[KentuckyFan35]

The hype has faded about this guy. Cordia had talent, more than what people thought they did, and this man did nothing with it. I played for Honeycutt, and I played for Denny and from what I am seeing he is nowhere near there level as a coach. Cordia had a worse team last year and almost took Letcher into overtime. I played with Zach Hurt & Josh Taylor. Our teams would have never let a team beat us that bad. Josh would have hurt an opposing player or started a fight before he allowed that. And we played hard for Honeycutt.

OUCH to this lose.

No they didn't!!! Knott beat all the talent they had 63pts and it wasn't that close!

[WALL2WALL]

No they didn't!!! Knott beat all the talent they had 63pts and it wasn't that close!

That game was most definitely an awful game. One of the worse games I have ever been to, but I truly believe that game didn't show the talent they had. They were in the middle of the region with that team. After all those players quiting they are near the bottom.

[The_Rock]

I would never coach but if i did i wouldnt beat a team that bad. very classless by the lcc coach. classless

[PaintsvilleTigerfan]

If I am understanding this correctly Rhodes did not play his varsity players? Someone correct me if Im wrong,.

[ANEWPAT]

If I am understanding this correctly Rhodes did not play his varsity players? Someone correct me if Im wrong,.

I was not at the game, but from what I have gathered, this is what happened. Since the beginning of the season, Cordia has had 8 players either quit or be kicked off their varsity team. To have a full team, some of the JV were brought up and are now on varsity. It is his actually varsity team now. Rhodes did start his normal varsity starters, but at some point during the game, he put them on the bench and played the players that he brought up from JV. I think his gameplan was to force LCC to take their starters out and play the end of the bench also with the goal of keeping LCC from being able to run the score up. However, to Rhodes surprise, LCC left their top players in far more than he thought they would. Now, the debate is, should LCC be ashamed of leaving their top players in and running the score up on Cordia considering Cordia took their top players out and played the subs.

[zaga_fan]

So basically...
You have a tag team match between The Rock/Stone Cold vs The Undertaker/Spike Dudley.
The Undertaker tags in Spike and walks back to the green room and Spike gets 30 stunners 20 rock bottoms and 5 the peoples elbows.

[ANEWPAT]

I know everyone but me loves the seeding of the districts for tournament, but this is one of the situation for why I hate it. KCC and LCC should NEVER be playing Cordia and Jenkins in the first place. Neither team gains anything from it. The district is seeded, so KCC and LCC are stuck playing Cordia and Jenkins twice each. Then they have to decide how to handle it. Do you just waste four games? If they play to their game, everyone pounds on them and calls them classless and says they should be ashame and should be watching out for Karma. Well, why should the starters have to sit on the bench four games out of their season just because the powers that be want to seed the district. When you expect them not to play those four games you are punishing them for being some of the top athletes in the district. Now, you would say what do they care, the team will win anyway. Some of those kids are going for individual honors as well. They are trying to get colleges to look at them and those colleges look at their game averages in shootings, rebounds, assists and steals. When they sit out four games and don't get their normal stats it affects those averages. In addition to that, some players are trying for those 1000 point and 2000 point marks or even trying to break school records in shooting, rebounds etc. Missing those four games a year makes that really hard to reach. I don't like seeding and I think if they are going to make this big schools play schools that can't compete no one has a right to complain when the big school puts a spanking on them.

[WALL2WALL]

I know everyone but me loves the seeding of the districts for tournament, but this is one of the situation for why I hate it. KCC and LCC should NEVER be playing Cordia and Jenkins in the first place. Neither team gains anything from it. The district is seeded, so KCC and LCC are stuck playing Cordia and Jenkins twice each. Then they have to decide how to handle it. Do you just waste four games? If they play to their game, everyone pounds on them and calls them classless and says they should be ashame and should be watching out for Karma. Well, why should the starters have to sit on the bench four games out of their season just because the powers that be want to seed the district. When you expect them not to play those four games you are punishing them for being some of the top athletes in the district. Now, you would say what do they care, the team will win anyway. Some of those kids are going for individual honors as well. They are trying to get colleges to look at them and those colleges look at their game averages in shootings, rebounds, assists and steals. When they sit out four games and don't get their normal stats it affects those averages. In addition to that, some players are trying for those 1000 point and 2000 point marks or even trying to break school records in shooting, rebounds etc. Missing those four games a year makes that really hard to reach. I don't like seeding and I think if they are going to make this big schools play schools that can't compete no one has a right to complain when the big school puts a spanking on them.

Wasn't like that a few years ago.

[OrangenowBlue]

I know everyone but me loves the seeding of the districts for tournament, but this is one of the situation for why I hate it. KCC and LCC should NEVER be playing Cordia and Jenkins in the first place. Neither team gains anything from it. The district is seeded, so KCC and LCC are stuck playing Cordia and Jenkins twice each. Then they have to decide how to handle it. Do you just waste four games? If they play to their game, everyone pounds on them and calls them classless and says they should be ashame and should be watching out for Karma. Well, why should the starters have to sit on the bench four games out of their season just because the powers that be want to seed the district. When you expect them not to play those four games you are punishing them for being some of the top athletes in the district. Now, you would say what do they care, the team will win anyway. Some of those kids are going for individual honors as well. They are trying to get colleges to look at them and those colleges look at their game averages in shootings, rebounds, assists and steals. When they sit out four games and don't get their normal stats it affects those averages. In addition to that, some players are trying for those 1000 point and 2000 point marks or even trying to break school records in shooting, rebounds etc. Missing those four games a year makes that really hard to reach. I don't like seeding and I think if they are going to make this big schools play schools that can't compete no one has a right to complain when the big school puts a spanking on them.

I think this is where me and you rarely disagree. I absolutely hate games like this but if you don't seed, you could have one of these teams that are not deserving and absolutely horrible, going to the regional tournament while a much deserving team, who may have won 20 games that season, sitting at home watching the "bad" team lose by 50 in a game they could have won. If a team is mediocre or just plain horrible in the regular season, they are the same in the tournament. You do not need to reward teams for being bad. That is what "blind draws" does. You can use other ways to seed, but I absolutely deplore seeding by using Cantrell ratings. It wouldn't be that big of a deal in the 53rd(boys and girls) due the discrepency between the top two and the bottom two, but I think in the 54th where you have three of the top teams, anything other than seeding is a farce

[ANEWPAT]

Wasn't like that a few years ago.

Of course there will be a year or two here and there. There will always be an exception. But, you go all the way back and add them up and tell me just how many years total Cordia has been competitive with the bigger schools. And, by bigger I am not necessarily meaning number of students. I mean the top schools for sports. Hazard is small in enrollment but I call them one of the big schools because I am talking basketball. If Cordia wants to keep playing KCC and LCC every year hoping for another one of those year or two runs when they can compete, fine. But, they are going to then they are going to have to take the spanking all those other years with their mouths closed. Both schools would benefit more if they used those four games each season to play teams that are at least within striking distance of them. No one benefits by winning 40+. No one benefits by losing 40+. No one benefits by making a top ranked team in the district/region sit their players on the bench four games every season to keep from embarrassing another team.

[ANEWPAT]

I think this is where me and you rarely disagree. I absolutely hate games like this but if you don't seed, you could have one of these teams that are not deserving and absolutely horrible, going to the regional tournament while a much deserving team, who may have won 20 games that season, sitting at home watching the "bad" team lose by 50 in a game they could have won. If a team is mediocre or just plain horrible in the regular season, they are the same in the tournament. You do not need to reward teams for being bad. That is what "blind draws" does. You can use other ways to seed, but I absolutely deplore seeding by using Cantrell ratings. It wouldn't be that big of a deal in the 53rd(boys and girls) due the discrepency between the top two and the bottom two, but I think in the 54th where you have three of the top teams, anything other than seeding is a farce

And I have seen this happen more than once and when it does it is unfair. I just don't see it as any more unfair than forcing these teams to waste four games per season, every season, playing teams that they have to try not to beat too bad. What I really think would be best will never happen and you probably will definitely disagree with me on this one. I would actually prefer to have a divisional system put into place which is what I first thought they were headed toward when the started the All A, but it didn't happen. Let LCC, PCC, KCC, Haz etc fight it out with each other and the other top teams around the state. Then the lesser competitive schools can have their own division where they can all compete without taking beatings in half their games. Have a Division I and a Division II district, regional, and state tournament. I just get tired of hearing how horrible KCC and LCC are because they won't take it easy on those little grade school kids.

[OrangenowBlue]

Of course there will be a year or two here and there. There will always be an exception. But, you go all the way back and add them up and tell me just how many years total Cordia has been competitive with the bigger schools. And, by bigger I am not necessarily meaning number of students. I mean the top schools for sports. Hazard is small in enrollment but I call them one of the big schools because I am talking basketball. If Cordia wants to keep playing KCC and LCC every year hoping for another one of those year or two runs when they can compete, fine. But, they are going to then they are going to have to take the spanking all those other years with their mouths closed. Both schools would benefit more if they used those four games each season to play teams that are at least within striking distance of them. No one benefits by winning 40+. No one benefits by losing 40+. No one benefits by making a top ranked team in the district/region sit their players on the bench four games every season to keep from embarrassing another team.

No one benefits from one of those weak teams playing in the regional tournament while LCC or KCC is sitting at home after having to play each other. A few years ago before seeding, on the girls side, the top three teams were Letcher Central, Knott Central, and June Buchanan. They all blind drew into the same bracket while Jenkins and Cordia drew into the opposite bracket. Letcher Central, who was the best team in the regular season, had to play Knott Central, June Buchanan, and then Cordia in the district finals. Cordia only had to play one game, against the weakest team, when they didn't deserve to even go to the region. I would much rather have to endure playing them in the regular season, then miss the postseason because I had to play one of the best teams first, while a rinkydink team who has won only a few games goes to the regional tournament to get the hell beat out of them. I think seeding should be mandatory by the KHSAA. If one of the smaller or weaker schools wants to go the region, they need to work harder. There are positives about kids going to smaller schools but this is one of the negatives. You have to live with it.

[OrangenowBlue]

And I have seen this happen more than once and when it does it is unfair. I just don't see it as any more unfair than forcing these teams to waste four games per season, every season, playing teams that they have to try not to beat too bad. What I really think would be best will never happen and you probably will definitely disagree with me on this one. I would actually prefer to have a divisional system put into place which is what I first thought they were headed toward when the started the All A, but it didn't happen. Let LCC, PCC, KCC, Haz etc fight it out with each other and the other top teams around the state. Then the lesser competitive schools can have their own division where they can all compete without taking beatings in half their games. Have a Division I and a Division II district, regional, and state tournament. I just get tired of hearing how horrible KCC and LCC are because they won't take it easy on those little grade school kids.

I have to ponder on this one for a few. As far as what people say or think, I have thick skin and they can kiss my @$$. I think this idea takes away from the mystique and special quality of the KHSAA state tournament. You are awarding mediocrity by using this system. The state tournament is great as is but I would support a class system before I would support this idea. If a team has only won a few games, then,( unless they have vastly improved or are in a weak district), their season needs to come to a close in the district tournament.

[ANEWPAT]

No one benefits from one of those weak teams playing in the regional tournament while LCC or KCC is sitting at home after having to play each other. A few years ago before seeding, on the girls side, the top three teams were Letcher Central, Knott Central, and June Buchanan. They all blind drew into the same bracket while Jenkins and Cordia drew into the opposite bracket. Letcher Central, who was the best team in the regular season, had to play Knott Central, June Buchanan, and then Cordia in the district finals. Cordia only had to play one game, against the weakest team, when they didn't deserve to even go to the region. I would much rather have to endure playing them in the regular season, then miss the postseason because I had to play one of the best teams first, while a rinkydink team who has won only a few games goes to the regional tournament to get the hell beat out of them. I think seeding should be mandatory by the KHSAA. If one of the smaller or weaker schools wants to go the region, they need to work harder. There are positives about kids going to smaller schools but this is one of the negatives. You have to live with it.

I hear what you're saying and I admit sometimes "the luck of the draw" sucks. I realize that my opinion is a minority and that's why most districts seed.

[ANEWPAT]

I have to ponder on this one for a few. As far as what people say or think, I have thick skin and they can kiss my @$$. I think this idea takes away from the mystique and special quality of the KHSAA state tournament. You are awarding mediocrity by using this system. The state tournament is great as is but I would support a class system before I would support this idea. If a team has only won a few games, then,( unless they have vastly improved or are in a weak district), their season needs to come to a close in the district tournament.

As far as taking away from the KHSAA state tournament, I think the All A does that already. Once they created any second state tournament, they have taken away from the original. I think if there is going to be a second tournament system, it should be ONLY for those who have no chance making to the Sweet 16. My understanding when they started it was that it was to give some of those smaller schools a chance at a state title. Then they defined smaller school by enrollment instead of by success on the court. Then we ended up with Hazard going to All A state tournament year after year when they are more than capable of making it to the Sweet 16.

My bottom line, I hate seeing these teams that not competitive year after year taking a stomping by the better teams. I don't think it's fair that the top teams in the region are stuck wasting four games every season just to arrive at conclusion that everyone already knew would be the outcome. And for what? Just to get to the district tournament and make KCC and LCC waste one more game each playing those same two teams that they never should have played in the first place. I just really feel that it would be better for every team involved if some system could be put in place where teams can play against teams they could be competitive with.

[OutsideLookingIn]

Some districts seed by the ratings from the Herald Leader Cantrell ratings or the Courier-Journal Lit ratings. Usually pretty acurate in defining the weak and strong with a region or district.

[OrangenowBlue]

Some districts seed by the ratings from the Herald Leader Cantrell ratings or the Courier-Journal Lit ratings. Usually pretty acurate in defining the weak and strong with a region or district.

Normally I only support seeding from heads up competition and I have been critical of this type(newspapers) of seeding, but in this case, this may be the best option.

[OutsideLookingIn]

No one benefits from one of those weak teams playing in the regional tournament while LCC or KCC is sitting at home after having to play each other. A few years ago before seeding, on the girls side, the top three teams were Letcher Central, Knott Central, and June Buchanan. They all blind drew into the same bracket while Jenkins and Cordia drew into the opposite bracket. Letcher Central, who was the best team in the regular season, had to play Knott Central, June Buchanan, and then Cordia in the district finals. Cordia only had to play one game, against the weakest team, when they didn't deserve to even go to the region. I would much rather have to endure playing them in the regular season, then miss the postseason because I had to play one of the best teams first, while a rinkydink team who has won only a few games goes to the regional tournament to get the hell beat out of them. I think seeding should be mandatory by the KHSAA. If one of the smaller or weaker schools wants to go the region, they need to work harder. There are positives about kids going to smaller schools but this is one of the negatives. You have to live with it.

I agree with OrangethenBlue, 2006 53rd finals JBS defeated Cordia, 2007 KCC defeated JBS,2008 LCC defeated Cordia, 2009 KCC defeated LCC, 2010 KCC defeated JBS, 2011 KCC defeated LCC. Looks as if the only dominate team in the 53rd since its conception has been KCC. If you look at the results the seeding process is working pretty good. Yes, I agree playing weak teams doesn't help you grow as a team, but looking at the results from the KHSAA website all those weak teams like Cordia, Jenkins and then JBS are not as weak as ANEWPAT would like us to believe

[OrangenowBlue]

I agree with OrangethenBlue, 2006 53rd finals JBS defeated Cordia, 2007 KCC defeated JBS,2008 LCC defeated Cordia, 2009 KCC defeated LCC, 2010 KCC defeated JBS, 2011 KCC defeated LCC. Looks as if the only dominate team in the 53rd since its conception has been KCC. If you look at the results the seeding process is working pretty good. Yes, I agree playing weak teams doesn't help you grow as a team, but looking at the results from the KHSAA website all those weak teams like Cordia, Jenkins and then JBS are not as weak as ANEWPAT would like us to believe

A correction needs to be made. 2009 Letcher Central beat Knott Central in the district finals at Knott Central.

Since the inception of the new 53rd District in 2005-06, the district champs have been.

Boys:
2006 - June Buchanan
2007 - Knott Central
2008 - Letcher Central
2009 - Letcher Central
2010 - Knott Central
2011 - Knott Central

So actually Letcher Central actually has just won one less then Knott. Knott will be the favorite to win their fourth district title at the tournament at Jenkins. On the girls side, it has been dominated by the bigger schools, Letcher Central has won four district titles while Knott has won two. Letcher will be the favorite going in to the district tournament. If both boys and girls teams from LCC/KCC make the district finals, which they should, it should some exciting games to watch.