Playoffs need more tweaks: Trib article
- Thread starter MC63
- Start date
The Tribune article makes an assumption that MC was a top team this year- and that Glenbard West was/is a top team this year. I disagree with this assumption. I attended 4 Glenbard West games this year (vs Hinsdale South, Hinsdale Central, Bolingbrook, and LT) and 1 MC game (vs Brother Rice). The Glenbard West team is a very good GW team but not great- by historical measures. The MC team was also a "good but not great" team. One case in point for GW--Hinsdale Central had them beat in the 4th quarter- racked up 26 points on their defense---and Hinsdale Central was a "decent but not great" team. If these 2 teams are the best teams in 7A this year, then "so be it"..........but I wholeheartedly disagree with the assumption. (Loyola and HF---different story---this game is the state championship)
This is the same complaint every year. The IHSA can't change things every year. The fact MC lost is too bad. If HF loses today too bad. The state finals will have good teams playing for the championships regardless.
The article really doesn't come up with any solutions other than "Hey, IHSA, come up with a formula for strength of schedule". Cool, thanks, beat it. It would have been nice if he had come up with an example of a formula or something. Anyways, like @corey90 said, good teams are going to meet in the 2nd round and beyond. As long as they're not meeting in the 1st round I am happy. The 2nd round and on is where the big boys come to play.
So you are saying that if these options happen:
In 6A Montini or Prarie Ridge vs SHG
In 5A Naz or JCA vs LWW or Washington
in 4A Phillips vs Rochester (many other good teams also left in 4A)
That these are not good teams playing in the State finals Game? Do you believe that is because of the way the playoffs are set up or is it just that teams below 7A are not very good?
Again this is a very generic look and again you'll never please everyone. And also the less the IHSA has input here the better.....leave it alone
The field is set by Saturday of week 9 at 5pm. Coaches in each class submit a team write up by 9pm. At midnight the coaches in each class are sent the write ups and results for each of the 32 teams. They have until 10am Sunday to submit a 1-32 ranking of their class. Highest and lowest ranking for each team is thrown out to discourage manipulation. By noon Sunday the brackets are posted online and the voting results are sent back to the coaches.
Just a sped up version of what happens in other sports, but there are fewer teams to worry about in football.
Just a sped up version of what happens in other sports, but there are fewer teams to worry about in football.
And as someone who has seen the online voting in other sports it is quite clear a third of them don't pay any attention what so ever and they know their sectional opponents months in advance. How would JCA or LWW properly seed Centralia?
The only thing everyone pretty much agrees on is CPS Chicago conference teams should always be seeded last regardless of record. Outside of that it is all up for debate.
Want to eliminate some of the say lesser CPL teams in the state playoffs? Get rid of 8 classes of football.....
I think the assumption is that MC and/or GW were both capable of making the finals this year--no comparison to other years or whether this year's team is better than any other GW or MC team. I am not sure how you read that into it, but your assumption is not there.. IF GW wins state by more than 7 points, then that supports the article's thesis. If not, no. Same thing with LA/HF, but we don't know the result of that yet. If the goal is to go far into the playoffs, than the whole playoff selection matters. If the goal is to win state, it makes no difference. You have to beat everyone in the playoffs and beat temas that defeated other teams in the playoffs. Some would say it is too bad MC and GW played early, but I say so what. It was a great game, and if some want to consider that that game is more representative of a quarterfinal, semi-final or even state championship, than so be it.
6A will be fine, 5A not even close. 4A fine, 1-3, not so close. 1-32 solves most issues.
A
anon_4vszfu35bv677
Guest
Nothing is perfect. Every year someone will be unhappy. Just play whose in front of you - you have to beat them all anyway...
I know more needs to be done to make it a true playoff system, and I do agree. However, I am very happy with the way it is now: 1 - 32. And quite honestly, if MC/SR were to meet in the second round with 9 - 1 records under the 1 - 32 system, I'd be fine with that.
The damn regional/quadrant system was dumped for 7/8A--something a lot of posters were "whining" about for years. One thing at a time.
The fact that either Niles North or The Bourbonnais will be playing for a semifinal appearance makes it interesting for me (under the current 1 - 32 seeding).
But, one could argue, that if a true playoff system was in place, would NN or The Bourbonnais be in a similar position?
And that is the position I take under this new system, not under the regional/quadrant crap system.
MC lost twice (and blown out twice) and the forfeit hurt them. Even 2 points total different seed. Additionally PC and SR were 3-6.1-32 is best system. No problem with playing GW 2nd round on my end.