scooterbob

It is good to see that some are noticing Malloy. His contributions can be measured in far more than points scored. He is a tough eighth grader who is not intimidated by anyone. I think he played 31 of the 32 minutes. He does need to shoot more. He had a fine "teacher" in Pat McGuire.

It was such a thing of beauty that it would have been cruel for anyone to blow a whistle. It was probably offset somewhat by several bulldozer clearouts.

You are quite possibly correct. In that case, you continue to draw. Remember, I am looking solely at what is best for Rose Hill. Others can and do take care of themselves. Rose Hill had it in its power to get either the limited seed or the draw. Either is better for it than is the "eternal" seed.

Well, Frances, it is, most likely, now a non-issue. However, at the district meeting, it could have well been the main issue. Rose Hill chose not to make it an issue. If you will read recent posts you will find that various and sundry questions have been forthcoming concerning how this would work and whether or not it is "legal". Most recent posts on the subject have been concerning those issues. Rose Hill's actions have probably made it, as well as the draw, moot points until the makeup of the district changes. That, in my opinion, was a mistake on the part of Rose Hill. For the relatively short term, it should work well for them. However, over the long run, it will not. Of course, if the near future is as bright for them as some observers seem to think, both the seed and the draw will be of no measurable consequence. The talent will not end with the graduation of Euton and Jackson. The undefeated seventh grade team just won the KBA state tournament which included 39 schools from around the state. This group has easily handled most every other local seventh grade team and, for that matter, almost all local eighth grade teams. I understand that the sixth grade team and the fifth grade team are at or near the top of the area. I also understand that, even though some local systems have feeders into the next level, that should make little difference. Therefore, I would say the next six or seven years are "promising". Thereafter, who knows? I was concerned about the "thereafter" which, as I said, is possibly a little ridiculous on my part.

What you are missing is that the teams agree as part of the original limited seed arrangement that, if three votes cannot be garnered at the next applicable meeting (in my example it would be four years), the district automatically goes back to a draw. They can agree to such an arrangement if they so choose. If this proposal were presented by Rose Hill or Fairview, either Ashland and/or Boyd County would have to go along with it to get their seed, though limited, or they lose out and the existing draw arrangement remains in effect. The point is that, as long as they act responsibily, I believe the schools in a district can make pretty much whatever arrangement they want. You are correct that Rose Hill should prosper from a seed for the next six or seven years. I was looking at the longer range which, I admit,is probably "stretching" the relevance of the issue.

Fortunately, the little schools have the Class A.

Ashland has played 24 games and Elliott County has played 21 games. Ashland is averaging 66.75 ppg and Elliott County 76.33 ppg. Ashland gives up 61.38 ppg and Elliott County 59.0 ppg. Nothing earth shaking but interesting.

All state selections and Mr. Basketball are all subjective. Although it would be opinion, it would certainly be educated opinion. there would be some difficult choices but it isn't too hard to "sort out" most of the contenders from the pretenders.

I'll nominate Lindsey Adkins of Rose Hill. Her willingness to sacrifice her own best interests for the benefit of the team, her quiet but effective leadership, and her consistently positive attitude are both noteworthy and remarkable.

Ranking for the state tournament sounds good to me. As they say, a rose by any other name is just as sweet.

Some support Mayo and some don't. We should all be up front as to our own personal position and just leave it at that. As has been stated, no minds will be changed.

Although this may be getting a little too deep, a lease is a contract and an agreement among subject schools is a contract. We will not agree on this issue. However, I feel rather certain that the KHSAA has no documented provision which would prohibit what I suggested. I would believe that, as with any other reasonable agreement (ie: contract) reached by the subject schools, the KHSAA would not interfere. Why should it?

Well, then, all of you seed supporters, why don't we just be consistent and seed the state tournament? If your reasoning applies to the district, surely it should apply to the big event. Why should we have tough draws for the 6th, 7th, 10th, and 11th regions and have the 15th play the 16th?

I don't recall ever posting whether I was a Christian or not. It is of no relevance in this discussion. However, your post is a good example of your continuing lack of facts. Then, again, you are just following the lead of some others who, when their flawed reasoning (or lack thereof) is exposed, turn in desperation to the Christian angle.

Let's try one more time: 1. At least three teams vote to seed for, let's say, four years after which it is clearly understood that the issue will come up for reconsideration. 2. As part of the item being voted on above, it is clearly understood that, if the issue fails to get at least three votes at the meeting four years later, the format goes back to a draw. 3. Let's use an easy example. You sign a lease for a four year period. After four years, you decide again whether to continue the lease or move out. Continue the lease means continue seeding. Moving out represents going back to a draw. 4. The KHSAA rule that you cited does not address seeding for a definite period of time one way or the other. Certainly, it is not prohibited by that rule. Therefore, if three of the teams wanted to do this, it could be done. 5. Ashland and Boyd County will always vote to seed. However, to make any change from the status quo (draw), it took three votes. Therefore, it was my position that Rose Hill should have proposed a seed for a definite time (as explained above) rather than forever. 6. Whether or not Ashland (Boyd County from my experience at these meetings merely echoes Ashland) would have "bought into" the seeding for a definite period of time is something I obviously cannot answer. 7. However, if Ashland wanted its seed situation, it would be forced to accept Rose Hill's proposal. Otherwise, Rose Hill would have joined Fairview in producing a 2-2 vote meaning we stick to the draw. Is that a little clearer?

I'll certainly admit that for the next three years and probably for at least the next seven years, Rose Hill's boys could benefit from seeding. I guess I am more concerned with the "long run" and, that is probably a ridiculous stance since I won't be around to observe it anyway. I will continue to fuss and, when away from BGP, cuss some, too. However, the decision has been made and I'll do whatever little I can to help make it work for the benefit of Rose Hill.

I appreciate the comments of LRCW. He is a "rare breed" in that he supports both Ashland and Rose Hill. I commend him for that. Regardless of what may be stated by others, his final sentence is absolutely correct. He is also correct, as is Frances, when he states that the content of my posts is much more likely to displease Rose Hillers than partisans of the other three schools in the district. I appreciate the candor of Frances and GIAT, both devoted and admirable Ashland fans. As for not being too loud, Frances, I don't think I could have been any louder if I appeared on Hannity and Colmes. However, I haven't posted anything that I haven't stated numerous times in the Rose Hill halls and gymnasium. Possibly I should appear to be more of a "team player". However, I don't think that should include being a lemming and jumping off the cliff. The real victim in this is Fairview. Alliances are hard to build and easy to destroy. Obviously Ashlanders and Boyd Countians are understandably euphoric with the result. Fairview rightfully feels betrayed. Most at Rose Hill are "pleased" today but tomorrow may well be different. With few exceptions, like LRCW, I am the "Lone Ranger" on this issue. However, sometimes that is how it goes. As I said I am an advocate and not a peacemaker.

Absolutely, and I commend him for it. He is a skilled advocate for Ashland. He does his job remarkably well. He has no peer in this area. Your statement makes my point.

Reread my posts. My "theme" is that Fairview, Boyd County, and Ashland always conduct their affairs in accordance with what is best for each of them. That is not a cut at any of them. It is actually a quite positive assessment of them. I commend them for it. I am asking Rose Hill to do the same. In representing their individual schools, "fairness" should have nothing to do with the process. Each school acts in good faith but entirely in the best interests of their constituency. They are advocates for their schools and what is best for their schools. That is how it should be. Now, I know that all of you Ashland and Boyd County posters are thrilled to death with the outcome. Possibly, a few of you had to change your clothes when you learned of the seeding arrangement. So, naturally, you defend it since it is good for your people. Fairview, on the other hand, is a victim of the process. I understand that they are "unhappy". They have every right to be so. However, if our loyalties were reversed, I feel sure all of you would be "disappointed" in the outcome. I am a Rose Hill loyalist. I am an advocate for what is best for Rose Hill.

Your reference says nothing about seeding for a definite period. It is not specifically prohibited. Thus, it can be easily argued that, by a vote of three or more, the seeding could have been set for a definite period. The schools in a district can vote whatever they choose since it only effects them. It is merely my position that Rose Hill should have limited the seed arrangement or voted to draw. Nothing has been offered to indicate that such a limited seed was not a choice.

This could be a fine rivalry for both schools. Hopefully, both will nurture it in the coming years. LCA will soon "outgrow" Rose Hill but it is a nice matchup for now.

Why, thank you, Frances. Actually, as I typed the positive statement about your favorites, I was wondering just how you would go about turning it into a chance to take a shot- veiled or otherwise. You didn't disappoint me. I'll give you another compliment and see how you react to it. The improvement of Ashland from last year to this year can be attributed to the change of occupants in the head coach's chair. So far, Bud has been impressive.

Russell.

LCA has a losing record but they play a much more demanding schedule that do teams in the 16th Region. They would fare well in this area.

I listened to the whole game and didn't hear any mention of the Ashland cheering section. Were they there and, if so, did they perform as they do at home games? Also, it sounded like Elliott County had real problems hitting foul shots. Is that normally the case? It didn't make much difference tonight but could haunt them in a tight game decided by foul shots. They do make some threes but they sure missed a load of them. Ashland showed that they deserve to be rated third in the region behind Russell and Elliott County.