Introducing the IHSA Class C Championship Series

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
Ladies and Gentlemen; Vertebrates, Invertebrates, Amphibians and Lizards alike;

These are desperate times. Syrian Refugees, terrorists, a climate crisis, political correctness and the continued push to disincentivize competition are all serious issues. However, none more serious than the recent Illinois high school football championships that produced 4 public and 4 private champions, with 5 blowout games. Indeed, these are troubling facts, and this reptile has had enough. So much enough that said lizard has opted to forgo it's lurking, grow a pair (of thumbs) and partake in the discussion.

It is with this political turmoil in mind that I propose a fully clambaked idea. An idea that will reward and encourage competition. That will result in more teams making the playoffs and more teams scheduling tough regular season slates. An idea, so bold, that it can apply to every school, to every sport in which the IHSA hosts a championship series. I propose - The IHSA Class C Championship Series! brought to you by Country Financial (C for competitive ;)).

At the beginning of each athletic season, every IHSA membership school will have the ability to opt in to compete in the IHSA Class C Championship Series! brought to you by Country Financial. Schools that opt-in will be grouped together in their own playoff bracket. For football, this would mean the opt-in schools are seeded (seeding approach TBD, but will include SOS), with the top 32 teams making the Class C playoffs. If less than 32 teams opt in, then every opt in team makes the playoffs. If more than 32 opt in, then those that don't make the top 32 cut will fall back to standard classification. After the Class C is determined, the remaining classes are built.

As the prestige and honor of a Class C championship builds over time, this will open the doors for 32 more teams to make the overall playoff pool. It will encourage scheduling of tougher regular season schedules by the more competitive teams, as Class C opt ins can make the playoffs regardless of record (if less than 32 opt ins) and potentially still make the standard 1-8A playoffs if they fall out of the top 32 C-Class opt ins. It will also remove the end of season debate; if you want to claim you're the best, opt in and prove it.

I'll go out on a limb here (actually quite common for the lizard folk) and say the entire CCL Blue, Montini, SHG, and JCA would opt in. Would also venture that the Glenbard Wests, HF, Maine South, LWE, and other perennial public powers would often opt in more years than not. Imagine the games, crowd$, and competition this would provide!

And why stop at football? Why should the wrestling world be deprived of Montini vs OPRF, or the basketball world miss out on the 3A vs 4A separation of powers. There is an answer to our problems, and that answer is clear, bring on The IHSA Class C Championship Series! brought to you by Country Financial!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: The Disciple

BretEpic

Heisman
Jan 27, 2005
16,866
22,189
113
 

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
Couldn't agree more. This opportunity kind of exists today - but the only school I can recall wanting to "play up" is ESL...

It's all about branding @Capt Morgan

Why choose to play up to 7A when I can win 6A just fine? After all, today it's still just a another 1 of 8 state championships to be had. But to stay in 6A when the major competition has opted in to the Class C Series? I may win 6A, but that's now the Cotton Bowl to your BCS championship.
 

mchsalumni

All-Conference
Sep 24, 2008
5,702
3,531
0
I'm thinking @stonedlizard isn't as high as I originally thought. I like this idea, and you could add that some schools have no choice, but have to be Class C. Say any privates over 4A?
 
Jun 17, 2015
195
42
0
Ladies and Gentlemen; Vertebrates, Invertebrates, Amphibians and Lizards alike;

These are desperate times. Syrian Refugees, terrorists, a climate crisis, political correctness and the continued push to disincentivize competition are all serious issues. However, none more serious than the recent Illinois high school football championships that produced 4 public and 4 private champions, with 5 blowout games. Indeed, these are troubling facts, and this reptile has had enough. So much enough that said lizard has opted to forgo it's lurking, grow a pair (of thumbs) and partake in the discussion.

It is with this political turmoil in mind that I propose a fully clambaked idea. An idea that will reward and encourage competition. That will result in more teams making the playoffs and more teams scheduling tough regular season slates. An idea, so bold, that it can apply to every school, to every sport in which the IHSA hosts a championship series. I propose - The IHSA Class C Championship Series! brought to you by Country Financial (C for competitive ;)).

At the beginning of each athletic season, every IHSA membership school will have the ability to opt in to compete in the IHSA Class C Championship Series! brought to you by Country Financial. Schools that opt-in will be grouped together in their own playoff bracket. For football, this would mean the opt-in schools are seeded (seeding approach TBD, but will include SOS), with the top 32 teams making the Class C playoffs. If less than 32 teams opt in, then every opt in team makes the playoffs. If more than 32 opt in, then those that don't make the top 32 cut will fall back to standard classification. After the Class C is determined, the remaining classes are built.

As the prestige and honor of a Class C championship builds over time, this will open the doors for 32 more teams to make the overall playoff pool. It will encourage scheduling of tougher regular season schedules by the more competitive teams, as Class C opt ins can make the playoffs regardless of record (if less than 32 opt ins) and potentially still make the standard 1-8A playoffs if they fall out of the top 32 C-Class opt ins. It will also remove the end of season debate; if you want to claim you're the best, opt in and prove it.

I'll go out on a limb here (actually quite common for the lizard folk) and say the entire CCL Blue, Montini, SHG, and JCA would opt in. Would also venture that the Glenbard Wests, HF, Maine South, LWE, and other perennial public powers would often opt in more years than not. Imagine the games, crowd$, and competition this would provide!

And why stop at football? Why should the wrestling world be deprived of Montini vs OPRF, or the basketball world miss out on the 3A vs 4A separation of powers. There is an answer to our problems, and that answer is clear, bring on The IHSA Class C Championship Series! brought to you by Country Financial!


I think you are on to something or really close.

How about this? You have 8/6 classes, then let the PROGRAMS themselves pick what class they want to be for the next 5 years. HEAR ME OUT, People sometimes have little faith in a free market but many times it sorts itself out just fine, or at least better than it does under subjective rules and stipulation.

lets say we stick with the current 8 class system. The rule being that it is up to the school for the next 5 years what class they want to be in. They can only move between class 8-5A. Schools with big enrollments will feel the pressure not to pick lower classes and winning the "8A" state championship would be seen as the"true" state champions since it would be seen as the toughest. Critics will say, " what if a big public school wants to be in 5A?" My first reaction is, LET THEM. Over time the market will equal itself out, and winning a 5A title as an 8A school will be looked down upon. OR OR you could have the schools in that class vote IF a bigger school can move down. OK to move up, but needs to vote if you move down.

People might ask if its fair if a school like Lyons Township(sorry for using this example when i think average 8A schools they just always pop to mind) moves down from 8A to 5A and you see a MCC/LWW/naz vs LT in round 2. Ill live with that because I rather see that potential game than a LWW vs Troy 31-7 boring or the million other blowout games we saw in the opening rounds.

I think you would be surprised at what class programs pick, as most coaches embrace a challenge.
 

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
@mchsalumni I'd hate to actually force certain schools, as that can draw some negative connotations and opens the door to having to deal with how/when to move schools in/out of the C Class. Call me an optimist, but I like the think the court of public opinion and shaming can drive successful schools to opt in. We live in a country based on free market economics, applying some of those finer points here. You do raise a good point though, so indulge me while I refine:

  • Keep the same 1.65 multiplier applied to non-boundary schools for class determination after C Class playoff field is defined
  • Introduce the "Champions Promotion" brought to you by Farmers Insurance (side note, why do all the IHSA sponsors seem to be insurance companies?) or something that sounds better, to promote schools that have shown substantial success in the 1-8a classes into the C-Class. You may be thinking that something like this already exists, and you'd be correct! Take the success factor, and make it a positive, promotional factor. A "you are clearly a strong very good program that should join the other strong very good programs" factor.
  • For now, we'll say Champions Promotion works as the SF does today, except it can apply to both Private and Public schools, and will only force the promoted team into the C-Class for two years (remember, if more than 32 teams opt in and your seeding puts you at 33, you fall back to standard playoffs)
  • Let it ride

Over time, I'd like to think we'd see the prestige of the C Class force teams to opt in to compete, even if they don't win it all. Bolingbrook winning an 8A championship when they didn't opt in to the C Class is hardly something to brag about. Depending on how the C Class seeding is done, purely making the 32 team field would be an accomplishment, a de facto "top 32 in state finish".
 
  • Like
Reactions: mchsalumni

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
Just for fun, let's take the teams that historically opt for a challenge or would have had the Champions Promotion apply to them for the 2015 football year and throw together our first Class C Championship Series playoff pool. Remember this would have been done prior to the season starting, so we don't necessarily know how good/bad some teams would have been...

  1. Phillips (a maybe, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt)
  2. Rochester (first Champions Promotion to public school!)
  3. JCA
  4. Naz (a maybe, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt)
  5. SHG (Champions Promotion on the private side!)
  6. Montini (see SHG)
  7. East St Louis (historical precedence for opting up)
  8. Maine South (historical precedence based on non-con scheduling)
  9. Wheaton Warrenville South (historical precendence)
  10. Stevenson (just won 8A, why not?)
  11. HF (looking to prove something)
  12. Loyola (CCLB)
  13. Mount Carmel (CCLB, all for one and one for all)
  14. Brother Rice (CCLB, see 12,13)
  15. St Rita (CCLB, see 14)
  16. Providence (CCLB, see 15)
Viola! Not only do you get the literal handful of privates that cause all the issues into the same class, you sprinkle in the publics that annually compete for a title and field strong teams. Is this even a stretch? This doesn't even consider the GBW, LZ, LWE, Brook, or other perennial public contenders that may opt in for year 1, let alone year 2 once they see the potential.

Now let's seed them based on W/L, opponents win record, football enrollment, something that gets us to roughly where these teams would have ranked in week 10, and to the actual playoff bracket...

1. Loyola
16. ESL (tough to call where to put them with the forfeits)

8. Naz
9. Phillips

4. JCA
13. WWS

5. SHG
12 Stevenson

2. HF
15. St Rita

7. MC
10. Rochester

3. Montini
14. Providence

6. Brother Rice
11. Maine South

Primetime HS Football here. A 2nd round Loyola vs Naz/Phillips...a 1st round Naz vs Phillips!!
 
Last edited:

Sportsguy909

Redshirt
Nov 29, 2015
3
0
0
@stonedlizard this idea is brilliant. My only question is how much of a component is record? Do you take in the 5-4 Team like Marist this year or mount Carmel last year or the 9-0 Whitney young team
 

Catch--22

Senior
Sep 29, 2006
2,518
756
0
I think Lizard said the top 32 teams "by seed" would make it. Brings two extreme scenarios to mind, and I don't think I'm bothered by either.....

The CCL Blue teams of recent vintage (Provi '15 and Rita '15) who finish 3-6 but would murder 95% of the teams in the state would make the Class C playoffs if only 30-35 teams opted in. If that 3-6 record isn't good enough to make the Top 32 seeds in Class C, they fall to the remaining 8 classes, so they miss the playoffs all together.

Contrarily, if we get to a place in which the prestige of Class C is all that matters to the biggest schools, maybe 100 schools opt in. All the schools Lizard mentioned, as well as the Napers, Downers, Valleys, Hinsdales, Barr, Fremd, Pala, Lville, NT, E-town, CG, Batv, Geneva, etc etc etc.... So the top 32 seeds could possibly be a collection of solely 9-0 and 8-1 teams. A down year for Loyola resulting in a 6-3 record simply "drops" them to 8A.

My tweaks..... Class C would be followed by 7 classes rather than 8. 256 teams is still the size of the playoff field so 4-5 teams aren't qualifying in classes below Class C.

Saturday night is reserved for Class C in the playoffs. The remaining 7 classes play on Friday nights and Saturday afternoons.

Neutral sites for the quarters and semis would be great, but it might be a logistical nightmare. It's easy to say ISU, U of I, NIU, etc would host, until a matchup like GW vs Loyola is slated for ISU. If the available large local stadiums (NCC, BU, Bridgeview etc) could be snapped up with short notice, that would be ideal.... but not realistic.
 

ignazio

All-Conference
Oct 25, 2007
3,837
2,878
0
How the hell did you join over 6 years ago and just start posting today?

Your idea has merit. I believe California has something like the "open" class. Don't ask me to explain it - it seems to change every year.
"CIS, Section IV, Subset J, Region Blue Back-to-back Champions ...."
However, I see EVERY school going the route of "we wanted to play up, but the administration decided it's better to stay where we are." And the privates adding "plus, we're already multiplied up, we'd like to win one before we die, etc etc."

Still, 6 years and this brings you out of the reeds?
 

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
Been under a rock for a few years, forgot my password a couple times too.

Here's what you're looking for on the Cali situation.

http://www.modbee.com/sports/high-school/prep-football/article8843636.html

Synopsis, as far as I can tell:
  • 51 Sections in California (a section is a geographic region consisting of multiple "leagues" or conferences in IL terms)
  • #1 ranked section winner from the north and #1 from the south are chosen by a committee and face each other in "open division" championship
  • 48 remaining teams (after 1 play-in game in north) are "paired by competitive equity rather than school enrollments" by same committee and play eachother in 12 norcal and 12 socal "bowl games"
  • The winners of each corresponding bowl game play each other
  • 13 state champions total ranging in terms of competitive equity Open > Div1 > Div2 etc
  • The famed De La Salle has been the Open Division champ majority of past few years

In terms of your IL privates or publics playing the "admin won't let me game" or "we want to win in this class first" that's fine. First and foremost it's an opt in. Two year Class C promotion only after sustained success in the lower classes. The Class C Championship is not really meant for the 2015 St Viator or Proviso Easts (no offense dudes). The lower class games are still an accomplishment and something to strive for. There's something to be said about being a state champion, regardless if it's not the Class C State Champion. However, you still won't hear ISU claiming to be the best college football team in the nation after they win their first FCS title this year.

@Catch--22 I love the reservation of Saturday night playoff games. Let's put this pigskin on a pedestal. Also like the 8 total classes vs 9, though still think it sells better as an option that get's more teams into the playoffs.

You and @Sportsguy909 hit the nail on the head; seeding process is vital. Think handing it to a committee like Cali's system is opening it up to fail - though I would take a committee picking 32 qualifiers over the two teams that will compete in the top division championship any day of the week. Ultimately, you need a system where the components are easy enough for the masses to understand (W/Ls, Quality W, Quality L, football enrollment, SOS, running clock time?, etc) but that can sort out where a 9-0 Whitney Young should fit against a 6-3 Loyola. Math can be tweaked, a lousy committee member...
 
Last edited:

Snetsrak61

Senior
Aug 16, 2008
1,189
667
113
Seems like less risk for the teams in the California set up. It's just the best two. Teams will be entering into a situation where they just cannibalize each other if it really ended up being 32 of the best teams in the state.

Wonder if you could cut the real playoffs down to two or three weeks with "district playoffs" that decide who is eligible for the state playoffs and then a committee seeds and chooses among say 32 or 64 teams across 8 classes. One class could be this open class. Two classes could be reserved as public only based on enrollment. One class private only based on enrollment. Since districts are based on region there would be equal represntation, but then you'll get the benefit of subjective seeding to try and make state matchups competitive. Lastly the number of districts is either 28 or 56 as automatic qualifiers leaving 4 or 8 at large bids the committee can choose from.
 

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
@mchsalumni I would have full faith in the ability of the DS Panel to select the top 32. Maybe you throw the Massey Ratings in as a 10th (or 11th?) member to add some objectivity.

@Snetsrak61 I'm not sure I understand your point. Having the best, or close to it, 32 teams cannibalize each other is exactly what we want and is exactly what happens today in each class. Problem is today those best 32 teams are spread over 3, sometimes 4 classes, causing competitive in-balance.

In some ways California has basically implemented the old BCS system, I'm proposing the new one.

If you're going to have a committee choose your top 32 C Class teams, or even choose the 32/64 teams in your example, whats the point of splitting publics from privates? Should the committee not be able to subjectively group schools of competitive equity together regardless of private or public?
 

Snetsrak61

Senior
Aug 16, 2008
1,189
667
113
Well 32 teams would not be like the current bcs model, considering that's a 4 team playoff.

I guess my point is I question if it's going to be in the best interest of teams to enter into a 5 round slugfest rather than just win a lower class. Granted you proposed a forced entry, but I never loved the idea anyways of basing past results on a teams level. Things can change dramatically. Two years is definitely the max look back I'd like though.

Regarding this committee, they'd have a few roles.
1. Selecting this Class C participants. Schools could still request this and that would be one factor, but they're the ultimate selector. This allows a really competitive top class without knocking out good teams before November.
2. Select at large bids. Either 4 or 8 schools who don't win district but are capable championship contenders. This wild card set up eases the impact of stacked districts.
3. SEEDING. We may have no choice but to accept equal representation amongst size and region, but at least a committee can subjectively put the top teams on opposite ends of the bracket. By pushing this part back later on in the playoffs at a 4 or 8 team level, rather than 32, it's more palatable. You're still giving some semblance of an equal shot.
Other than that, yes they'd still be restricted by size constraints on determining classes 1-7, but they do have some flexibility with the at large bids as well as the class c designation which isn't size/region restricted. The lower class public/private split I guess you can throw away but it's meant to be a concession to "protect" public representation.
 

Snetsrak61

Senior
Aug 16, 2008
1,189
667
113
Also putting the 32 best teams in one class makes the other 7 unwatchable. I don't care if LT vs PE is a close gane, it's not gonna be that interesting as a title/bowl game. Not to mention the smaller classes devoid of top teams.
 

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
@Snetsrak61 I see your point, the idea though is that if a team doesn't feel the Class C is right for their school at that year, they don't have to opt in. If they go on to win the smaller class, that's great, it's just not the Class C Championship.

Let's meet in the middle regarding the committee and use them to seed the teams that opt in to Class C?

In regards to unwatchable subclass games, I would venture to guess that we would rarely see any teams from today's class 1-4 ever in the Class C. The Rochesters and Phillips are the rare exceptions, but that basically means classes 1-4 remain unchanged. Today's Class 5/6 would typically only lose the 4-5 private schools (JCA, Montini, SHG, etc) that cause all the issues today. Really the only class that gets hurt is the highest one, as one would hope most of the top large schools opt in to Class C.
 

Snetsrak61

Senior
Aug 16, 2008
1,189
667
113
Eh, take a look at Edgys final rankings. You're basically going to eliminate all those schools from classes 1-7. Yea the games are closer without Naz and Montini in the fold, but are they really more watchable? Only if those schools in the 10-20 range are around to fill the gap, IMO. Otherwise were consolidating all the good games to class C.

That's assuming it actually works and the top teams opt in. Otherwise it's just a random hodge podge or NO one opts in and you are stuck with forcing teams in. It's just such a huge leap from the real world example you took of California taking two open schools. At that point it's a honor of itself and teams would be glad to play. If you might just get knocked out in round one and lose those extra practice weeks... it's just less appealing to schools, IMO.
 

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
Edgy's rankings only have 1-3 schools from 4A or lower TOPS. There's also no guarantee some of the mid-class publics would opt in. When was the last time Huntley had a strong team? Would they have actually opted in this year? Again, the only sub class that's truly impacted is highest one.

I'm not saying it's a finished product, but it's a different approach. I'd rather see the top teams (or top teams up for the challenge) duke it out in a playoff than rely on a committee to pick the best 26 to play each other for varying degrees of "Championship Games", but maybe that's just me. Appreciate your hole poking.
 

Snetsrak61

Senior
Aug 16, 2008
1,189
667
113
Edgy's rankings only have 1-3 schools from 4A or lower TOPS. There's also no guarantee some of the mid-class publics would opt in. When was the last time Huntley had a strong team? Would they have actually opted in this year? Again, the only sub class that's truly impacted is highest one.

I'm not saying it's a finished product, but it's a different approach. I'd rather see the top teams (or top teams up for the challenge) duke it out in a playoff than rely on a committee to pick the best 26 to play each other for varying degrees of "Championship Games", but maybe that's just me. Appreciate your hole poking.
Committee wouldn't be picking 26 teams. Those would be district winners. I guess some committee has to select the districts but that would be set an something like a biannual basis. The committee just has a little leeway with a few at large selections and the c class selections. I think you may be waiting a while to get teams to opt into a 32 team 5 round slugfest. Has any school but ESL ever opted up? So if you don't get 32 teams you'll end up forcing in some schools like 2015 Crete Monee who would be very fun to watch in 6a but not so much against LA and Montini. And rather than having to force a 2016 Naz up the C Class, force up the 2015 and 2014 versions you know can compete.
 

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
The 26 was in reference to the California committee who, under their current model, basically take the top 26 sectional winning teams and pair them against each other in in terms of 1 v 2, 3 v 4, etc until you end up with 13 State Champions. My point was, I'd rather see a true tourney rather than just picking some good games.

Districts have been proposed multiple times and are always shot down. They ignore the history and rivalry of some existing conferences which I think is fun/adds flavor to the regular season. CCL will never buy into it. No Districts.

Re-read the first reply to mchs, the only "forcing" into Class C is for teams that meet today's definition of the success factor, tweaked to force any team up after back to back subclass championships regardless of which sub class it's in. So for the 2015 year the only teams forced in Class C are Rochester, Montini, SHG. Will grant you that if no one else opts in in year one, it won't work. That's why we need some marketing guru's to push this as the royal rumble it should be.
 

Snetsrak61

Senior
Aug 16, 2008
1,189
667
113
My "district" proposal isn't the same as previous district proposals- not trying to adjust regular season scheduling, just trying to create a play-in type atmosphere for the state championship. Basically like the regional/sectional structure in other sports, but then a rebalance prior to the state finals. Regular season still matters aso much as it does now as you'd have to qualify for districts. 4-5 teams, stay home.

The issue I have with the initial proposal is I feel you are trying to pitch it both ways. If it's truly royal rumble, then talent level of the other 7 classes is compromised. If some mid and top range schools are left in the basic class system... it's not quite a royal rumble and you play a bunch of meaningless Rd 1-3 games. There is just such a different between a 99 percentile team compared to a 90 percentile team v a 90 and a 80. Let's cut to the chase and make a small one percenter battle that you really have to earn with your play through 9 regular season games plus 3 districts tourney games.
 

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
I'm not pitching it both ways at all, I fully acknowledge that the ideal scenario results in lesser value on the lower classes, hence:

"Why choose to play up to 7A when I can win 6A just fine? After all, today it's still just a another 1 of 8 state championships to be had. But to stay in 6A when the major competition has opted in to the Class C Series? I may win 6A, but that's now the Cotton Bowl to your BCS championship."

"The lower class games are still an accomplishment and something to strive for. There's something to be said about being a state champion, regardless if it's not the Class C State Champion. However, you still won't hear ISU claiming to be the best college football team in the nation after they win their first FCS title this year."

Keep in mind, this is a proposal to avoid something like public vs private separation, which would completely compromise the talent levels in all of today's classes.

The regular season would still matter as well, SOS would be a major part of any mathematical or committee seeding to determine if you're good enough to be in the 32 of all teams that opt-in.
 

Snetsrak61

Senior
Aug 16, 2008
1,189
667
113
In this scenario winning 6A is not the cotton bowl to the bcs. In your own words, basically, it's the FCS to thearn FBS. And there is no cotton bowl. Those two quotes literally just tried to sell it both ways.
 

stonedlizard

Senior
Oct 4, 2009
656
637
57
Message board metaphors can be tricky. Overall point was in this system, if you win 6A that's great, but the real challenge, title, and braggable win is earned by winning the Class C Championship.

This is dovetailing into an argument instead of a fun thought experiment on an alternative solution to competitive in-balance that doesn't include separating publics vs privates. Not sure if you didn't read the first half of the thread, or were confused between the actual proposal and the synopsis of the Cali system, either way, it's been fun. Appears this horse may be dead.
 

Snetsrak61

Senior
Aug 16, 2008
1,189
667
113
Read the whole thread. Just think it's not at all practical. No amount of convincing would make it take off, but even if it somehow did... would be better off shutting down the other state titles.