of value? What somewhat befuddles me is when weak teams are getting blown out in the first game of the playoffs and the coaches of those teams play their seniors the entire game. I understand the sentiment of letting the seniors play their entire last game, but if a coach is trying to build a program, I can't understand why he doesn't, once the game is out of reach, immediately pull the seniors (perhaps to an ovation from their fans) and let next year's players get some playoff/game experience.

 

The difference is that in football 192 of the 220 schools are included in the playoffs. There are actually some better teams left out. In all other sports every team gets in. If you're going to let them all in, fine. If not, why not select the very best?

 

I understand the sceduling dilema that smaller schools have. However, 1-9 means you've lost more than won in your division besides losing all the others. I've proposed solutons to this scheduling in the past. Feel free to go back through the archives and look at them.

The difference is that in football 192 of the 220 schools are included in the playoffs. There are actually some better teams left out. In all other sports every team gets in. If you're going to let them all in, fine. If not, why not select the very best?

 

I understand the sceduling dilema that smaller schools have. However, 1-9 means you've lost more than won in your division besides losing all the others. I've proposed solutons to this scheduling in the past. Feel free to go back through the archives and look at them.

 

Heck, I'm fine with letting every one in the playoffs. It doesn't bother me in the least. Might be even more blow outs, but I don't mind. Hopefully I'll get to watch some of the younger players, next year's starters, get a little action. From watching my two sons as frosh and sophomores get in playoff games, they thought it was really cool. Let 'em play, I say. Let 'em all play. And I know that attitude can be difficult for those of us that are up in the years, because making the playoffs in football was in and of itself a goal and a big accomplishment back in the day. I don't necessarily seeing it in the "give everyone a trophy" light, because if every one makes the playoffs, then playing in the first game of the playoffs isn't a trophy. It's just the beginning of a second season.

Edited June 15, 201016 yr by leatherneck

LN I was responding to you saying Highlands was close until halftime with bigger schools. That makes perfect sense. We have all been down this road before, but I just think for the population of Kentucky there should certainly not be 6 classes of football. To use your logic then 10 classes would be fairer than 6, and 20 would be fairer than 10. There is no exact science, but I do think one can look at the high school population of other states and see how many classes and state champions they have in football, and then decide what is "fair". The answer won't be six as that is too many.

 

We have been down this road a time or ten, haven't we. Heck, we know every pothole in this road. I understand what your saying and I can't say it's without logic. Frankly any number of classes chosen will always be wrong with someone and my point, taken to extreme, is indeed ridiculous. I don't know however, if we were to look at other states we should look at the number of schools in each class or whether we should look at the percentage of size disparity in each class (ie, the largest team in the class has 150% of the number of males in the smallest school in the class). If size of the male enrollment in a school has an effect on the outcome of football games generally, it would seem we should focus on the percentage of size disparity, as opposed to the number of schools in each class. But hey, I've been wrong before (if you asked Henry I've probably been wrong 100 times already today), and may be wrong on this issue also.

3 Classes. No moving up. As far as enrollment, I have a question. Out of the 6 state champions each season since we have gone to 6 classes, how many of those are schools with the largest male enrollment is their respective class? I'm going to guess the 6A champions are at the top in their class, and I know the 5A champions are at the bottom in 5A when it comes to male enrollment, after that I really don't know.

I think the whole super class thing is only a way to get rid of St X and Trinity, JMO. Tennessee has private school classes that compete in two separate division, but there are clearly not enough private schools in Kentucky to support that or at least the size difference is too wide to be fair.

3 Classes. No moving up. As far as enrollment, I have a question. Out of the 6 state champions each season since we have gone to 6 classes, how many of those are schools with the largest male enrollment is their respective class? I'm going to guess the 6A champions are at the top in their class, and I know the 5A champions are at the bottom in 5A when it comes to male enrollment, after that I really don't know.

 

I don't believe that enrollment is as important as how many of those male enrollees actually play the sport. Several small schools with good programs and historic success (Mayfield, Fort Cambpell, Danville, Corbin, Beechwood, etc...) repeatedly beat middle of the pack larger schools in 3A and above. Certainly enrollment plays a part, if you take St X vs LCA I would be willing to bet St X wins by a bunch, but they are both schools that get the most from what they have. I believe a large number of schools don't get the most of what they have enrollment and talent wise. Many of the more successful programs do. Add coaching, conditioning, youth programs, fan and administration support to the mix and you end up with programs like Highlands, Fort Campbell, Boyle Co, etc....