Yes, because Fern Creek is further east than Trinity. Second, you are completely disregarding Tackett's comment about "common schools". Add that into the mix and it is pretty obvious how the district was put together.

Oh, no, I get the common schools comment. And it's plenty clear how the district was put together. In fact, I'd call the common schools comment the primary consideration.

(Let me preface this by saying that I don't care if X and T meet up in round 1 of playoffs.)

 

I'm sorry, but I simply don't buy the "further east" argument. Do no other cardinal directions matter? If this was a decision based on east-west, then why are PRP, Butler, Manual and (it looks to be by a hair) St. X - those furthest west - not a district? That would leave Male, Southern, Seneca and Trinity as the "middle" of Louisville schools.

 

"Common schools"? I am interested in that definition and in knowing where else this was applied.

 

That's a fair question. I think that because T and X have been able to end up on the opposite sides of the brackets in the past and some people have complained (I think fairly) about it, the KHSAA decided to be very detailed as to what 3 Jeff Co. teams joined Oldham. Again, that's my guess. I'm not Tackett and I'm not on the ad hoc committee so I don't know. Once that decision was made, the remaining 8 teams were handled differently and the "common schools" criteria implemented. I have no idea what is meant by common schools either. I don't know if it's valid or if it's some subterfuge to penalize X or T. I do know that Tackett is a very honorable person and that the person in charge of the ad hoc committee is also. So I'm going to give Tackett and the ad hoc committee the benefit of any doubt. By the way, I'm not here to support the decision of putting T, X, Male and Manual together in one district. Frankly, I could not possibly care less where T is placed in the two west bracket districts. But I feel very strongly that when it came time to decide what three Jeff Co. teams should join Oldham in a district that would be in the east bracket, the KHSAA had to take the three most eastern Jeff Co. teams. I'd be mad as heck if the KHSAA ignored such just to make the 6A state championship game a better one to watch or to increase their revenues. That would go against every thing I think high school athletics and participation in high school athletics is supposed to be about.

 

Unless there are some new developments or info provided, I'm done with the debate. I understand both arguments very clearly. I'm not convincing folks on the other side I'm right, and they aren't convincing me they are right. So it's time to feel the comfort one feels when he stops beating his head against the wall.

That's a fair question. I think that because T and X have been able to end up on the opposite sides of the brackets in the past and some people have complained (I think fairly) about it, the KHSAA decided to be very detailed as to what 3 Jeff Co. teams joined Oldham. Again, that's my guess. I'm not Tackett and I'm not on the ad hoc committee so I don't know. Once that decision was made, the remaining 8 teams were handled differently and the "common schools" criteria implemented. I have no idea what is meant by common schools either. I don't know if it's valid or if it's some subterfuge to penalize X or T. I do know that Tackett is a very honorable person and that the person in charge of the ad hoc committee is also. So I'm going to give Tackett and the ad hoc committee the benefit of any doubt. By the way, I'm not here to support the decision of putting T, X, Male and Manual together in one district. Frankly, I could not possibly care less where T is placed in the two west bracket districts. But I feel very strongly that when it came time to decide what three Jeff Co. teams should join Oldham in a district that would be in the east bracket, the KHSAA had to take the three most eastern Jeff Co. teams. I'd be mad as heck if the KHSAA ignored such just to make the 6A state championship game a better one to watch or to increase their revenues. That would go against every thing I think high school athletics and participation in high school athletics is supposed to be about.

So are you saying that Tackett was dishonest about the process?

 

I don't see how you can keep failing to reconcile what Tackett said and what you claim he considered, without saying that he was less than forthcoming with the CJ.

That's a fair question. I think that because T and X have been able to end up on the opposite sides of the brackets in the past and some people have complained (I think fairly) about it, the KHSAA decided to be very detailed as to what 3 Jeff Co. teams joined Oldham. Again, that's my guess. I'm not Tackett and I'm not on the ad hoc committee so I don't know. Once that decision was made, the remaining 8 teams were handled differently and the "common schools" criteria implemented. I have no idea what is meant by common schools either. I don't know if it's valid or if it's some subterfuge to penalize X or T. I do know that Tackett is a very honorable person and that the person in charge of the ad hoc committee is also. So I'm going to give Tackett and the ad hoc committee the benefit of any doubt. By the way, I'm not here to support the decision of putting T, X, Male and Manual together in one district. Frankly, I could not possibly care less where T is placed in the two west bracket districts. But I feel very strongly that when it came time to decide what three Jeff Co. teams should join Oldham in a district that would be in the east bracket, the KHSAA had to take the three most eastern Jeff Co. teams. I'd be mad as heck if the KHSAA ignored such just to make the 6A state championship game a better one to watch or to increase their revenues. That would go against every thing I think high school athletics and participation in high school athletics is supposed to be about.

 

I can understand the disdain for having the perpetual X/T championship game. It just seems disingenuous to create a method and use it just on one side of Louisville, simply to keep X and T together. Some standard needs to be used consistently in determining these things or every decision is open to debate. I thought geography was that measuring stick, but I guess that it isn't.

I'm guessing Dunbar will be moved when the new McCracken school opens in a year or two. Muhlenberg County would likely move into District 2.

 

Who else would you now put into District 2 to even out the districts. Based on geography of course.

 

Would it not have at least made as much sense to shift a Louisville school in with District 2, put Dunbar back with Louisville, and ship a NKY school down with two Louisville schools and Oldham County?

So are you saying that Tackett was dishonest about the process?

 

I don't see how you can keep failing to reconcile what Tackett said and what you claim he considered, without saying that he was less than forthcoming with the CJ.

 

Okay one last post. I'm not saying any thing about Tackett being dishonest. Please don't twist my words. I'm saying T belongs in the west because the other three teams with Oldham are to the east of T. Again, it's that blooming simple. I don't know Tackett's logic and I'm smart enough, old enough and wise enough to not take every thing printed in the newspaper as the gospel truth or being entirely accurate or being the whole story. In my opinion, this thread is not about whether Tackett was dishonest, less than forthcoming or however you want to spin your dissatisfaction that T is in the West. Look there hasn't been a stronger public school advocate of T and the rest of the private schools on this site and in other places than me. I'm not a Highlands person that gives a hoot in hades about the silly "who has the most championships" competition (which I find childish on both sides). I'm not a Highlands person that believes Highlands could beat T more often than once or twice out of ten. I have nothing but profound respect for T and have stated such over and over again. But to place T in an eastern district just to make it easier for some west bracket team to make it to state (be that X, Manual or whomever) or to attempt to set up a X vs T championship just to appeal to the fans or bring in more money for the KHSAA would be flat out wrong to me. You can disagree with that all you want. I really don't care.

I can understand the disdain for having the perpetual X/T championship game. It just seems disingenuous to create a method and use it just on one side of Louisville, simply to keep X and T together. Some standard needs to be used consistently in determining these things or every decision is open to debate. I thought geography was that measuring stick, but I guess that it isn't.

 

This is my criticism of it. You basically apply one school of thought to one decision (East/West - therefore Trinity should not be in District 5), and then abandon it for the next decision (common schools - therefore Trinity should be with other private/magnet schools).

 

Also, the East/West idea is applied to one situation only, the situation of who should be in District 5. It is not applied to schools like Nelson County and Paul Laurence Dunbar who are clearly further east. But I certainly don't criticize the placement of Nelson County, because it made much more sense to place it with schools closer to it.

I'm saying T belongs in the west because the other three teams with Oldham are to the east of T. Again, it's that blooming simple.

 

I would so totally buy this if there was a "west" district and a "middle" district. But, there isn't. Sooooooooo.........next, please.

As this is the thread on Tackett's statements to the CJ, I guess I'll just keep commenting on those. Your point about whether Trinity in the grans scheme of things belongs in the East or West sectionals is conjecture. The districts should be built without consideration for what the finals look like, and in that case Trinity belongs with Ballard, Eastern and Oldham County.

 

Again, just so it doesn't get lost:

 

In regard to the 12 Jefferson County-area schools in 6-A, Tackett said he started drawing the districts with Oldham County and decided Ballard and Eastern were the closest schools. From there, filling out the district was a choice between Fern Creek and Seneca, Tackett said.

 

"We wanted them to be in with the most common schools, and that took Trinity out of the picture," Tackett said. "Once we got done with that one, we split the other two (districts)."

 

They took the first two closest schools to Oldham County, and then changed the criteria. It was clearly done with an eye towards creating the X-T-M-H super district. I don't think that's appropriate.

This is my criticism of it. You basically apply one school of thought to one decision (East/West - therefore Trinity should not be in District 5), and then abandon it for the next decision (common schools - therefore Trinity should be with other private/magnet schools).

 

Also, the East/West idea is applied to one situation only, the situation of who should be in District 5. It is not applied to schools like Nelson County and Paul Laurence Dunbar who are clearly further east. But I certainly don't criticize the placement of Nelson County, because it made much more sense to place it with schools closer to it.

:thumb:

This is my criticism of it. You basically apply one school of thought to one decision (East/West - therefore Trinity should not be in District 5), and then abandon it for the next decision (common schools - therefore Trinity should be with other private/magnet schools).

 

Also, the East/West idea is applied to one situation only, the situation of who should be in District 5. It is not applied to schools like Nelson County and Paul Laurence Dunbar who are clearly further east. But I certainly don't criticize the placement of Nelson County, because it made much more sense to place it with schools closer to it.

 

I think the east/west idea was more important in this particular district because it is actually the statewide dividing line for east and west. Therefore, it was more important that the eastern most schools go with Oldham County because they would also be in the east half of the state. Once that was decided, the east/west issue was not nearly as important. Bottom line, I think it is all very logical. Here is a question for those so vehemently in favor of Trinity being in the east - why is that so important to you? I can see T and X fans wanting the state championship game to line up with those two. For those like myself who are not T or X fans, why is it so important that Trinity be in the east?

I don't care if Trinity is in the east or the west. But I don't like that the KHSAA cares, and I don't like the way they got there.

 

Also, VoR, that isn't how they drew up the district. They even considered putting Seneca with Oldham County.

I don't care if Trinity is in the east or the west. But I don't like that the KHSAA cares, and I don't like the way they got there.

 

Also, VoR, that isn't how they drew up the district. They even considered putting Seneca with Oldham County.

 

Now that is the best point in favor of your argument against how the KHSAA drew up the district. That tells us that the "common schools" goal took precedence over pure geography.

 

So that leads to a general theoretical question- knowing your team will get into the playoffs no matter what, do you want to be in a difficult district or do you want to be in an easy district?

 

As a Beechwood fan, I wish our district was more difficult. That is why Beechwood plays the killer non district schedule. Playing the best is how you get your team better for the playoffs. I think Trinity fans should be happy to be in the "downtown" district.

I don't care if Trinity is in the east or the west. But I don't like that the KHSAA cares, and I don't like the way they got there.

 

Also, VoR, that isn't how they drew up the district. They even considered putting Seneca with Oldham County.

Well said.

 

Let's face it ... the KHSAA is very conscious of the Trinity-St. Xavier dominance. Why else does 6A have a rotation system with districts for the playoffs, something that none of the other five classes employs?

Now that is the best point in favor of your argument against how the KHSAA drew up the district. That tells us that the "common schools" goal took precedence over pure geography.

 

So that leads to a general theoretical question- knowing your team will get into the playoffs no matter what, do you want to be in a difficult district or do you want to be in an easy district?

 

As a Beechwood fan, I wish our district was more difficult. That is why Beechwood plays the killer non district schedule. Playing the best is how you get your team better for the playoffs. I think Trinity fans should be happy to be in the "downtown" district.

 

02Ram is a Manual fan. And to be honest, even if he didn't argue a logical point, I can see why Manual would feel hosed in a district that not only didn't take any difficulty away, but added to it immensely. In the proposed district, I would say T & X will be 1, 2 most years, with Male 3 and Manual 4. I think it will be easier for Male to crack the top 2 than for Manual.