Maybe extend the regular season by starting one week earlier and shorten the playoff (3 games vs 5) to allow for conference tournaments with the winner moving to the playoffs as the conference representative. Your conference should determine the class, not individual schools.
First round blowouts and running clocks
- Thread starter ramblinman_rivals165935
- Start date
Great! Thank you for giving this some thought and coming up with an idea to make the playoffs better. Is it safe to infer that you are at least somewhat in agreement that there are too many first round mismatches?
I think there are too many mismatches played throughout both positive and negative results. I know we switched to 1-32 seeding but there are still flaws in the system considering the current method of seeding. Example: 8-1 Nequa playing against 7-2 GBW first round. Not fair to either one of those teams in terms of first round matchups. I know 8A was extremely difficult with the amount of undefeated and one loss teams however E'ville, GBW and MS all could have remained 7A and made that tournament a little tougher for all schools. I think when you have a 5-4 team they should fall where they may.
Example. Based the classes on all the automatic qualifiers first by even it out as best as you can. So this year the number was 204 so that mean the top 25 by enrollment is determined for each class. Once that is complete, you place the 5-4 throughout the playoffs at will. Congrats for making the playoffs but your class will be determined later. Take those handful of teams and match them up however you see fit. So the higher 5-4 teams will fill the first 7 spots in 8A. The next highest will fill the next 7 spots in 7A. So there is a chance that a 5-4 Naz would have to play6A or 7A and not 5A. In this scenario, I can't see NV having to play GBW in the first round. I expect an undefeated team to win big over a 5-4 team however I shouldn't see the reverse under no circumstances.
But Marist's path included the DVC champ. Are you really suggesting that the DVC champ is not on a competitive level with the highest class? This is why the idea is absurd. What if they destroy an 8-1 Cary Grove? You keep operating under some odd assumption that blowouts dont happen between evenly matched teams despite the fact that i give you examples of blowouts between evenly matched teams. Why would you use Libertyville as an example when they struggled with an average Bradley last year?
I think the problem youre having is you want to take repitation and post hoc information and pretend as though you can apply it to the future. Last year Bradley was like 3rd or 4th in their conference which wasnt particularly strong and they had Libertyville beat and you want to elevate Libertyville based on what? Ill take Barrington all day. Reminds me of how everyone was hyping LZ in recent years when simple investigation shows that Stevenson owned them. LZ had the better reputation because of the playoff class they were in being easier. Fact is, with public schools when you move up in enrollment you are generally getting a better class.
The sooner you understand that the sooner youll understand why youre spinning your wheels here.
As for shortening the playoffs, sure why not. Why not just eliminate the playoffs all together and have a few bowl games? Some would be sure to end in blowouts still.
Ramblin again, back to my post:
the IHSA system while far from perfect appears to error on the side of letting in a larger amount of schools than to error on a smaller amount of schools, and really what is the harm in that? so 30% of 40% are blow outs in the first round? so what? the boys get to play an additional week and the schools get the excitement of making the playoffs. if they don't belong there, they get blown out, no harm no foul. These boys for the most part get 2 years and 2 years only to be able to compete in P/O's, its a memory they will have for a lifetime, even if they get blown out. Just over half the schools make it, meaning about half don't. its not a professional league.
lets look at some schools that either would have just made it or not made it at all under a different system.
In 8A
Fremd (25 seed) Win
Huntley (24 seed) Win
WV (31 seed) Win over 9-0 team in a "tough" conference (most years)
Maine South (26 seed) Win
in 7A
Jacobs (28 seed) Win (running clock over 8-1 team)
Agree that all divisions should be seeded 1-32 and eliminate North/South. You go with the 1-32 seeding at every level, eliminate North/South and in the end the majority of the time you will truly get the top 2 teams, or very close to it, playing in the final game. The winner is the champion, isn't that the point of the tournament to crown the best team in the division? The most equitable way to get that and give everyone a "fair" shot at it, is to seed them. with the seeding the better team are for the most part are rewarded for having a good regular season. if there is blowouts along the way, then there are. what is the harm in that?
There is NO SUCH THING as a perfect system. Never going to happen, someone will always have a gripe, no matter what you use.
No.
All I am suggesting is that, with a class of top teams instead of largest schools, Marist's road to the title game would have been different. Actually, that's not a suggestion; that's a fact. Under those circumstances, who knows if Marist would have made it to the title game? Hell, who knows if LOYOLA would have made it that far under those circumstances? Clearly, gooms felt strongly that GBW was the better of the two teams last year.
How many examples can you give like that? For every one you give, I'll give you AT LEAST 10 playoff game blowouts that are between mismatched teams. Better yet, Bones, how about if you do a little work here for once? How about if you go back to the list of the 52 first round blowouts that I posted, and you sell me on which of those games were between "evenly matched teams."
Libertyville finished last year at 13-1. Their lone loss came in the 7A title game by 6 pts to GBW. While they may have struggled (and prevailed) against Bradley in the semis, they also dispatched some pretty solid teams last year like LWE and Stevenson, If you think that Libertyville was not one of the top 32 teams in the state last year, you were not paying attention.
Last edited:
Really? You are really trying to take the side that blowouts are, at worst, neutral or no harm no foul? Again, what good is it to have a playoff game, a PLAYOFF game, where one team would beat the other in a blowout ten out of ten times? What's the point? To give the kids an extra game to play, when 41% of those games are blowouts? Has anyone ASKED the kids who were blown out if they would have preferred to play an additional game against a team closer in caliber to their own?
I'm not suggesting that we reduce the number of teams that qualify. Take the same 256 qualifying schools and just classify them differently. Johnny still gets to have that playoff memory of a lifetime. Ideally, he won't have to remember that he was blown out 67-0.
Completely agree. But, does that does not mean that we should be satisfied with the status quo. If someone can build a better mousetrap, do you tell them not to bother because the one that everyone uses gets it right six times out of ten?
Last edited:
Blowouts happen. In every sport. In the playoffs.
But... in a competitive playoff scenario, you don't see one particular team crush their way through the entire bracket. This, unfortunately happens often in the IHSA football playoffs in multiple classes.
The problem isn't first round blowouts. It's not. It's just not. A typical 5-4 team playing a 9-0 should probably get beat soundly all things considered....just like an NBA 1 seed should probably sweep an 8 seed in the playoffs.
The problem is currently teams like Phillips, ICCP, a few years ago Montini, Rochester, JCA and going into my time machine... Driscoll...
This thread is kinda dumb but it's an interesting spin.
If there are 32 teams in a class....in an ideal world how many have a realistic chance at winning it all? In ramblinman's brain, obviously it is 32. I don't know the answer, but I know that the top team shouldn't consistently be 35 points better than teams 2 through 8. The "culprits" are typically teams that "play by a different set of rules" than the rest of the pack.
I'm not even sure the multiplier and the success factor have made much difference. If anything it just seems to hurt the vast majority of teams that are not football powers.
Changes should probably be made, but since all teams are not created equal, it is almost futile to try and concoct a system that will achieve competitive balance throughout.
I'd personally like to go back to football enrollment with multipliers in place for open enrollment schools. Waivers for teams that haven't made the playoffs in 3 years.
The common denominator seems to be when teams "play down" once they enter the playoffs.
But... in a competitive playoff scenario, you don't see one particular team crush their way through the entire bracket. This, unfortunately happens often in the IHSA football playoffs in multiple classes.
The problem isn't first round blowouts. It's not. It's just not. A typical 5-4 team playing a 9-0 should probably get beat soundly all things considered....just like an NBA 1 seed should probably sweep an 8 seed in the playoffs.
The problem is currently teams like Phillips, ICCP, a few years ago Montini, Rochester, JCA and going into my time machine... Driscoll...
This thread is kinda dumb but it's an interesting spin.
If there are 32 teams in a class....in an ideal world how many have a realistic chance at winning it all? In ramblinman's brain, obviously it is 32. I don't know the answer, but I know that the top team shouldn't consistently be 35 points better than teams 2 through 8. The "culprits" are typically teams that "play by a different set of rules" than the rest of the pack.
I'm not even sure the multiplier and the success factor have made much difference. If anything it just seems to hurt the vast majority of teams that are not football powers.
Changes should probably be made, but since all teams are not created equal, it is almost futile to try and concoct a system that will achieve competitive balance throughout.
I'd personally like to go back to football enrollment with multipliers in place for open enrollment schools. Waivers for teams that haven't made the playoffs in 3 years.
The common denominator seems to be when teams "play down" once they enter the playoffs.
LWE was a shell of their former selves Last year and Stevenson was 6-3 and got shellacked in the 2nd round. Those are your examples that boost Libertyville? Along with struggling with a middling Bradley? This is what makes your top class? And you want to disparage Marist's path?
Far be it from me to defend Marist, but come on. I mean, why dont we just put Taylorville in there for safe measure? Honestly, it sounds like you want to classify and seed based on hype and reputation. I admittedly dont like that idea in principle.
Why do I keep seeing images of Bernie Sanders when I read this thread??? I am sure he would approve
Hey, Bones, how about if you remind the good folks reading this thread where you ranked Libertyville in last year's final DSR rankings? I'm happy to provide the link if you have forgotten.
I agree that it would be futile to attempt to create completely balanced classes. I'm not suggesting that we should try.
What I am suggesting is to try to come up with something that would IMPROVE the current competitive balance of our playoff classifications, because enrollment as the sole determining classification factor, combined with seeding within those enrollment based classes, is exactly what is contributing to the mismatches.
Im sure they were ranked highly. I have no problem with that and would do it again. What I wouldnt do is automatically pick them in a game over Marist at the end of the year, or even NC, or WV.
There is a difference between a ranking and classifiying/seeding a playoff class in a judicious and reasonable manner. Afterall Rice had all the hype and reputation this year...but got beat by a team who wouldnt make your "class of great teams" instead they get to be in the "you still play football" class and go toe to toe with Bremen.
Just out of curiosity in preventing blowouts, what do you do about the blowouts where the team with the lessor record is the team that won by 30 plus on the road? Now I know some of them were better to begin with. But there are surprises.
So a 5 and 4 team doesn't get in. I know you want to prevent it. Sometimes you can't. Look at NFL Super Bowls. There definitely have been some stinkers. If the NFL can't prevent a walloping in the super bowl, do you think that any of us can do this in high school football?
Don't sweat it. Relax. Enjoy the games. Watch young men do their best in the face of overwhelming opposition. Sometimes they may surprise you.
So a 5 and 4 team doesn't get in. I know you want to prevent it. Sometimes you can't. Look at NFL Super Bowls. There definitely have been some stinkers. If the NFL can't prevent a walloping in the super bowl, do you think that any of us can do this in high school football?
Don't sweat it. Relax. Enjoy the games. Watch young men do their best in the face of overwhelming opposition. Sometimes they may surprise you.
For the record, let me remind you and others. You ranked Libertyville #4. That was AFTER they "struggled" with Bradley in the semis, AFTER they beat a couple of shells of their former selves, and AFTER they lost to GBW in the finals.
I suggested that adding your #4 team to a top team class last year, along with a few other top 7A teams, would have had an impact on Marist's road to the title game. From your response, you would have thought I was suggesting to add some washed up also ran that couldn't possibly hold its own in a top class instead of your #4 pick last year. You win the grand prize for talking out of both sides of your mouth.
While I am at it, Bones, SEVEN of your final DSR top ten last year were playing in classes other than 8A. If ever there were proof that our current classification system fails to feature evenly matched teams, one need only look at your final DSR rankings and the classifications of those teams.
I don't know exactly how it could be done, but IF it could be done, or if something close to it could be done, just try to imagine a top class that includes the best of the best...instead of the largest. Why that is something that scares you or revolts you or causes you nervous diarrhea at the mere notion of such a thing is simply mystifying. To me, the very idea is so full of promise and potential that I think it is worth it to give it a try regardless of the handful of unintended consequences that seem to be giving you a bad case of agita or nervous bowels.
Last edited:
I'm not trying to prevent 5-4 teams from getting in. Again, keep the exact same qualifying teams as we have now.
What I am trying to prevent are mismatches that result in blowouts. I'm trying to classify teams so that a 5-4 Marian Central doesn't have to play a 9-0 Solorio or a 5-4 Sycamore doesn't face a 7-2 Westinghouse in round one. I think the only way to avoid that is to have them in different classes. The 42-0 victory for Marian Central and 55-0 win for Sycamore two years ago are two of literally hundreds upon hundreds of playoff games over the years that serve as mounting evidence that the classification system needs to be adjusted.
Last edited:
StonedLizard has a pretty cool detailed plan that is being tweaked for an offseason thread I think. yes - get all the "top teams" into one division.
just wanted to point that out.... please carry on
StonedLizard has a pretty cool detailed plan that is being tweaked for an offseason thread I think. yes - get all the "top teams" into one division.
just wanted to point that out.... please carry on
Still much in the works, but so far Montini would be classified higher than Taft, which would be classified higher than Byron, which would be classified higher than Westinghouse...
The problem ramblinman, is that you are picking this "best of the best" and placing them into 8A (a class based on enrollment) AFTER the fact. Youre explaining who you are dropping and why. Furthermore I highly doubt your rationale can be consistant.
I don't think it would take much to know intuitively that a team like Taft needed to be dropped from 8A before the fact. What is needed is a classification system that would objectively and empirically determine that. I think such a concept is worthy of further development. You, on the other hand, are avoiding it like the plague.
What about Taft says they should be dropped that Simeon doesnt have? And dropped from where, 8A is an enrollment based class. Perhaps West Aurora should be dropped, they were 9-0 but lost. Or do we only apply this rule selectively?
Perhaps Taft and WA both should have been dropped. Both of them played just one playoff qualifier in the regular season, with Taft losing to Lincoln Park and West Aurora beating Huntley.
What is needed is a classification system that would appropriately classify most of the teams such that the gap between the best and worst teams in each class is narrowed as much as it reasonably can be. Ideally, it would get schools like Taft and WA into the appropriate class, but maybe it can't get everything right all the time. It doesn't have to be perfect, just better. Clearly, the current system we have is FAR from perfect.
But Huntley beat 8-1 Stevenson. So we're going to drop West Aurora, Huntley, Stevenson, and Simeon (who lost all their non-conference games and only beat schools similar to Taft).
I think every school should have two non conference games to help with seeding. I also think playoff points should only count from the opponents you beat. The more teams you beat, the more playoff points you have.
There's classification, and then there's seeding within that classification. I don't think they are necessarily one in the same.
Now you are the one arguing after the fact.
Earlier, you chided me for basing my arguments after the fact, calling it a problem. I then adjust to before the fact, and you bring up an after the fact playoff game that you use to call my before the fact argument into question.
Did you and HHSTF pay for the same correspondence school course in negotiation?
Last edited:
They are definitely not one in the same.
We qualify one way (record), classify another way (enrollment), and seed the classes a third way (record and playoff pts). The result of that cornucopia of crap is 52 first round playoff games out of 128 with victory margins of 30 pts or more.
Yes I used after the fact information to show that your competitive level talk simply wont work. Wed also have to drop Maine South because they were pretty even with West Aurora.
This isn't an argument. It's contradiction. It has devolved into the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.
You did not address the rest of my post.
There are certainly problems with the seeding system. Teams from weaker areas get seeded higher than their ability. That is a problem.
I still fail to see an issue with large margin of victory in the first round. To me, that should be somewhat expected, especially when teams are actually seeded properly.
In a true competitive playoff scenario with 32 teams, the games should theoretically get closer as the teams advance.
I suppose that your ideas to classify properly to limit first round mismatches would also eliminate what I view as the problem, which is teams like IC running clocking their way through 3A. So, I guess we agree that there is a problem with both classification and seeding, which is a start.
that is why you need to go to a 4tier system. it is the only way it works.
north, south, east, west. will each have there 4tiers. and the top 8 winning tiers will play in the top tier1, and so on down the road. so by game 7/8/9 you have your tier1, tier2, etc.
you have got to stop thinking of 1a-8a, because it is meaningless. 8a is NO better than a 1a school. and I do not want to hear go thru the season playing 8a schools. its simply the depth.
just because you are classified in 8a does not mean squat.
altho it should, it should mean you are the best Illinois has to offer. but that is simply not true.
How do you determine the tiers?
There has to be a standard. In my opinion, it is public schools and enrollment.
There are haves and have nots at all spectrums, but if you just look at the public schools, the quality of the teams tend to improve as the enrollments go up.
That is why football enrollment should be used with a multiplier for open boundary schools and a waiver for open boundary schools under certain criteria.
This might not eliminate first round blowouts, but it would create more competitive games in the second round and beyond.
If you were to take IC out of the equation, there would still be NINE first round games in 3A that were decided by 30 pts or more last weekend. That's more than half of all first round games in 3A.
A team like IC going deep in 3A and blowing out everyone along the way is the outlier. 41% of first round games being decided by 30 pts or more is the norm. You shouldn't change systems to deal with outliers. Systems should be changed to deal with a norm that is undesirable.
I am not trying to eliminate all blowouts. When you say blowouts should be somewhat expected, I somewhat agree. My opinion is that 41% of first round games being blowouts is more than I care to expect and be satisfied with.
I'll ask you the same question I've asked others: What is your threshold? Mine is around 33%. I don't know why that's how I feel, I just do. Would 90% of first round games being blowouts be too much for you? 80%? 70%? At what point would you start to believe that there are too many first round blowouts?
I'm glad you agree that there is a problem with classification and seeding. I think the problem stems from qualifying by record, classifying by enrollment, and seeding by record and playoff points. Two of those three actions are related to actual games played. The other is related to something very different. I think if we tried to change the one that is very different to one that is influenced by both enrollment AND games played, that it would reduce the top to bottom gap of competitive level that exists in each class currently determined by enrollment only.
Last edited:
Ehhh theoretically yes you are correct. And I dont argue that.
IMO the classes as is are simply the classes. But lets not kid ourselves 99.9% of the time if the 1A champ played the 8A champ its going to be over in the 1st qtr before depth is an issue. But that doesnt speak to the quality of the class simply the difference in potential given the #'s.
With your proposal i fail to see how region is relevant to classification. Just because Rochester may be the #1 team in central IL doesnt mean they should have to play Loyola, thats absurd. Also not sure how you came to the tier idea, so because Bolingbrook may be a 4th tier in its region they get to play Mt Olive? Come on. This is getting out of hand.
Now I do agree with you that in Ramblin's scenario it is pointless to talk of dropping and raising teams until he gets the classes down pat because it makes no sense to have a system not based on enrollment but to then talk about moving schools around in a system based on enrollment. Thats why I keep asking for something so we can determine what the classes look like.
Not sure I am buying that.
In general if you have 3000 students to draw from (and let's say every single one of them turns out for football) the top 22 kids from that 3000 student pool will be significantly better than the top 22 kids from the 300 student school 99 times out of 100
Just like a gold miner with a Pan is going to find fewer gold nuggets than the strip mining operation a mile down stream
GoDogz - have you watched the 1A or 2A title games and compared those teams/games to the 7A/8A title games recently? I watched 2A thru 8A last year and there is a very big difference between 2A and 7A/8A in my humble opinion (and I'm not just talking about # of kids on the sidelines and/or depth)
problem is you are assuming because bb has 3000students they have a bigger pool to choose from. and most years that is true. but how about this year. they would simply lose their way to tier2 or possibly tier3 this year. because they are average at best this year. but next year they may have a blockbust year and be right back in tier1. it is not about championships. it is about being ranked in the best class Illinois has to offer. you can give them all medals if they need something to touch and feel or showoff in the hallways.
you guys are really not seeing the big picture.
if you are in tiers. it does not make bb v mt olive.
mt olive will fall or rise to their potential, same as bb.
same as every school involved. this will also help with the public school cycles of being good and not so good every 3-4years. and the private schools that just are not good in football, and just are being lumped in with the rest.
because if you are good you will find your way up to playing the best. every year, yes some teams will find their way up to the top year in and year out. but you will see a changing of the guard because you will get the best of the best each and every year all the way down to the least best of the best... and they still get their medals. tier4 team64.
but you saying you want tier1 team16 to play tier3 team5 so they can play for a championship because they have the same amount of kids. I don't agree.
yes, watch them all every year. and some years that may be true.
however, again you are assuming that just because they have 100kids on the sidelines that the school with 35kids on the sideline is not as good to be able to play them.
go years back when driscoll was on its insane run, they could have matched up with virtually anybody every year. and if think differently then you are absolutely crazy.
or Rochester, any public school that breeds success year in and year out.
so you are saying that the 35kid school cannot pass a football 65yards for a touchdown.
but the 1600kid school that gives 45pts in a game is better you are nuts. will they be able to find some monstrous dudes for their lines much easier sure, I totally agree.
As bad as we were this year we would easily win 1A. Not even going to discuss it. Even with injuries. This year and every year.
Its about how you compare to similar schools. To try to classify by saying which schools are good and which are bad is insane.
No - what I am saying is there are very few if any 1A or 2A schools that could make the jump to the top division.
Driscoll was a private school and in 3A out of 6 classes - so yes I could see them being able to jump to the top class just like I could see the Montini team from last year in 6A jumping to the top class. But those are a few exceptions out of 100's of schools.