rockmom Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 You keep saying this. I'm not getting it. How was moving to 6 classes going to end the dominance of X and T? A very good question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegrasscard Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 (edited) A. In my uninformed opinion, the move to 6 classes wasn't done to benefit X and T. Quite the opposite - it was done to give several more schools the opportunity to win a state championship without ever running into X or T. B. I agree 100% with your final thought. Let's dance with the one what brung us for a while. I will support both of these! X and T are X and T. Before that they were X and F (Flaget). When you have 1,400 boys and field 100+ pure freshman each year you are in a class by yourself. But when you beat these powers, either in the regular season or in the playoffs, it is something very special. My (public) school did it once in the 1970s. I still have the newspaper clippings. It was a regular season game but we felt like we had won state after that for a week. Getting stable district, regional and class rivalries that are big games through out the year should be a strong goal in this effort. The thread on rivalries demonstrated this very well. Being district and regional champs used to have some meaning and pride. Some schools still proudly list district and region championships at their stadiums. This may seem trite to the Highlands, Boyles, Danvilles, Xs, Ts, etc of the state. But District and Region championships should be something to be proud of and should be more meaningful. If they were then the need for 6 or more 'State Championship' level classes would be a lot less. Get to where these is less need for a 5 week, drawn out 'State Championship' playoff. There should be a 'District Championship' game - top 2 teams in each district play for that title. There should only be 2 'regions' for each class that should have some geographic designation - East/West, North,South, Metro/Statewide, etc. There should be a champion of each region. Then those 'Regional Champions' meet at the 'State Championship' game. Then you have meaningful and celebrated 'champions' at 3 different levels. The classic example of this was the old 4A championship in the 70s and early 80s. The Jefferson County Champion and Statewide Champion (they did use the word Champion for the winners) would meet for the 4A Kentucky State Championship. This was a great formula. It only got changed when some outside of Jefferson County did not like it that Jefferson County (Louisville) was 'guaranteed' a finals spot. That issue ruined a great format. The old format forced X and T to play each other in a playoff game. Some may who believe in 'state or nothing' may view this as a vertical watering down of the championships but the alternative is the watering down horizontally as was done with the 6 classes. It has not really worked. The comments about 4A being stronger than 5A show that the 6 class system has failed. 4 could still work. 5 at the very most would be correct. Given the format changes/reversals above. Edited September 9, 2010 by Bluegrasscard fix grammer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bugatti Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 You keep saying this. I'm not getting it. How was moving to 6 classes going to end the dominance of X and T? It has not ended their domination. But it took away a multitude of teams that are no longer in their class that have to feel their wrath. 37 teams in 6A now. 54 teams were in 4A the last year of its existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malachicrunch Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 A very good question. Which no one seems to be able to answer:thumb: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malachicrunch Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 It has not ended their domination. But it took away a multitude of teams that are no longer in their class that have to feel their wrath. 37 teams in 6A now. 54 teams were in 4A the last year of its existence. Ok. Then how did it benefit the 17 or so that now do not have to face T and X? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportsfan08 Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 Georgia has a 5 class system with a lot more teams than KY does. Districts, which they call regions, have anywhere from 6 to 10 teams. It's a big honor to make the playoffs consistently. If KY went to a 5 class system this would probably be the case. They could also keep a cap on the number of teams in 1A so maybe there would only be 5 or 6 teams in each district. Or just leave class A at 32 teams and add teams to the other 4 classes. Anyway, you don't hear about schools complaining that they can't beat Camden or Loundes in GA. They know their situations and try to give them there best shot when they get the chance. If schools would stop splitting all the time and realize that with more students you can offer more electives and have an all around better school, then you would see schools with the size to consistently compete with an X and T. But that's a different subject all in to itself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bugatti Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 Ok. Then how did it benefit the 17 or so that now do not have to face T and X? I am not sure how to really answer that because I do not have the breakdown of every district and classes teams went to after the split to 6 classes. But we do know if and when they lost, they had a a lot better chance of winning against Team ____ rather than Team X or T. You guys are looking at the question incorrectly. The KHSAA accepted the fact Trinity and St. X are dominate. They did not try to eliminate their domination. They attempted to limit the amount of teams they could dominate... which they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegrasscard Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 You keep saying this. I'm not getting it. How was moving to 6 classes going to end the dominance of X and T? See my post above. One possible solution - return to a Region format that forced these 2 into playoff game prior to the final. That is how it used to be. In the final game some school is still going to have beat one of these two powers (assuming the win their region) but at least the finals will not be the X and T show every year. BTW. After going to 6 classes all but one of the classes repeated in the second year. 1A, 2A, 3A, 5A and 6A were all back to back in 2007 and 2008. And the 2A and 5A 2009 champions were threepeats (Highlands, Fort Campbell). So it some ways the 6 class system merely created versions of X and T at the lower levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malachicrunch Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 I am not sure how to really answer that because I do not have the breakdown of every district and classes teams went to after the split to 6 classes. But we do know if and when they lost, they had a a lot better chance of winning against Team ____ rather than Team X or T. You guys are looking at the question incorrectly. The KHSAA accepted the fact Trinity and St. X are dominate. They did not try to eliminate their domination. They attempted to limit the amount of teams they could dominate... which they have. OK. So they got dominated by someone else. I fail to see the benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportsfan08 Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 Why would the KHSAA put X and T on the same side? Then those two split the gate for the game instead of the KHSAA getting it's hands in the pot if they play in the finals. An X and T championship is the second biggest game of the year behind their regular season matchup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bugatti Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 OK. So they got dominated by someone else. I fail to see the benefit. A loss is a loss, sure. I do not think judging success strictly by winning the title is fair either. But you are kidding yourself if you do not think some teams have a better shot now not being in their class. Maybe a school is now able to advance a round or two further because they are in a different region? I do not have the breakdown of which teams went where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bugatti Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 Why would the KHSAA put X and T on the same side? Then those two split the gate for the game instead of the KHSAA getting it's hands in the pot if they play in the finals. An X and T championship is the second biggest game of the year behind their regular season matchup. They did that a couple years ago and we were left with Ryle being manhandled in the finals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malachicrunch Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 See my post above. One possible solution - return to a Region format that forced these 2 into playoff game prior to the final. That is how it used to be. In the final game some school is still going to have beat one of these two powers (assuming the win their region) but at least the finals will not be the X and T show every year. BTW. After going to 6 classes all but one of the classes repeated in the second year. 1A, 2A, 3A, 5A and 6A were all back to back in 2007 and 2008. And the 2A and 5A 2009 champions were threepeats (Highlands, Fort Campbell). So it some ways the 6 class system merely created versions of X and T at the lower levels. I agree. Somehow I don't think that was the intention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegrasscard Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 Why would the KHSAA put X and T on the same side? Then those two split the gate for the game instead of the KHSAA getting it's hands in the pot if they play in the finals. An X and T championship is the second biggest game of the year behind their regular season matchup. They used to be on the same side when there was a Jefferson County Championship. I don't think KHSAA got that gate. Maybe they did. But it the entire structure of HS football in this state is resting on KHSAA making a few more bucks at one game then we have some serious priority problems. If its money driving the issue then maybe the KHSAA should host the 'Regional finals'. Again, we need different levels of rivalries and championships and puts some meat into local games prior to the state final game. The current post season is nothing but an NFL like playoff. At the end of the day there are 3 to 6 'Champions' and 190 'losers'. Since the playoffs are just that - playoffs, schools have no reason to celebrate or track their accomplishments below the state level. And we wonder why no one feels good about this format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHO'S NEXT? Posted September 9, 2010 Share Posted September 9, 2010 I am not sure how to really answer that because I do not have the breakdown of every district and classes teams went to after the split to 6 classes. But we do know if and when they lost, they had a a lot better chance of winning against Team ____ rather than Team X or T. You guys are looking at the question incorrectly. The KHSAA accepted the fact Trinity and St. X are dominate. They did not try to eliminate their domination. They attempted to limit the amount of teams they could dominate... which they have. BINGO! We have a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts