ThrowItDeep

With the new alignment out, could we eliminate the "District" model where you Let schools schedule their own 10 games, it eliminates the playing of Fall Break issues, and then pool the teams in the Districts 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8. Use RPI to determine the first round matchups in the playoffs. This would allow a lot of change to first round matchups. If one district has two strong teams, it could keep them from playing early in the playoffs.

Hearing from a reliable source that we may be getting an announcement really soon.

Has anyone seen the new numbers?

Coach Vessels went to Greenwood in 2016 and worked under Chris Seabolt, then to Glasgow with Jeff Garmon, before taking the OC job at Barren County.

Justin Vessels named head football coach this past Thursday. https://www.edmonsonvoice.com/sports

Getting running clocked year after year against schools you would never think about scheduling does not encourage participation.

It’s a punishment for some lol… physically. Football was always different… for decades. Not everyone made it. And everyone lived afterwards. I get expanding. But we’ve expanded too much (in my opinion)…

This does eliminate a lot of bad teams, but still forces the bad teams that beat those really bad teams to play in the playoffs against far superior opponents. I'd be ok with just the play your 10 games against anyone you want and then take all four teams and keep it at 32.

REGULAR SEASON Before the season begins, teams are placed in their respective classes. Everyone knows who is in the class and what possible teams they could match up with in the playoffs. Eliminate "districts" as we know them. Don't force teams to play teams they don't want to play. Play 10 games. Play 9 games. Play 8 games. Whatever your school wants to do. If basketball coaches can figure out how to schedule 30 games, volleyball 35, baseball/softball 36, surely football coaches can find a way to schedule 10. The top tier schools may have a little more trouble than others but they would also be able to play other top tier programs (bigger gates, bigger exposure, etc.) Eliminating district games means the end of the district grid during the middle of 90+% of the school's fall break window. PLAYOFFS When the playoffs arrive, teams are ranked based on whatever ranking system is decided. RPI, Cal Preps, combination of them both, etc. The number of teams in the playoffs can be argued to exhaustion. No fewer than 16 per class. 20 would be a good number. No more than 24. This should eliminate any first round games being forfeited and having teams lose opportunities to play. If the argument is that every team should have the opportunity to play that last game, let all teams that don't make the playoffs play one extra game against an opponent that they will at least have a chance to compete in. This might allow a little shred of momentum going into the next year for teams that are used to getting running clocked late in the first quarter. Or if a team is just beat to death and need to end the season, let them end it. Every situation is different. CONCLUSION This method eliminates most all meaningless games. Yes, there will still be running clocks and blowouts. But now this gives the feel of the old 4 class system. Back then, you had to have a capable enough team to win 2-3-4 games in your district just to make it. So even your 4 seeds typically fought for a little while before the better teams extended the score to a comfortable margin. It makes going to the playoffs something earned, not given. It allows teams that just don't have the team to compete with top tier teams the chance to schedule teams that they can compete with which should help build up or build back their programs. In our current system, if you are unlucky enough to be in a 6 team district, that's half of your schedule decided for you. A five team district, 40% of your schedule is gone. I don't think coaches of other sports would be too fond to have 40-50% forced on them, especially if their district is loaded. There are the traditional powerhouses that only a state title will be considered a great year. There are schools that want to win ONE playoff game, have a winning record, etc. Each year is different. Each group of kids is different. Without naming schools, there are several that when the new districts came out, you just felt awful for. It doesn't help their program AT ALL. Allow these schools the chance to compete without having to go "independent" or suffer financial consequences. Thoughts? Make it better. Anything worth moving forward with?

Ohio County will travel to Edmonson County on September 15th.

We'll see how this turns out, but if they are able to land the right guy.... it would be a huge get for Caverna. Jaw dropping if it happens!

Three things that could eliminate most of these realignment issues we see every single time it happens. 1. No moving up or down in class. Where you land is where you land. 2. Eliminating mandatory games vs. opponents... If there were no regular season districts, this would almost eliminate all of the moving and manipulation that goes on. 3. If the RPI is the magic solution ( it needs work), then use it. Figure out a number you want in the playoffs (16) and play it. Let everyone else have the option of ending the season or playing either a bowl game or a small playoff for the silver cup... If we are about providing opportunities for kids, this would give it to them. 95%+ of the state want to have competitive games, have a winning record, etc. Less than 5% of the state have a realistic chance of winning a state championship. By eliminating games people don't want to play, allowing them to have success, achieve a winning record, win a few playoff games (even against inferior teams) can help build programs for the future.

Responded in the big football thread.

That's why I said what I did. It's an "experiment" either way. If your school district is definitely going back to school, they are going to "experiment" with every kid that is in their school district. Each parent needs to decide if they are allowing their kid to go back to school, participate in athletics, go to a friend's house, etc.

Regardless of what side you are on, I can't keep but thinking that our approach is totally opposite of what it should be. Schools are either starting back in early August or in our case, after Labor Day. We are a small district with about 2,000 total students. Others have many, many more. I've heard people say, "We don't want to let athletics starting to hinder the start of school." I think that is not the right thought process. It sounds good, but why open up the schools without a small "test run"? I hate to make anyone a guinea pig, but why not allow fall sports to practice normal "with some precautions"? We probably have around 100 athletes that play fall sports. They are some of the most well-conditioned we have. If they were able to be around each other, practice like normal, be in the locker room some, etc., we would be able to see if the virus spreads like crazy or not at all. Why not experiment with 100 kids as opposed to, in our case, 2,000 kids? Because once you open those school doors, its going to be an experiment, whatever you believe. I'm all for sports starting back and playing right now. But, I'm also for "practicing" before going into a "game". So let sports be a practice for our schools' upcoming game.

Regardless of what side you are on, I can't keep but thinking that our approach is totally opposite of what it should be. Schools are either starting back in early August or in our case, after Labor Day. We are a small district with about 2,000 total students. Others have many, many more. I've heard people say, "We don't want to let athletics starting to hinder the start of school." I think that is not the right thought process. It sounds good, but why open up the schools without a small "test run"? I hate to make anyone a guinea pig, but why not allow fall sports to practice normal "with some precautions"? We probably have around 100 athletes that play fall sports. They are some of the most well-conditioned we have. If they were able to be around each other, practice like normal, be in the locker room some, etc., we would be able to see if the virus spreads like crazy or not at all. Why not experiment with 100 kids as opposed to, in our case, 2,000 kids? Because once you open those school doors, its going to be an experiment, whatever you believe. I'm all for sports starting back and playing right now. But, I'm also for "practicing" before going into a "game". So let sports be a practice for our schools' upcoming game.

Speaking from our area, we had numerous people/students out sick in the late fall/early winter time period that: 1. Didn't have Flu A 2. Didn't have Flu B 3. Didn't have Strep 4. Told they had "something viral" Some stayed home for a little while, came back, and then had to go back to the doctor for same symptoms. Others were out for much longer. Our school system shut down multiple times before we ever heard of COVID-19. This is my 17th year teaching. I had never seen anything like it before. Then this mysterious Coronavirus just shows up...

Anybody else think we've been around it for longer than just since March??? California found it in February... Now Ohio has found it in January... Antibody testing reveals COVID-19 has been in Ohio since January, health officials say

Here are a couple pics I took today. Last home game was November 15.

We tried a splash of red on the game field with our navy this year. It still looks pretty good. I was worried it would turn pink... But still showing red now. If I can remember, I'll take a pic when I head back to school. Also, like you, we used one long red line down our practice field on each side representing the top of the numbers. I've seen schools use that as the "divider" for their secondary in terms of alignment. We used ours to let our kids know where the numbers were.

Coach, Try spraying those lines with a darker color. It will stay on that bermuda for a long, long time. Back around 2009 or 2010, we started painting our game field for any home playoff game in our dark navy. Looked good all winter and early spring.

I like it Coach! We went to Thursday mornings in 2011 through my last year in 2015. For much of the same reasons you talked about. We just seemed so much fresher on Friday. Practicing early allowed our coaching staff a day off after school also. I had one assistant who seemed to be sick a few times on Thursday after our morning practice and magically got to feeling better on the lake fishing... Depending on the team and what your practice plans look like, (Mondays/Saturdays), I could see doing two mornings on occasion. --Kyle Pierce--

ATL Cat, Did the WR step out of bounds before he caught it? It was definitely a catch but maybe it was an illegal one. If so, the official made the wrong signal but in the end was the correct ending result...

It's been a few years since I was coaching Guru, but last time I remember if neither team could agree on game time, it was set at either 7:00 or 7:30.

Game time is up to the two schools. My sophomore year, we played a state-semifinal game around 2:00/3:00 pm...