but that is the great thing about it. they do not need to be able to jump up to the top tier??
they need to be playing in the tier that makes them competitive with each other.
First round blowouts and running clocks
- Thread starter ramblinman_rivals165935
- Start date
but that is the great thing about it. they do not need to be able to jump up to the top tier??
they need to be playing in the tier that makes them competitive with each other.
On that we can agree! I would like to see IC moved up a couple of "classes" I think they would get more competitive games playing in 6A with the likes of Cary Grove, PR, etc.
Would love to see ESL, GBN, Bradley and a handful of others in the "top class"
i doubt there is a system which solves the problem.
The problems isnt 5-4 teams from good conference. the problem is team of all records from bad conferences. If we shrink the field while protecting conference champs, not sure the problem gets solved other than booting out some very good 6-3 teams.
Here is my somewhat thought out solution
1) CPS gets 8 teams in playoffs... they can devise a system to figure out which 8
2) Reduce to 6 classes, keep 32 teams per class. this will eliminate all 5-4 teams
3) Add a "Strength of Conference" factor which captures last 3 year playoff wins from conference (somewhat adjusted for conf size). This will ensure that the 6-3 teams which get in should be from stronger conferences
4) Home field to higher seeds. Period.
The problems isnt 5-4 teams from good conference. the problem is team of all records from bad conferences. If we shrink the field while protecting conference champs, not sure the problem gets solved other than booting out some very good 6-3 teams.
Here is my somewhat thought out solution
1) CPS gets 8 teams in playoffs... they can devise a system to figure out which 8
2) Reduce to 6 classes, keep 32 teams per class. this will eliminate all 5-4 teams
3) Add a "Strength of Conference" factor which captures last 3 year playoff wins from conference (somewhat adjusted for conf size). This will ensure that the 6-3 teams which get in should be from stronger conferences
4) Home field to higher seeds. Period.
Should there be a limit to how many schools make it from other weak conferences? Last time the Southwest Prairie or Southland had a championship? Or Mid Suburban? Or just one weak conference?
How do we decide which are the strong conferences that get the extras? The CCL for example THIS YEAR showed they werent as strong as perceived, id hate for them to take a birth from a more deserving school because they had a great 2013.
What the actual problem here is, and Ive said it over and over, is that there is no way to classify open enrollment schools in relation to schools with boundaries. That is THE problem with enrollment classification. People want to expand that problem to all schools and its just unwarranted.
That said the only reason I am for the split is because when you arbitrarily put these open enrollment schools into the top class where they actually belong you have changed the whole dynamic of that class and pushed down public schools who also belong there.
How do we decide which are the strong conferences that get the extras? The CCL for example THIS YEAR showed they werent as strong as perceived, id hate for them to take a birth from a more deserving school because they had a great 2013.
What the actual problem here is, and Ive said it over and over, is that there is no way to classify open enrollment schools in relation to schools with boundaries. That is THE problem with enrollment classification. People want to expand that problem to all schools and its just unwarranted.
That said the only reason I am for the split is because when you arbitrarily put these open enrollment schools into the top class where they actually belong you have changed the whole dynamic of that class and pushed down public schools who also belong there.
I'm still struggling to see how to classify teams. Past performance doesn't always predict future results, especially in public high schools.
There is simply no way to play enough out of conference games to get enough data to accurately classify all teams in the state based strictly on ability.
Enrollment is the only standard and for closed boundary public schools it is the most logical and proven metric to classify teams.
Use football enrollment because strength of schedule matters and teams shouldn't play a class or two down in the post season if they are successful enough to qualify for the playoffs based on their regular season schedule.
Use a multiplier for ALL open boundary/enrollment schools because the evidence supports that open boundary schools have a much higher ceiling as compared to closed boundary schools of similar size.
Use a waiver because evidence also supports that not all open boundary schools are football factories.
There is simply no way to play enough out of conference games to get enough data to accurately classify all teams in the state based strictly on ability.
Enrollment is the only standard and for closed boundary public schools it is the most logical and proven metric to classify teams.
Use football enrollment because strength of schedule matters and teams shouldn't play a class or two down in the post season if they are successful enough to qualify for the playoffs based on their regular season schedule.
Use a multiplier for ALL open boundary/enrollment schools because the evidence supports that open boundary schools have a much higher ceiling as compared to closed boundary schools of similar size.
Use a waiver because evidence also supports that not all open boundary schools are football factories.
You don't have to get every possible unit of data. Neither do you have to accurately classify all teams in the state. What you have to do, in my opinion, is classify the qualifying teams better than is being done currently. Period. It doesn't have to be perfect or 100% accurate, just better.
When you say that enrollment is the most logical and proven metric to classify teams, I disagree. The only thing it has proven to be is flawed. Year after year, it produces classes that have HUGE ranges of competitive level from top to bottom. In my opinion, classification by enrollment combined with seeding by record and playoff points is the primary reason why there are as many blowouts as there are.
Now is the time we should start seeing some competitive games.
After the riff raff has been weeded out in the first two rounds, the best teams should be battling for the trip to the state finals.
Just out of curiosity, in this mythical endeavor to create algorithmic classes based on ability and performance....should each state champion have been moved up at least one class in hindsight?
After the riff raff has been weeded out in the first two rounds, the best teams should be battling for the trip to the state finals.
Just out of curiosity, in this mythical endeavor to create algorithmic classes based on ability and performance....should each state champion have been moved up at least one class in hindsight?
But that wont happen because of the ceilings reached by open enrollment school EIC and Phillips
1. I have said the same thing when we were. 1-8.
2. But we would likely be playing in Champaign
Which of these 12 teams is favoured to beat them? I didn't include the 2 teams they have beat
South Shore
Plano
Manteno
Coal City
Johnsburg
Genoa Kingston
Rockford Lutheran
Wheaton Academy
Aurora Central Catholic
Kewanee
Richmond Burton
Marengo
Favored based on who's rankings? You also have teams no longer playing and you forgot Althoff, Rochester, and Philips, who would all beat them. Plus Johnsburg and GK. I would take CC in a rematch as well.
All I said was that if Phillips would be in a higher class like they belong, we would likely end up playing in Champaign... obviously Rochester and Althoff dont come into that equation.. the 12 teams I listed do, looking at the entire bracket
Coal City would not beat Herscher.. first game was close because we couldn't figure out how to hold onto the football..
Even the CPS fans on the board have said Phillps should have a multiplier, they get kids from all over the south side and yet not multiplied..
If I told you to go jump in front of a truck because it's safe, would you?
When they break IHSA rules than call me. I'm sorry they're breaking your rules but for now the tigers have to play them.
And thats fine.. all I initially said was that if they weren't there, its likely we make it to the finals..
The IHSA is completely classifying them incorrectly
Maybe you try for a job with the IHSA and help fix the problem instead of airing your grievance on a message board?
I respectfully disagree with your statement about them making it to the finals, especially after watching them struggle a bit with Dixon.
Well you came up with 5-4 Coal City who we already beat.. LOL
And Johnsburg and Genoa-K... Not a big fan of comparing scores, but we beat Plano and Manteno by a bigger margin than Johnsburg did..so to say we couldnt win it makes no sense
You also shouldn't be a big fan of records, especially in the I-8. Plano turned into a train wreck and Manteno was hot garbage. Means nothing, what else you got? Besides contradictions....
So your grand answer to who is better than Herscher is a team that was only able to beat a train wreck by 12 and hot garbage by 14????
I-8 Large is one of, if not the, best 4A conferences in the state,, Herscher dominated that conferences this year..
I've said who I think can beat them. Re-read.
I-8 Large is one of, if not the best, based on what? Your opinion again? What is your definition of dominate? Large was 33-25 this year, not impressive to say the least. And too bad they missed Wilmo this year.
Would have loved to play Wilmo this year, think we beat them..
IHSS guys have Herscher ranked 5th in 4A, those are people that follow 4A football more than you do.. everyone had them in their top 7.. obviously you know more than
It's all opinon based. Clearly you think you're right and your **** doesn't stink. My opinion is that it does. Good luck to your boys, they'll need it.
Not going to read four pages of this thread but why not have a committee like they do for the NCAA Tournament? You get a couple experts (like Edgy, of course) and you have them meet a couple times throughout the regular season, and they pick 1-32, or quadrants, or whatever. The math involved with playoff points and whatnot are leading to some of these blowouts. It's rare that the NCAA gets it wrong for its games, why not try that approach?
Because there's over 500 teams and no one watches them all, not even edgy. Theres also not enough overlap between the teams to do this reasonably. Also the NCAA has NEVER gotten it right. The tournament has NEVER gone chalk which is what you expect if you get it right.
False. What your proposal does is sully each and every class other than the top class. Thats why I have characterized it the way I have. You want the top class of the perceived "Super Duper" teams (which you have proven you cant even determine which are which several times over) and every class under that is defined by being worse than the class above it. Like the CCL outside of the Green. The current system is based on something tangible and real not emotions.
Of course its all opinion.. its just that your opinion is different than everyone elses it seems.. consensus is that Phillps, Althoff and Rochester are a mile ahead of everyone else.. and then a group of Johnsburg, Herscher, Genoa ... after watching us all year and seeing Johnsburg on Friday, there is no question we could beat them..
It still doesn't make my opinion right or wrong and curses to me for not having the same opinion as "everyone else". I get that you're intimately invested in your team though which is why your attitude is the way it is. The fact is we'll never know because tiger doesn't make it out of the qtrs but feel free to crown them champs in your head.
Ah, the joys of talking to the internet hero that thinks he knows what he is talking about... I had a few beers with a Manteno coach yesterday, he felt that Herscher was better than Johnsburg... how many times have you seen those two teams play?????
All I have ever said is that they can beat any team in the state outside of the top 3... you are in a huge minority that feels other otherwise, which is fine because I am guessing you know nothing about the teams in 4A
Yes, right, I forgot you don't hide behind a screen name.
Herscher four times, Johnsburg thrice.
LOL... just AMAZING that you have happened to see schools that are 2.5 hours apart a total of 7 times...
Its just amazing that a yellow hammer like you would have the time to miss Wilmo games and drive to see Herscher and Johnsburg
Can we have your brief scouting reports on both teams?? Names/numbers of top kids each each??? Offenses and defense ran??
Maybe you are right and I am wrong, just the guy going with the herd and thinking my guys are a top 5 or 6 team.. and when my simple mind sees we beat Manteno and Plano by a bigger margin than Johnsburg did, that I translate that into thinking we could beat them..
Thanks for the chuckle.
That's why you're a simple mind, you don't factor in any of the intangibles. You simply see "Hey we beat so and so by a bigger margin so that MUST mean we're better." Cool story, bro.
Intangibles???? LOL
No, I look that we would do a better job containing Peete as our run defense has been better all year old.. we can pound their interior with Koranda and throw over the top on them like Manteno did..we can do everything as well and somethings better.
Oh, it's definitely based on something tangible alright. Problem is, it's also a faulty and flawed determinant of competitive level that has been proven so dozens of times each year for many years.
For me, this is an argument to try to find a better way. For you, you are satisfied with a very imperfect status quo. For someone who was so willing to make changes to discriminate against private schools, I find your unwillingness to admit to an obvious problem and to search for a better way to be very odd to say the least.