[LCHSbulldogsalum]

Just because someone doesn't support another's ideas, doesn't mean they are "wrong". Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the subject. I think it is a reasonable debate on why baseball isn't classed, and other sports are. And the numbers don't lie, either. If the system was "fair", then why are the larger schools the only ones winning the title the past few decades in baseball? Is that because only those larger schools "care" about baseball and "work harder", like some on here suggest is the reason people are wanting a class system because they "don't want to put in the time"? Is it possible that the larger schools can put more time in on individual sports because of the lack of number of athletes playing two sports, while the smaller schools have to share their athletes between two or even three sports, meaning less time on developing in one particular sport?

Now, does this mean that JC, LC, Pikeville, etc., just aren't "working hard enough"? I don't think so. And splitting the tournament in to two weekends didn't do anything to help the smaller schools more than it did to help the LARGER schools. The KHSAA doing this has shown that they are attempting to curve the debate and avoid the issue. Take McCracken County as an example here. One of their parents posted that they have never been beaten in a regional game. Is that good for the sport of baseball and promoting the sport? I doubt that they are winning because the other teams aren't "taking it serious enough". They are the largest school in a region that has smaller schools (McCracken has 2,000 students, only a couple other schools in Region 1 are above 1,000).

Another person says they have talked to athletes from other states that are "envious" of what we have in KY. Well, I've also done that. I got a dramatically different answer. I got one of "wow, that's crazy, how can you all compete against schools twice your size". But, I guess some are content with that one state title at a small school every 25-30 years (I'm talking baseball, not basketball.....since that is what a lot of people are too focused on when the classification debate heats up). That's fine. But if something happens once every few decades, I don't call that a "trend" or "proof" that the system is good and shouldn't be changed.

And I think it's interesting about the Track and Field claim by Pulp. I did not know they classified that sport. IF that's true, then WOW! To me, that's a definite head scratcher on why baseball wouldn't be classed if Track is.......and for those that say football should be classed, why? The numbers in football are equivalent to baseball. Anyone can spin the "offense-defense-special teams" argument all they want, but baseball has to survive with two-way players, so can football. Who cares if your football roster has only 20 kids and you are playing a Louisville school with 75 players.....shouldn't matter......just work harder.