Does that make Julian Tackett Jeff Gillooly?

All of these distances came from Goole Maps.

Working it out, the current districts are 20% more efficient. The proposed districts give the system 375 miles total round trips, while the current setup that I have illustrated is 311 miles.

 

And, yes, I know, teams out in the county sometimes go roughly that far one way for a district opponent. But we're talking about an area with 12 teams in the class. There shouldn't be any drives over 20 miles one way, even when you include Oldham County.

 

In fact, the system that I have demonstrated to be superior has only 2 trips greater than 10 miles, outside of trips to Oldham County, and none greater than 12.

 

In the proposed districts we find 6 such trips, with 3 greater than 12 miles.

 

Again, distance isn't the point. The point is that the current districts are not only more efficient--they are currently in place! Why would they be changed to a less efficient system?

As a side note, can anyone else create three districts of these 12 teams that result in fewer round trip miles than the current setup?

Working it out, the current districts are 20% more efficient. The proposed districts give the system 375 miles total round trips, while the current setup that I have illustrated is 311 miles.

 

And, yes, I know, teams out in the county sometimes go roughly that far one way for a district opponent. But we're talking about an area with 12 teams in the class. There shouldn't be any drives over 20 miles one way, even when you include Oldham County.

 

In fact, the system that I have demonstrated to be superior has only 2 trips greater than 10 miles, outside of trips to Oldham County, and none greater than 12.

 

In the proposed districts we find 6 such trips, with 3 greater than 12 miles.

 

Again, distance isn't the point. The point is that the current districts are not only more efficient--they are currently in place! Why would they be changed to a less efficient system?

 

You keep saying it isn't about distance yet that is what you continue to use as the base of your argument. I don't think anyone on here disagrees that the current system in place is more efficient. The problem is no one really cares because in the end it's the difference of 64 miles split between 12 schools.

 

Nothing is changing with the current system so maybe they changed it to try and spark other JCPS programs to improve. I know if I am Fern Creek and I have to play Trinity every year for a district title finally gets to the point of enough is enough. You can only take failure so many times before it starts to wear on you and effect you program in a negative way. It's easy to say work harder and get better but does anyone really think that progams like Southern are on a level playing field with T and X? If you do your lieing to yourself. Maybe this new system gives teams like Southern the opportunity to taste a little success and build on it. I am in no way in favor of everyone getting a trophy sometimes enough is enough and change is needed.

You keep saying it isn't about distance yet that is what you continue to use as the base of your argument. I don't think anyone on here disagrees that the current system in place is more efficient. The problem is no one really cares because in the end it's the difference of 64 miles split between 12 schools.

 

Nothing is changing with the current system so maybe they changed it to try and spark other JCPS programs to improve. I know if I am Fern Creek and I have to play Trinity every year for a district title finally gets to the point of enough is enough. You can only take failure so many times before it starts to wear on you and effect you program in a negative way. It's easy to say work harder and get better but does anyone really think that progams like Southern are on a level playing field with T and X? If you do your lieing to yourself. Maybe this new system gives teams like Southern the opportunity to taste a little success and build on it. I am in no way in favor of everyone getting a trophy sometimes enough is enough and change is needed.

Not that it matters, but Fern Creek and Southern are both currently in districts where they don't play T and X. Here's the link to the district standings.

 

But, like I said it doesn't matter. The whole point of 6 alignments is to try and level the playing field as much as possible. Southern can't keep up with Manual, Male, Ballard or Eastern either, but it shouldn't enter into the consideration of the district lines. Geography is all that should matter.

Not that it matters, but Fern Creek and Southern are both currently in districts where they don't play T and X. Here's the link to the district standings.

 

But, like I said it doesn't matter. The whole point of 6 alignments is to try and level the playing field as much as possible. Southern can't keep up with Manual, Male, Ballard or Eastern either, but it shouldn't enter into the consideration of the district lines. Geography is all that should matter.

 

Sorry but I disagree. Geography should be factored in but it shouldn't be the only factor. If geography is the only thing that should matter then why aren't T and X in the same district? X is the third closest school to Trinity.

 

Southern may not be able to keep up with Manual, Male, or Ballard but they have a better chance of beating those guys then they do T and X.

Sorry but I disagree. Geography should be factored in but it shouldn't be the only factor. If geography is the only thing that should matter then why aren't T and X in the same district? X is the third closest school to Trinity.

 

Southern may not be able to keep up with Manual, Male, or Ballard but they have a better chance of beating those guys then they do T and X.

Again, you're cherry picking. Geography has to matter overall, not just between X and T. St. X might be the third closest school to Trinity, but can you create a three district system that has them together that doesn't have district pairings way out of whack like Fern Creek with Ballard and Oldham County. If you can, please show it.

Again, I think geography is overrated when it comes to urban areas. You're talking about the difference in 5-10 miles between opponents. I would guess that 80% of the state has to travel more than 15 miles to their nearest district opponent and in urban areas, most of their opponents are closer than 15 miles.

And Southern does not have a demonstrably better chance against Manual and Male than X and T:

 

Southern '09:

 

Lost to Male 42-0

Lost to Trinity 55-0

 

Southern '08:

Lost to Male 43-18

 

Southern '07:

Lost to Male 55-6

 

Southern '06

Lost to Trinity 49-7

Lost to Trinity 56-7

Again, I think geography is overrated when it comes to urban areas. You're talking about the difference in 5-10 miles between opponents. I would guess that 80% of the state has to travel more than 15 miles to their nearest district opponent and in urban areas, most of their opponents are closer than 15 miles.

Again, it isn't the distance. It's the fact that the districts were created with the X-T pairing in mind. That's wrong.

Again, it isn't the distance. It's the fact that the districts were created with the X-T pairing in mind. That's wrong.

I agree. The agenda is very clear.

Working it out, the current districts are 20% more efficient. The proposed districts give the system 375 miles total round trips, while the current setup that I have illustrated is 311 miles.

 

And, yes, I know, teams out in the county sometimes go roughly that far one way for a district opponent. But we're talking about an area with 12 teams in the class. There shouldn't be any drives over 20 miles one way, even when you include Oldham County.

 

In fact, the system that I have demonstrated to be superior has only 2 trips greater than 10 miles, outside of trips to Oldham County, and none greater than 12.

 

In the proposed districts we find 6 such trips, with 3 greater than 12 miles.

 

Again, distance isn't the point. The point is that the current districts are not only more efficient--they are currently in place! Why would they be changed to a less efficient system?

 

I guess if one is upset with the proposed district the answer would be either: A) the KHSAA ad hoc football alignment committee headed by a private school representative, that also received input from another private school representative, is out to get X and T and prevent them from ever playing in a state championship game again; or B) the KHSAA must hate Manual and Male.

 

As X's AD pointed out in the CJ article, many folks have never agreed with putting X in one bracket and T in the other. I mean seriously, if you are geniunely trying to break the districts down so that the 16 most eastern schools will end up in districts placed in the east bracket and you are trying to put the 16 most western schools in districts placed in the west bracket, then you put Ballard, Eastern and Fern Creek with Oldham Co. That's what the KHSAA did. To leap frog T over one of the more easternly located teams just to make it possible to have X and T meet in the state game would constitute the very gerrymandering that people are accusing the KHSAA of doing with its proposed alignment. To set up the districts to make it possible for have X and T meet in the state game would be proof to some that the KHSAA is only interested in the almighty dollar as critics frequently claim. That would be wrong in my opinion.

 

If you believe that T should be placed in a western bracket district and not be concerned about trying to make sure X and T can meet in the state game, you then look at the remaining 8 6A schools in Jeff Co. You could group those schools a couple of different ways. You could continue to go east west or north south or try to cluster "common" schools together (the latter of which is what Tackett said he and the committee did). Perhaps Tackett and the committee are wrong in using the "common" school theory. But any way you cut it, if you try to keep the 3 most eastern 6A Jeff Co schools in the district that will be placed in the east bracket, X and T are going to be located in districts that end up in the west bracket and will have to play one another prior to the state game. The same holds true with Male and Manual. When they play another in the playoffs is really not important to the coaches or administrators at X and T from what I'm told and my guess is that the folks at Male and Manual would feel the same.

 

The proposed districts may not be in the financial best interest of the KHSAA. I'll give folks that, although the next time people claim the KHSAA is only interested in the almighty dollar, I hope they remember this decision before they make that claim. The proposed districts may appease some of the public school folks that had been clamoring for the split (which is not in X's or T's best interest to see happen). I'll give folks that too. Unless we want to again experience all the turmoil, bad feelings and "legislative interest" that we experienced a couple of years ago, I'm not sure its wrong to be aware of those issues. I wouldn't want to take extreme actions to avoid those issues, but in this case, I don't think the KHSAA has taken extreme actions. T and X are very close to one another. It's not like they are 50, 75 or 100 miles apart and placing them in the same district would cause extreme travel time and expense.

 

I appreciate and respect folks differing opinions and differing views on this issue; I hope they can appreciate and respect mine.

 

 

One can look at tough districts differently. One can say it stinks that arguably 4 of the best 6A schools are in one district. However I look at it differently. I actually wish Highlands district was tougher than it has been the last several years. I long for the days when CovCath was a real challenge. It didn't bother me when Highlands was probably the second best team in its class but because they'd lost to CovCath they weren't going to play in the state game. We needed to beat them when we played them and we didn't. I wouldn't have felt any better losing to them in the state game than I felt losing to them earlier in the playoffs. Heck, it may have been worse. Blow out district games are not only boring and bring poor gates, I don't think that it pushes the better team to get even better. All Dale's crazy talk last year about wanting to win a national championship in my opinion was caused by his assessment that Highlands was going to be playing in a very weak district and wouldn't be challenged much in the playoffs. In other words, he came up with some additional motivation to keep the kids laser focused during the off season work outs, the summer practices and throughout the regular season and playoffs. Putting X, T, Male and Manual in one district may have been the best thing the KHSAA could have done for the head coaches at those four schools, not to mention for the ADs given the huge gates and revenues those four schools will enjoy. They've always been great games, but because they are now district games they will mean even more, and I think the gates will be even bigger (as hard as that may seem possible for the X vs T game). I think it will cause all four teams in that district to get better. Those that don't will be left behind.

Edited October 5, 201015 yr by rockmom
fixed quote

That's not what Tackett claims they did, however. Tackett claims they looked at which schools were closest to Oldham County, with the exception of Trinity, and leaves that exception to the nebulous claim that Oldham County had more "in common" with Fern Creek or Seneca.

 

Is Tackett lying?

And if I were going to venture a question of motive, it's that the KHSAA, like most of the state, doesn't really care for Louisville as a whole that much. That neatly combines theory A with theory B, and anyone from inside the Jefferson County line would nod their head.

 

But we don't need to get into all that. Tackett himself said that they placed Oldham County with the closest schools, but don't look behind the curtain at Trinity, they're too different from Oldham County.

 

Tackett's own statements show that there was more than geography considered. That, to me, is the crux of what makes these districts objectionable.

Would we be in agreement that, geographically speaking, the best alignment would be this?

 

District 3 ... Butler, Pleasure Ridge Park, Manual, Southern

District 4 ... St. Xavier, Male, Fern Creek, Seneca

District 5 ... Trinity, Eastern, Ballard, Oldham County

 

Or is the best move to switch Southern and Male in the above alignment?