[Oldtiger]

OK Guys what do you think, should it be left as is - or should we move to a champ and runner-up of each district moving on, while giving everyone an extra game. Maybe take top three in each district with the winner getting a week off then the 2s and 3s battling to move on and play the champs. I just think the fourth place teams playing district champs is a waste and risk of injury.

[Hoot Gibson]

Yes, the playoff system needs tweaked. Every team should be involved in the playoffs and the regular season should be shortened by one game to accommodate the change. The focus of every coach and player should be continuous improvement over the course of the season to prepare for the playoffs. That is the system that Indiana uses and it encourages teams to schedule strong opponents without regard to fear of losing a few games. Indy Cathedral is a great example. Cathedral can, and has, started a season 0-4 and won the state title in its class. In Indiana, unlike the ridiculous system in Ohio, a team's early season wins and losses has no bearing on its ultimate success. That is how it should be in high school football.

[Wildcat18]

Yes, the playoff system needs tweaked. Every team should be involved in the playoffs and the regular season should be shortened by one game to accommodate the change.

Why? You have 0-10 teams playing in this thing. I don't see a point in rewarding teams that don't earn it.

[Hoot Gibson]

Why? You have 0-10 teams playing in this thing. I don't see a point in rewarding teams that don't earn it.

I don't see the point of earning a playoff spot in high school football. Kentucky high school basketball teams don't earn playoff spots. Does it result inferior teams winning regional and state championships?

What should be earned are district, regional, and state titles. So what if every team gets to play one playoff game? How can having high school football players, especially underclassmen play more football games be a bad thing? What kind of fool is going to brag about making the playoffs if every team makes the playoffs?

The focus of high school football should be to develop individual skills, teamwork, and good sportsmanship. Eliminating teams from playoff contention does nothing to meet any of those goals, IMO.

[Strikeout King]

I kinda like it the way it is

[Poseidon]

Give all 1-seeds a bye

[Hoot Gibson]

Give all 1-seeds a bye

Why penalize the top seeds by keeping them from playing a football game? Even mismatches in the early rounds of the playoffs serve a purpose. They give an opportunity for young players to gain some playoff experience that they would not get if the number of playoff games were reduced - and the extra playoff games that a successful team like Highlands gets to play is a huge advantage over teams that routinely lose in the first round. IMO, more football > less football.

Also, giving the top seed an extra week to prepare for its first playoff game would be giving an unfair advantage to a team that has already been rewarded with an easier path to a title.

[Jumper Dad]

OK Guys what do you think, should it be left as is - or should we move to a champ and runner-up of each district moving on, while giving everyone an extra game. Maybe take top three in each district with the winner getting a week off then the 2s and 3s battling to move on and play the champs. I just think the fourth place teams playing district champs is a waste and risk of injury.

All of those 4 seeds played a 1 seed during the season...playing one the first week of the playoffs shouldn't be any different...injuries happen every week regardless the quality of opponent...if games should be cancelled due to possible injuries then just quit playing football and start a chess team. (BTW I was on the Chess Team, so I'm not taking a shot at Chess)

[Poseidon]

Why penalize the top seeds by keeping them from playing a football game? Even mismatches in the early rounds of the playoffs serve a purpose. They give an opportunity for young players to gain some playoff experience that they would not get if the number of playoff games were reduced - and the extra playoff games that a successful team like Highlands gets to play is a huge advantage over teams that routinely lose in the first round. IMO, more football > less football.

Also, giving the top seed an extra week to prepare for its first playoff game would be giving an unfair advantage to a team that has already been rewarded with an easier path to a title.

I do not see it as penalizing the #1 seed. It would give them a week to rest and scout rather than risking injury in a game that is over within 1 quarter. As far as it being an advantage, yeah it is, but the #1's have earned it IMO.

[Hoot Gibson]

I do not see it as penalizing the #1 seed. It would give them a week to rest and scout rather than risking injury in a game that is over within 1 quarter. As far as it being an advantage, yeah it is, but the #1's have earned it IMO.

Ther #1 seeds have already been identified as the strongest team and rewarded by playing the weakest team. That should be sufficient reward for winning regular season games. Like Jumper Dad said, the game is football and injuries are part of the game. If the #1 seeds are afraid to risk injuries to their starters, then they can start their JV players and see how things go for them before putting their starters at risk.

[Poseidon]

Ther #1 seeds have already been identified as the strongest team and rewarded by playing the weakest team. That should be sufficient reward for winning regular season games. Like Jumper Dad said, the game is football and injuries are part of the game. If the #1 seeds are afraid to risk injuries to their starters, then they can start their JV players and see how things go for them before putting their starters at risk.

Ok, you are right and I am wrong.

[Hoot Gibson]

Ok, you are right and I am wrong.

Thank you for having the good sense to recognize that. :biggrin:

Seriously, I think that for the sake of the sport, anything that shortens the season for players is a negative. I am not one who thinks that everybody deserves participation trophies and scores and championships don't matter. My concern is that Kentucky high school football is extremely top heavy, with a handful of teams dominating the post season.

Every year, those same teams enjoy an extra few weeks of practice and extra games that teams who exit early from the playoffs don't get to enjoy. Don't get me wrong, winners earn those advantages, but it does perpetuate the dominance of a few teams. Schemes that limit playoff participation contribute to the overall weakness of high school football in Kentucky.

I also don't think that it would be a bad thing to add some consolation games to the current system - not just to hand out more trophies, but to extend the season for more players.

[Orange Blaze]

I don't see how it is benificial to have a really bad #4 seed play a really good #1 see. I can see how it is good to give te kids one more game but how is it fun when you know you will be crushed. I played on a #4 seed team one year and no one on the team really wanted to play in that playoff game because we all knew that we were driving 2.5 hours away to be crushed. I remember that last week of practice everyone just went through the motions and everyone was just ready to the season to be over. I also don't see the benifit of the#1 team because the blowout games just risk the chance of losing key players due to injuries.

[Spirit100]

Thank you for having the good sense to recognize that. :biggrin:

Seriously, I think that for the sake of the sport, anything that shortens the season for players is a negative. I am not one who thinks that everybody deserves participation trophies and scores and championships don't matter. My concern is that Kentucky high school football is extremely top heavy, with a handful of teams dominating the post season.

Every year, those same teams enjoy an extra few weeks of practice and extra games that teams who exit early from the playoffs don't get to enjoy. Don't get me wrong, winners earn those advantages, but it does perpetuate the dominance of a few teams. Schemes that limit playoff participation contribute to the overall weakness of high school football in Kentucky.

I also don't think that it would be a bad thing to add some consolation games to the current system - not just to hand out more trophies, but to extend the season for more players.

You do realize you are making way too much sense :biggrin:.
The more reps and opportunity for the players the better in my book. I agree with Hoots thought process on this issue.

[Spirit100]

Yes, the playoff system needs tweaked. Every team should be involved in the playoffs and the regular season should be shortened by one game to accommodate the change. The focus of every coach and player should be continuous improvement over the course of the season to prepare for the playoffs. That is the system that Indiana uses and it encourages teams to schedule strong opponents without regard to fear of losing a few games. Indy Cathedral is a great example. Cathedral can, and has, started a season 0-4 and won the state title in its class. In Indiana, unlike the ridiculous system in Ohio, a team's early season wins and losses has no bearing on its ultimate success. That is how it should be in high school football.

And Trinity has followed the same example this season! Although Manual and Male are "up" this year. I'll be curious to see if their plan works out for them with another 6A title. Time will tell.

[Poseidon]

Thank you for having the good sense to recognize that. :biggrin:

Seriously, I think that for the sake of the sport, anything that shortens the season for players is a negative. I am not one who thinks that everybody deserves participation trophies and scores and championships don't matter. My concern is that Kentucky high school football is extremely top heavy, with a handful of teams dominating the post season.

Every year, those same teams enjoy an extra few weeks of practice and extra games that teams who exit early from the playoffs don't get to enjoy. Don't get me wrong, winners earn those advantages, but it does perpetuate the dominance of a few teams. Schemes that limit playoff participation contribute to the overall weakness of high school football in Kentucky.

I also don't think that it would be a bad thing to add some consolation games to the current system - not just to hand out more trophies, but to extend the season for more players.

When does the KHSAA meet on realignment and changes to formats and such?

[Hoot Gibson]

When does the KHSAA meet on realignment and changes to formats and such?

I am not sure. The last realignment was for 2011-2014. I don't know when the realignment for 2015 and beyond will be made.

I would like to see the KHSAA get more involved with training clinics or mentoring programs for coaches. There are too few decent football coaches in Kentucky to go around. IMO, focusing on upgrading coaching skills around the state would go along way to reducing first round playoff mismatches. The quality of basketball coaching in Kentucky far exceeds the quality of football coaching. It would be great if the balance among football teams and coaches matched basketball.

[enknight84]

Here's my two cents worth. There are far too many classes in Kentucky (I know the private/public issues are why we are where at now) and not enough football playing schools and that's making there be three and four team districts, which is why there are there are 0-10 teams in the playoffs. I like the four team system that we had before with more teams in each district which would make there be (theoretically) better fourth place teams in the playoffs. I never liked the two teams going to the playoffs because too many good teams got left out (i.e., we were 9-1 one year, our only loss was in the district, and we didn't make the playoffs). So I guess my system would have four classes with at least six teams in each district. Like I said, that's just my two cents worth.

[Hoot Gibson]

Here's my two cents worth. There are far too many classes in Kentucky (I know the private/public issues are why we are where at now) and not enough football playing schools and that's making there be three and four team districts, which is why there are there are 0-10 teams in the playoffs. I like the four team system that we had before with more teams in each district which would make there be (theoretically) better fourth place teams in the playoffs. I never liked the two teams going to the playoffs because too many good teams got left out (i.e., we were 9-1 one year, our only loss was in the district, and we didn't make the playoffs). So I guess my system would have four classes with at least six teams in each district. Like I said, that's just my two cents worth.

I agree that there are too many classes in football for a state with the size and population of Kentucky. However, the problem as I see it is that there are far too many 0-10 and 1-9 teams in the state, not that those teams are in the playoffs. There is far too little parity in Kentucky when it comes to high school football and it is the direct result of far too many bad coaches. The difference in natural athletic ability between schools having comparable enrollments does not explain why some schools struggle to win more than a game or two year after year. That is the problem, not the playoff system, and making the playoffs more exclusive would just result in a shorter season for players on badly coached teams. That is not a cure. It is not even a band aid.

[FormerJacket72]

You take that same 1-9 or 0-10 coach and give him trinity talent or highlands and yes he will win football games. Your argument is not just. Kentucky has pockets of good football. Making the playoffs is not going to make it any better. Some of those teams are just wanting the season over and you are making them endure one more week to get beat down. Thought that's what spring football was for. What is there 36 + teams per class? And 32 make the playoffs? C'mon basically everyone is making the playoffs. So when someone wins a state title they are the best of 36 teams. Pretty weak if you ask me. Need to go back to 4 classes and top two from district make the playoffs.

[Hoot Gibson]

You take that same 1-9 or 0-10 coach and give him trinity talent or highlands and yes he will win football games. Your argument is not just. Kentucky has pockets of good football. Making the playoffs is not going to make it any better. Some of those teams are just wanting the season over and you are making them endure one more week to get beat down. Thought that's what spring football was for. What is there 36 + teams per class? And 32 make the playoffs? C'mon basically everyone is making the playoffs. So when someone wins a state title they are the best of 36 teams. Pretty weak if you ask me. Need to go back to 4 classes and top two from district make the playoffs.

You take a bad coach, give him a good team, and the same schedule as his predecessor, and the program will immediately decline. Yes, that bad coach may win a few games in his first season but by the second season he will be lucky to win a game or two. I saw it happen first hand at Johnson Central. Bill Musick's last team posted an perfect 10-0 regular season record. Over the next three seasons and two head coaches, Johnson Central won a total of 5 games. Along came Jim Matney, and his first JC team won 7 games. I witnessed the same kind of turn around in Greenwood, Indiana when the school hired one of the top coaches in the state. Good football programs just do not happen without competent coaches making it happen.

Another great example is what Dudley Hilton did at Bourbon County. He took over at a school that had never come close to a state championship and led the team to their first and only state title in his first season as their coach. He later returned to Bell County, and Bourbon County's program soon hit rock bottom again.

A football team that is just looking forward to the end of the season is poorly coached. Period. That kind of attitude begins at the top of a program and filters down to parents and players - and the attitude can wreck a good football program over the course of a single season.

Tinkering with the playoff system will not fix bad coaching and that is the reason that Kentucky has so many awful football teams that get blown out of games in the first quarter of the first round of the playoffs.

[FormerJacket72]

I agree there are way too many bad coaches out there. I am not disputing that. The whole Kentucky high school football system needs revamped. As for small town football it goes in cycles. There is no denying that talent wins games. Some of these areas just have less talent than your bigger areas. You think nick saban is a great coach? He is a decent coach but he is a great recruiter. You think he wins national championships with marginal talent? Far fetched I know.

[sstack]

You take that same 1-9 or 0-10 coach and give him trinity talent or highlands and yes he will win football games. Your argument is not just. Kentucky has pockets of good football. Making the playoffs is not going to make it any better. Some of those teams are just wanting the season over and you are making them endure one more week to get beat down. Thought that's what spring football was for. What is there 36 + teams per class? And 32 make the playoffs? C'mon basically everyone is making the playoffs. So when someone wins a state title they are the best of 36 teams. Pretty weak if you ask me. Need to go back to 4 classes and top two from district make the playoffs.

I do not always agree with Hoot and do not agree with everything he is saying about this subject, but he is 100# correct in saying those coaches of 0-10 teams would not come to top programs and keep them at the top. Alot of people think Highlands has 40 D1players walking the hallways. An opposing NKY coach a couple of years made a comment that Dale (HHS coach) takes a bunch of small average athletes and turns them into a crazy football machine. Highlands is usually smaller with less overall talent than most teams but wins do to excellent coaching. Not any coach could just stand on the sidelines of a team like HHS (or JC like Hoot said) and win. There is a lot of bad coaching in KY football. I have seen a lot of teams over last ten years who had better talent than Highlands and should have beat them but didn't because of lack of coaching. Just one game that always comes to mind is the playoff game couple years ago against Bryan Station. That team had scary good talent all over the field and incredible size and speed. However some of the worst coaching I have ever seen. I have always felt sorry for that team because they deserved better. Coaching is so important in HS football

[NKY Fan]

The playoffs should lead the best teams play each other, hopefully in the championship game. To this end, move the winner of each class up one level in the playoffs the following year. Winner of the top class stays. You want a HHS and BG matchup, this can give it to you. Should HHS run the table for a couple of years, then they can lay claim to being the best in the state. Until then, they are just best in their class (Proven on the field). The rest is just speculation. As for all team making the playoffs. That is just wrong. Putting the worst team in their district against a vastly superior team does nothing for either except expose players to injury from fair play and at times cheap shots.

[Tica]

What needs tweaking are the two dozen or so schools who lack either the resolve or resources to improve their programs. Granted, on any weekend, about 90 schools will win and about 90 schools will lose, but it does not always have to be the same 20-30 schools content to be the doormat. It is the persistent core cluster of uncompetitive programs which creates the first-round grotesquely farcical mismatches.

[footballfever]

I like 5 classes. about 44 per class with 5-6 teams in each district. Still take top 4 so teams would have to win 1 or 2 district game to make playoffs and still have 5 games for bowl and rivalry.

[blue1424]

I do not always agree with Hoot and do not agree with everything he is saying about this subject, but he is 100# correct in saying those coaches of 0-10 teams would not come to top programs and keep them at the top. Alot of people think Highlands has 40 D1players walking the hallways. An opposing NKY coach a couple of years made a comment that Dale (HHS coach) takes a bunch of small average athletes and turns them into a crazy football machine. Highlands is usually smaller with less overall talent than most teams but wins do to excellent coaching. Not any coach could just stand on the sidelines of a team like HHS (or JC like Hoot said) and win. There is a lot of bad coaching in KY football. I have seen a lot of teams over last ten years who had better talent than Highlands and should have beat them but didn't because of lack of coaching. Just one game that always comes to mind is the playoff game couple years ago against Bryan Station. That team had scary good talent all over the field and incredible size and speed. However some of the worst coaching I have ever seen. I have always felt sorry for that team because they deserved better. Coaching is so important in HS football

The same can be said for a lot of Louisville schools. There are many teams that Collins has faced from Louisville over the past couple of season that have a ton of speed, size, and talent, but have zero coaching or discipline. Teams like Western and Doss have never been as successful as they can be because they have never had good enough coaching.

[RunItUpTheGut]

We just had one of these threads yesterday before this one was posted.

[mandan]

I know there are a few exceptions but, just about every successful program in Ky. has a coach that has been there several years. They have been willing to stick it out, put in the hard work, time committment, and build a program. So many of your 0-10, 1-9 teams have a constant turnover of coaches.

All too often, coaches give up quickly when thet're not successful, or are driven out by parents and fans.

As for the playoffs, teams should have to earn their way into the playoffs. I know basketball and baseball all are included but you can't compare those with football, imo. There's a reason you can't play football games every day and only once a week. Not so with the other two. Not much good can come out of a physical and emotional beatdown. If you have ever been on the losing end of one of these games, what positives did you gain from it?

I like Ohio's playoff system. It causes teams to schedule better opponents if you want to make the playoffs. It isn't perfect, but it's better than what we have here, imo.

[FCFlyers]

I could not agree with you any more on the number of playoff teams that make the tournament! Good teams win year in and year out because of their feeder programs and their off season programs such as weight lifting. There are exceptions where a good group of kids will show up at a school, But in the end a good program gets the best players to play football and to improve each year. Teams that make the playoffs with 1 or 2 win have no business playing an extra game to just get destroyed by a Trinity, Bowling Green or a Highlands. I am not sure what the answere is but a team that has a 0-10 record 99% of the time is ready for the season to end! I think the KHSAA needs to eliminate the first round games for the 1 seeds.