Random thoughts from someone so old that he knows that the original NFL teams included a club based in Racine, but NOT Racine in Wisconsin.
1) If the IHSA's "district" proposal does get overturned, it won't be mostly because of ridiculous matchups in which powerhouse programs from the Chicago suburbs are forced to play "district" games against non-competitive programs from the Chicago Public League, although that clearly is a problem.
It will be overturned because of the Rule of 9.
Some of the districts in the IHSA model had nine teams and a nine-team district will not work.
Forget the first two weeks of the 2021 season because those are practice games that mean nothing.
And ignore the fact that in a nine-team district, some teams won't be playing all the other teams in their district.
The reality is that in a nine-team district, in weeks 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, one team each week is NOT going to have anybody to play.
Where does a school which has no game in week 3 find a non-district opponent to play in yet another non-counting practice game?
And then, in week 4, it's a different team in the same scheduling situation. And then in week 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, well, you get the idea.
The only solution will be to find another nine-team district and match up the bye teams each week. Of course, that could create a competitive and worthwhile practice game.
Or, it could create a slaughter-rule game. Or it could create a game in which the visiting team is traveling 150 miles to play a practice game that does't count in the standings.
Anybody think that's a good idea?
The Rule of 9 does not work. An eight-team district can function on some level in terms of scheduling, though certainly not in terms of competitiveness.
A nine-team district fails. As would a seven-team district. A district is going to have to be eight teams or 10 teams or six teams...with the six-team version requiring teams to play some opponents twice during a district season.
The IHSA nine-team district is a train wreck waiting to happen.
2) Practice games the first two weeks of the season...
Do coaches play everybody on the roster in these two games because the result is irrelevant?
What about bizarre strategies in these games, such as testing out the theory of never punting regardless of the line of scrimmage?
Will opposing coaches agree to play starters for a half, and then flood the field with reserves so they get to play the second half?
Will teams use practice games to fine-tune their onside kicks?
Think about this please: In the NFL, everybody hates the preseason games. Yet, the IHSA has now created two preseason games for every high school team.
If a team has an outstanding running back, does the kid get 25 carries in the practice games, or does he sit to avoid injury?
3) Scheduling lower-level games is now the hardest job an athletic director has.
A strong football school might have a Freshman A team, a Freshman B team, a Sophomore team and a JV team. But there are schools in Illinois with enrollments above 1,200 that are going to have trouble fielding teams at at those four levels.
The IHSA has chosen to make scheduling easier at the varsity level, but at the same time, has created the potential for a major mess at lower levels.
4) Expanding the playoffs, which currently include 256 teams (32 teams X 8 classes).
Starting the season a week earlier so that the number of playoff teams can be doubled to 512 is not going to fly.
If a team's first game is in mid-August and three games are scheduled before Labor Day, when is actual practice going to start? The first week in August? Hello 90-degree days. That is stupid and will not work.
Playing an eight-game season so as to double the playoff enrollment to 512 is not going to work either. The reason? The game that will be eliminated under the IHSA's district plan is one of the practice games in weeks 1 and/or 2.
With an eight-team district, that's seven district games and just one practice game. For teams that are really good and are in a really week district, the game being eliminated is a game that the coaches, players and fans want to see.
Some have suggested making a 48-team bracket for the eight classes, which totals 384 teams. That creates a first-round playoff bye for the top 16 teams in each class, and you can pick those top 16 any way you want.
It's a bad idea.
For starters, you are again adding a week to the season for some teams. You can't add a week at the beginning because of August heat, and you can't add a week at the end because there are so many problems with moving off the Thanksgiving weekend for state playoffs that it has no chance of ever happening.
Just to bring up two problems:
1) If it's not Thanksgiving weekend for the playoffs, then you are trying to hold football playoffs all day Friday and Saturday while the university has school in session. Playing at ISU or NIU or U of I or SIU or any university works for the final games because the campus is basically empty because of the holiday weekend.
You want to see a mess? Trying driving a thousand cars onto the NIU campus during the day on a Friday with school in session. No shot at this happening.
2) Basketball season's opening games are Thanksgiving week. While it's certainly possible that a big school such as Lincoln-Way East will have no football players on its basketball roster, there are hundreds of schools in which the basketball team OR the wrestling team consists of football players.
Also, with a 48-team playoff bracket, you are giving a bye week to 16 teams that won't want it. Remember, they star players are losing a game to play — a state champ/runnerup would play 13 games in stead of 14 which the kids don't want.
But here's the thing: A good team such as Mt. Carmel would get a first-round by and then play the No. 32 or No. 33 seed in what is now the second round. Does a team want a bye to prepare for a 40-point slaughter game? Nobody wants that. It makes zero sense.
5) Finally, in an attempt to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem, here is one idea for expanding the football playoffs, and I kind of am surprised I haven't read this before because I guarantee there are ice hockey and boys lacrosse supporters reading.
Here is a doable play for turning a 32-team bracket into a 48-team bracket.
The top 32 teams go into the playoffs just as they do now. I don't care if you want to seed teams 1-32 or have two 1-16 brackets or four 1-8 brackets. Do whatever you want.
Now comes the new part. The next-best 128 teams — 5-4, 4-5 and 3-6 records under the current system and who know what under the new district system — will qualify for their own Silver Division playoffs with 16 teams in each of the eight brackets.
Those teams would have their own playoffs with the championship games set for the Saturday before Thanksgiving, with four classes playing at pick-a-school (Barrington is awesome and could host four games and I am sure there is a high school further south that could host the other four games. Crowds wouldn't be huge because these are, after all, not elite teams.
The champs would be crowned the weekend before the Gold Division state title games are played.
What this would do would be to give incentive to teams 1-5 to keep working hard to make the postseason
It's a B Division tournament, so to speak.
In ice hockey, the AHAI has done that in the past, playing its top teams in the Red Division (Loyola Gold, New Trier Green, Glenbrook North, etc.) and letting the lesser-skilled teams play in a White Division for a championship.
Boys lacrosse did the exact same thing until the IHSA took over the sport. If you're a lacrosse powerhouses (think New Trier, Loyola, etc.) it's great to compete for an IHSA state title. But if you're at a completely different skill level, then you have zero chance of succeeding in the postseason.
Playing in a Silver Division or "B" tourney would give football teams a reason to play on in October.
That's it. Thanks for reading.
1) If the IHSA's "district" proposal does get overturned, it won't be mostly because of ridiculous matchups in which powerhouse programs from the Chicago suburbs are forced to play "district" games against non-competitive programs from the Chicago Public League, although that clearly is a problem.
It will be overturned because of the Rule of 9.
Some of the districts in the IHSA model had nine teams and a nine-team district will not work.
Forget the first two weeks of the 2021 season because those are practice games that mean nothing.
And ignore the fact that in a nine-team district, some teams won't be playing all the other teams in their district.
The reality is that in a nine-team district, in weeks 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, one team each week is NOT going to have anybody to play.
Where does a school which has no game in week 3 find a non-district opponent to play in yet another non-counting practice game?
And then, in week 4, it's a different team in the same scheduling situation. And then in week 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, well, you get the idea.
The only solution will be to find another nine-team district and match up the bye teams each week. Of course, that could create a competitive and worthwhile practice game.
Or, it could create a slaughter-rule game. Or it could create a game in which the visiting team is traveling 150 miles to play a practice game that does't count in the standings.
Anybody think that's a good idea?
The Rule of 9 does not work. An eight-team district can function on some level in terms of scheduling, though certainly not in terms of competitiveness.
A nine-team district fails. As would a seven-team district. A district is going to have to be eight teams or 10 teams or six teams...with the six-team version requiring teams to play some opponents twice during a district season.
The IHSA nine-team district is a train wreck waiting to happen.
2) Practice games the first two weeks of the season...
Do coaches play everybody on the roster in these two games because the result is irrelevant?
What about bizarre strategies in these games, such as testing out the theory of never punting regardless of the line of scrimmage?
Will opposing coaches agree to play starters for a half, and then flood the field with reserves so they get to play the second half?
Will teams use practice games to fine-tune their onside kicks?
Think about this please: In the NFL, everybody hates the preseason games. Yet, the IHSA has now created two preseason games for every high school team.
If a team has an outstanding running back, does the kid get 25 carries in the practice games, or does he sit to avoid injury?
3) Scheduling lower-level games is now the hardest job an athletic director has.
A strong football school might have a Freshman A team, a Freshman B team, a Sophomore team and a JV team. But there are schools in Illinois with enrollments above 1,200 that are going to have trouble fielding teams at at those four levels.
The IHSA has chosen to make scheduling easier at the varsity level, but at the same time, has created the potential for a major mess at lower levels.
4) Expanding the playoffs, which currently include 256 teams (32 teams X 8 classes).
Starting the season a week earlier so that the number of playoff teams can be doubled to 512 is not going to fly.
If a team's first game is in mid-August and three games are scheduled before Labor Day, when is actual practice going to start? The first week in August? Hello 90-degree days. That is stupid and will not work.
Playing an eight-game season so as to double the playoff enrollment to 512 is not going to work either. The reason? The game that will be eliminated under the IHSA's district plan is one of the practice games in weeks 1 and/or 2.
With an eight-team district, that's seven district games and just one practice game. For teams that are really good and are in a really week district, the game being eliminated is a game that the coaches, players and fans want to see.
Some have suggested making a 48-team bracket for the eight classes, which totals 384 teams. That creates a first-round playoff bye for the top 16 teams in each class, and you can pick those top 16 any way you want.
It's a bad idea.
For starters, you are again adding a week to the season for some teams. You can't add a week at the beginning because of August heat, and you can't add a week at the end because there are so many problems with moving off the Thanksgiving weekend for state playoffs that it has no chance of ever happening.
Just to bring up two problems:
1) If it's not Thanksgiving weekend for the playoffs, then you are trying to hold football playoffs all day Friday and Saturday while the university has school in session. Playing at ISU or NIU or U of I or SIU or any university works for the final games because the campus is basically empty because of the holiday weekend.
You want to see a mess? Trying driving a thousand cars onto the NIU campus during the day on a Friday with school in session. No shot at this happening.
2) Basketball season's opening games are Thanksgiving week. While it's certainly possible that a big school such as Lincoln-Way East will have no football players on its basketball roster, there are hundreds of schools in which the basketball team OR the wrestling team consists of football players.
Also, with a 48-team playoff bracket, you are giving a bye week to 16 teams that won't want it. Remember, they star players are losing a game to play — a state champ/runnerup would play 13 games in stead of 14 which the kids don't want.
But here's the thing: A good team such as Mt. Carmel would get a first-round by and then play the No. 32 or No. 33 seed in what is now the second round. Does a team want a bye to prepare for a 40-point slaughter game? Nobody wants that. It makes zero sense.
5) Finally, in an attempt to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem, here is one idea for expanding the football playoffs, and I kind of am surprised I haven't read this before because I guarantee there are ice hockey and boys lacrosse supporters reading.
Here is a doable play for turning a 32-team bracket into a 48-team bracket.
The top 32 teams go into the playoffs just as they do now. I don't care if you want to seed teams 1-32 or have two 1-16 brackets or four 1-8 brackets. Do whatever you want.
Now comes the new part. The next-best 128 teams — 5-4, 4-5 and 3-6 records under the current system and who know what under the new district system — will qualify for their own Silver Division playoffs with 16 teams in each of the eight brackets.
Those teams would have their own playoffs with the championship games set for the Saturday before Thanksgiving, with four classes playing at pick-a-school (Barrington is awesome and could host four games and I am sure there is a high school further south that could host the other four games. Crowds wouldn't be huge because these are, after all, not elite teams.
The champs would be crowned the weekend before the Gold Division state title games are played.
What this would do would be to give incentive to teams 1-5 to keep working hard to make the postseason
It's a B Division tournament, so to speak.
In ice hockey, the AHAI has done that in the past, playing its top teams in the Red Division (Loyola Gold, New Trier Green, Glenbrook North, etc.) and letting the lesser-skilled teams play in a White Division for a championship.
Boys lacrosse did the exact same thing until the IHSA took over the sport. If you're a lacrosse powerhouses (think New Trier, Loyola, etc.) it's great to compete for an IHSA state title. But if you're at a completely different skill level, then you have zero chance of succeeding in the postseason.
Playing in a Silver Division or "B" tourney would give football teams a reason to play on in October.
That's it. Thanks for reading.
