[jammin' jamey]

Only "4" #4 seeds were able to pull the upset of a #1 last night...

2A: Heath (4-6/1-3) 20 - Caldwell Co. (7-3/4-0) 7
5A: Montgomery Co. (7-3/1-3) 16 - Woodford Co. (8-2/4-0) 7
6A: Nelson Co. (4-6/2-2) 34 - Greenwood (5-5/3-1) 28 2OT
6A: Shelby Co. (6-4/0-3) 60 - Scott Co. (9-1/3-0) 56

Do you still think that #1 vs. #4 games are needed? Should there be a change? Maybe #1 seed gets a bye week during the opening round, while the #2 & #3 seeds play for the right to face #1?

Suggestions for change or leave it as it is? Let's hear it!

Do you like having teams within your district facing each other during the opening round? I bet Greenwood didn't. Despite being the 1st seed, they lost to Nelson County in during the regular season.

[jammin' jamey]

Just to add more stats to the argument...Under the old format last season, "3" #4 seeds were able to score upsets of #1's.

Class 2A: Glasgow over Monroe Co.
Class 4A: Cambell Co. over Boone Co.
Class 4A: Woodford Co. over Lafayette

Seems like larger schools are more suspectible to upsets in the opening round. And, with the playoffs watered down this season allowing more participants, the chance of an upset in the opening round is greater now than before.

Just a thought.

[bball fan]

It was "necessary" for the ones that pulled the upsets! It certainly mattered to them!

Is it necessary for the #16 seed to play the #1 seed in the NCAA tourney?? It might not be but it sure is fun for the #16 seed to get the post season birth. I don't see what all the fuss is about? All the other sports allow it, so why not football??

[Tomcat68]

I'd rather see just the top 2 seeds go to the playoffs under this format with 6 classes. I love the 2 vs 3 games, but it wouldn't be fair to the #1 seeds to force them to have a bye week. Typically in highschool football teams often have more trouble coming off of a bye week rather than just playing the week prior.

I do like the rematch factor in the playoffs now. Games are closer in score and distance. Bigger gate money and every district gets a team to the final 8 to root for.

[EkyLb]

I dont see what the gripe is here, the kids get to play more games which is what is important to them. So why does it matter to us fans? You get to watch the kids play one more game. Yeah it is necessary, and dont fix something that isnt broken. It gives teams who's bye week is the last week of the season, especially teams that are 1 or 2 seeds a chance to get back in tune before the District title game.

[alfus21]

I bet Greenwood didn't. Despite being the 1st seed, they lost to Nelson County in during the regular season.

Sucks for them and the other #1 seeds. Maybe they should try harder next year. Of course these games are necessary. There are plenty of blowouts but there are also upsets. This would be like saying to take out the #1 vs. #16 games in the NCAA tournament.

[cougar_54]

i say leave it how it is.... I think the #1's and #4's should play in the 1st rond because you never know what is going to happen on this level of play.... Athletes are willing to give it there all no matter what seed they are....

[footballdaddy10]

i think its necessary, because these games make a true playoff system, allowing every team a chance to get a playoff win.. sometimes, a team may beat a team during the season, but perhaps they were missing a player or didnt have a good game.. this second chance makes it more competitive in my opinion

[Panther Thunder]

I think it is more neccessary for the bigger classes where parity is more common.

[Armchair QB]

One more game to make some $$$. I am all for it.

[MCHornets]

Yes, these games make money, and even if they are blowouts, it is good for the players.

[TheyKnowMe]

Yes they are. Some teams can always pull out an upset.

[Tubby Hater]

I say reduce the teams from 4 to 3, and give the 1 seed the buy and let 2 and 3 play. It is ridiculous that you have teams that are making the playoff every year just because they are in a 4 team district.

[bob2007]

this game gives the 4 seed chance to make a miracle that everyone will always rember but most of time it never happens...

[jchseagle11]

i thinks these games are a necessity...montgomery county a number 4 seed beat woodford county a number 1 seed so upsets do happen.

[jammin' jamey]

It is ridiculous that you have teams that are making the playoff every year just because they are in a 4 team district.

That's one of the drawbacks for me as well.

Overall, it seems that the general consenus is to keep it the way it is. Yet wouldn't you agree that the playoffs are a little diluted because some 98 teams made the field this year with the class system change?

I'm not totally against the #4 seeds. Everyone likes the notion of cinderella. I think the crowd attendace would be better if the 1 & 4 games were the way they used to be and not featuring a rematch in the 1st round from the regular season. But I think the system is dilluted now overall and it's not fair rewarding mediocre teams who simply make the playoffs because they are in a 4-team district.

With one exception this year, the 4 seed wins came from large schools with a large number of players. What's the upset in that? Like Nelson County, for example, who beat #1 seed Greenwood in the regular season.

[kyrifle]

Only "4" #4 seeds were able to pull the upset of a #1 last night...

2A: Heath (4-6/1-3) 20 - Caldwell Co. (7-3/4-0) 7
5A: Montgomery Co. (7-3/1-3) 16 - Woodford Co. (8-2/4-0) 7
6A: Nelson Co. (4-6/2-2) 34 - Greenwood (5-5/3-1) 28 2OT
6A: Shelby Co. (6-4/0-3) 60 - Scott Co. (9-1/3-0) 56

Do you still think that #1 vs. #4 games are needed? Should there be a change? Maybe #1 seed gets a bye week during the opening round, while the #2 & #3 seeds play for the right to face #1?

Suggestions for change or leave it as it is? Let's hear it!

Do you like having teams within your district facing each other during the opening round? I bet Greenwood didn't. Despite being the 1st seed, they lost to Nelson County in during the regular season.

1 seed and 4 seed should never happen to begin with. Only 2 teams from each district should be playing in the play off's. This just drags the season out much longer. You have district's with only 4 teams in them, and the 4 seed sometimes comes into the play off's with a 0-10 record. I would even be somewhat open to just the winner of the district going to the play off's like it was in the old days.

[FOX SPORTS]

Four #4 seed upsets is ALOT!!!

This was a big year for the #4 seeds.

[OutlawJoseyWales]

Personally, I don't like the format. 2 potential options are more appealling to me:

1. Only top 2 teams in district make playoffs. #1 plays #2 in offsetting district.

2. Top 3 teams in district make playoffs with #1 seed getting a bye week. Still use offsetting district format...with 2nd place team receiving home field advantage for the first round. Winner of that game travels to Offsetting district winner for 2nd round.

Current system makes no sense...especially when you are still playing district foes. If nothing else, get away from the inner district play until district/regional final round.

I have a strong suspicion that the format will change after this season. Too many well respected coaches are vigorously pushing adminstration for changes.

[jammin' jamey]

Personally, I don't like the format. 2 potential options are more appealling to me:

1. Only top 2 teams in district make playoffs. #1 plays #2 in offsetting district.

2. Top 3 teams in district make playoffs with #1 seed getting a bye week. Still use offsetting district format...with 2nd place team receiving home field advantage for the first round. Winner of that game travels to Offsetting district winner for 2nd round.

Current system makes no sense...especially when you are still playing district foes. If nothing else, get away from the inner district play until district/regional final round.

I have a strong suspicion that the format will change after this season. Too many well respected coaches are vigorously pushing adminstration for changes.

I agree and I hope you are right. :thumpsup:

I like option #2 the best and you have to play offsetting districts - draws a bigger gate.

[Codeman]

I think it is bull! that the #4 has to play the #1 seed because that is such a mismatch, you know David and Goliath for cryin out loud. We are in 3A and this is how it went down.


#1-Belfry VS. #4 Magoffin Belfry wins 42-14

#2-Sheldon Clark VS. #3 PCC Sheldon Clark wins 41- 6

It should have looked something like this...

#1-vs. #2 #3vs. #4 There may have been a totally different outcome.

[OutlawJoseyWales]

I think it is bull! that the #4 has to play the #1 seed because that is such a mismatch, you know David and Goliath for cryin out loud. We are in 3A and this is how it went down.




#1-Belfry VS. #4 Magoffin Belfry wins 42-14

#2-Sheldon Clark VS. #3 PCC Sheldon Clark wins 41- 6

It should have looked something like this...

#1-vs. #2 #3vs. #4 There may have been a totally different outcome.

That's crazy


In the current format....the district winner SHOULD be granted the easiest route to the state quarterfinals....and playing the #4 team is the balancing act. Not sure where you're coming from. In all facets of sports...whether it be college basketball, pro football, pro basketball, baseball...the overall winner of a conference, division, etc,etc, usually without fail receives some preferential treatment in terms of easiest path, home field advantage, etc,etc. Every team has the opportunity to EARN the top spot in their respective district, division, etc. Don't penalize the winner...for being the winner. I would much rather see 3 teams advancing into the playoffs vs. the current 4 team per district format. Too many teams are GRANTED a spot in the playoffs (due to 4 team districts).

[brotherinarms]

Refer to the "Any Given Friday" theory and theres the answer. Of course they are necessary any team can fall at any time its not only a matter of physical ability but also a matter of mental preperation dertermination and plain want to that allows teams to win.

[magic man]

i agree with the #1 playin 4# and 2 and 3 playing each other