[charlie22]

I think this is the best solution and it would cut down on the length of the season. A basketball coach at a good football school is put at a disadvantage because if their team goes deep in the playoffs, many of the kids will not be out for basketball until after the season has started. It also would take mediocre teams out of the playoffs and provide for good first round matchups.

I hear this often (usually from basketball coaches and basketball fans). Is there any empirical evidence supporting the position however?

While they may be an aberration, Lou Central's basketball team made it to the championship game in basketball, in spite of Wilson and Patterson playing football through and including the second weekend in December. Admittedly, Central struggled early without those two, but when the games really mattered (the tournament), Central's basketball team didn't seemed harmed at all by those two playing football so late. Can anyone know for certain that a basketball team would have had greater tournament success if the football season had ended one or two weeks earlier? Does one or two weeks of practice at the beginning of the season really make that much of a difference by the time the tournament begins 2.5 to 3 months later?

And how many football players actually play basketball and vice versa any more? I know at the smaller schools more kids play multiple sports, but it seems at the larger schools, its becoming rarer and rarer. Whether we agree with it or not, it seems like more and more kids are picking one sport and working on it almost year round.

Some corollary questions are: Is a football coach at a good basketball school put at a disadvantage by high school kids being permitted to play AAU basketball all summer long? Or is a football coach at a good baseball coach put at a disadvantage when the kids don't come out for spring football and instead play baseball? My point being that coaches of sports that aren't the dominant sport at a school are always behind the 8 ball to some extent or the other.

And since no one (I think) answered my question about who financially benefits from the extra rounds of playoffs created by the top 4 in each district making the playoffs, the answer is the schools do. The KHSAA does not. So if folks were thinking the KHSAA went with this system to line their pockets with green, they are mistaken. The KHSAA does not get a penny from any playoff game until the State game.

One final observation: do the people complaining about the winless football teams making the playoffs likewise complain when a basketball team with few victories makes the basketball district tournament? Or when the baseball team with the terrible record gets to participate in the baseball tournament? Don't most other sports allow every team regardless of record to make the playoffs? Why should football be different?