[FF40212]

Am I the only one who finds this a contradiction?
On one hand the Association claims to be worried about "travel considerations" and they claim to be
trying to group the games geographically.

Then on the other hand they admit that
teams which played each other in the regular season are supposed to be seperated in the first round.
Why do we have to seperate teams which already played in the reg season?
Common sense would tell you these ARE teams which are close georgraphically, so if your main goal is reducing travel times,
then why complicate this with not allowing regular season opponents to play in the first round?

This contradiction is indicative of the larger problem with this whole system. There is very little planning or forethought involved. And there is no effort to inform people as to what the criteria is for the decisions which were made.

That is why we have the uneven brackets
with 4 on one side, 9 on the other.
That is why we have some teams getting two byes.
And that is why we have some teams being forced to play on 2 days rest when their opponent has been off for three weeks.

This whole process appears to be arbitrary and mysterious,
at least to someone looking in from the outside.
I have asked three times now for someone to explain how the bye games were awarded, and so far no one has replied.
Once again, how is it that Graves gets 2 byes and Bowling Green gets only one, when BG stomped Graves in the reg season?

I know this whole system is new and the powers that be are probably learning as thet go. And I am sure that they are making an effort to run this playoff as they believe is correct.
But unless they are more transparent as to how certain teams are awarded byes, home field advantage, and bizarre bracket placements,
then people are not going to continue to believe that this system is fair and unbiased, and teams will not want to continue to participate.

First off, no offense taken. I understand where someone looking from the outside may have questions. Heck, I have asked these same questions. I know its hard to project a "tone" on message boards and emails so I won't get all high and mighty and act offended by your post.

First of all, none of this is "mysterious". It was all explained in February at the annual Coaches meeting. It is also available, entirely, on the website (http://www.kymiddleschoolfootball.com) under "2009_Playoff_System_Presentation__Final.ppt" in the State Playoff Information section.

Since I am the one you quoted, I will be glad to re-explain my post. I said that there are areas of the state where schools have signed up to play. That is a good thing. There are areas that have a lot of teams, and there are areas that don't. Those areas that do have a lot of teams, EVERY ATTEMPT was made to keep them from having to play someone they had played already during the regular season. There are several cases where that was not possible (Gallatin v/s Frankfort is one that is involving KMSFA Board Members who will have to re-play one another. That should show you that there is no favoritism).

We understand that we are not high school football. We aren't trying to be. We understand that a lot of schools want to participate, but are limited by transportation budgets. Believe me, we deal DAILY with issues that are boundless. Every area of the state has a school that has some sort of issue on why they can't play in this. We do our best to work things out for everyone involved.

If you have any other questions, I invite you to email me personally. If you have a better way of running this, then I invite you to attend our annual meeting in February 2010 where you can present an alternative "one size fits all model" for middle schools across the state.