Scheduling issues: What's the solution?

[Anon1754760634]

Ok so Prop 10 failed as expected....but it does bring up some important issues. Scheduling is an issue state wide and along with conference juggling more and more coaches and AD's are looking at options and alternatives.

So I ask you the fans.....what's the solution? Revised the current system? Leave it alone?

Post your thoughts here.

 

[mc140]

Originally posted by edgytim:
Ok so Prop 10 failed as expected....but it does bring up some important issues. Scheduling is an issue state wide and along with conference juggling more and more coaches and AD's are looking at options and alternatives.

So I ask you the fans.....what's the solution? Revised the current system? Leave it alone?

Post your thoughts here.

I like how it is now but if we have to appease..

Start the season a week earlier and make week 10 the first round. Let just about everyone in.

 

[LHSTigers94]

I think you completely change the off season/ summers rules and add one or maybe two scrimmage games to the season. I believe if more teams had true flexibility in preparing for an opponent, I believe teams will actually schedule differently. Take week 1 for example. There are a lot of teams that shy away for scheduling difficult opponents based on not knowing what type of team they may have. A scrimmage game allow you to work out the issues before going into battle.

 

[Stump73]

Mc140, This to me is the only way to do it! Then you would see the good smaller schools looking for bigger non conference oppenents to prepare for the playoffs and not so good of schools looking for less of a oppenent for a possible win to gain confidence and build the program. This also, from what I can see, would be a very easy thing to do and implement!
This post was edited on 1/7 11:47 AM by Stump73

 

[ignazio]

MC, Stump:

I disagree. I think the root of this problem is the attempt by marginal teams to get to 5 wins.
The don't like to be mid-pack, they don't schedule good teams for non-conference . . .
I think we should consider some formulation of strength of schedule, quality of wins/quality of losses.

Consider a conference w/ 2 powers, 4 mid-pack, and 2 strugglers.
The non-powers don't want the automatic 2 losses vs the powers and the possible 2-2 record against their mid-pack peers. Thus, their 2 open dates can only be filled w/ low-mid or struggler opponents.

I don't have the math final, but if a mid-pack team loses 4 or 5 games to quality opponents - shouldn't that count for something? And this should carry over to proper seeding.

 

[PowerI66_]

I'm sure jwar is positing his answer with the math required for the playoffs as I type this!

 

[guerinfbfan]

IHSA should hire me to make all the football schedules.

 

[MS4EVER]

Originally posted by guerinfbfan:

IHSA should hire me to make all the football schedules.

I like that Guerin! Now can you find us a week 2 game?

 

[Quags22]

My option has many levels to it:

1. Go to an 8-week regular season schedule
2. Double the number of playoff teams
3. Seed the teams 1-32 in a North region and a South region.
4. Seeding is done by current IHSA system of record and playoff points.
5. Top seeded teams may opt NOT to host a 1st or 2nd round game
6. All games must be on Saturdays to allow teams and their fans the ability to travel to away games

 

[emillika]

+1 I like it.. not that it matters what WE like though.

 

[jwarigaku]

PowerI66,

Not my math, it's already been done and I'm not posting it again because people want to reinvent the wheel. The football season is already too short in this state...chopping it to 8 games is not the answer. Good luck on reaching a consensus in a landscape that wants to award everyone a trophy!

 

[Quags22]

The only ones who get their season shortened are those teams that are 0-8 and 1-7. And those teams are so bad, they need to be only playing 8 games to begin with. Everyone else gets at least their 9 games.

You eliminate the need for teams to find that extra game in their season. Schools like Maine South play their 5 conference games and 2 crossovers. Now they just need to schedule 1 non conference game instead of 2.

 

[jwarigaku]

And people here ask why Illinois is not taken seriously in the football power state discussions?! SMFH!

 

[LHSTigers94]

The fact that you can't scrimmage eliminate Illinois from any type of power football discussion.

 

[Wassup13_rivals219252]

1. Go to an 8-week regular season schedule
2. Double the number of playoff teams

======

I don't like this idea. Doubling the number of playoff teams really just creates.....

a 8-week pre-season schedule, no more regular season and then playoffs.

No way I would want this.

Wassup

 

[jwarigaku]

Wassup and LHSTiger,

Again we find common ground!

 

[Quags22]

So if you play 8 weeks then it is a preseason schedule?

But if your play 9 weeks it is a regular schedule? Wouldn't that just be 8 weeks of preseason and one regular season game?

I understand your point about playoffs. I like many think there are way too many teams in it now. But that is not the way things are headed.

The district idea will come up again. One of the main reasons that it was defeated was that there were little to no specifics about where teams would go. There were at least three different models bandied about, with the IHSA not taking a position on any one of them they would implement.

And the scheduling issues will not go away either, making the district idea become more and more palatable. In the meantime, the traditional conferences like the Catholic League, the West Suburban and the ESCC will lose nearly all of their longtime rivalries when teams are sent to districts. Imagine Loyola not playing Mt. Carmel or St. Rita or Naz not playing JCA.

I love conference matchups. I would hate to see all those games go away and the conferences completely abandoned.

That's why I suggested doubling the number of playoff teams. Coaches and administrators want to say they made the playoffs. This solves that by still eliminating a handful of teams which means you have to qualify for the playoffs. It is still something earned, albeit by teams that could be 2-6.

 

[jwarigaku]

Guys,

There is no reason not to use leagues and then have geographic districts for the playoffs feed to regional, and then to state. When I first mentioned Districts a couple f years ago I didn't understand why everyone freaked out because I was accustomed to league play within geographical districts and it works well. Think about it and perhaps it will work.

 

[guerinfbfan]

Originally posted by MS4EVER:

Originally posted by guerinfbfan:


IHSA should hire me to make all the football schedules.

I like that Guerin! Now can you find us a week 2 game?

Guerin is open Week 2...give Koz a call

 

[ramblinman_rivals165935]

Originally posted by edgytim:
Ok so Prop 10 failed as expected....but it does bring up some important issues. Scheduling is an issue state wide and along with conference juggling more and more coaches and AD's are looking at options and alternatives.

So I ask you the fans.....what's the solution? Revised the current system? Leave it alone?

Post your thoughts here.

Okay, so scheduling is an issue. So what? Deal with it. This should not be about making some ADs' jobs easier. Some teams are going to find it difficult to schedule games. Some will find it less difficult. How big is the issue, really? Is it THAT big that we have to turn things upside down to make it go away?

On the topic of conference juggling, I have a few thoughts.

First, make schools sign a contract and pay a deposit into an escrow fund in order to join a new conference. Maybe they pay $250 per enrolled kid upon joining. Or maybe they pay $20 per enrolled kid every year that they are a member. Whatever. They join the conference with a contract that says they agree to remain in that conference for a period of X years. Five years, maybe? The deposit is forfeited if the school decides to jump to a new conference before the contract term expires.

Second, scheduling conference games is not the problem. It's primarily non-conference games that cause scheduling issues. The smaller the conferences, the more problems its schools have in scheduling non-conference games. My response to that problem is it sucks to be them. Seriously, if you create small conferences, then scheduling issues is a risk you accept. Don't make your problem our problem.
This post was edited on 1/13 11:15 AM by ramblinman

 

[OldLeaf]

I agree with ramblinman.....put the importance on bigger, more solid and long-term stable conference affiliations to minimize conference jumping and non-conference scheduling issues. And reward conference champions, co-champions and runner-ups more than they do now for and in the post-season playoff tounament. Put more emphasis at the conference level on conference play, records and standings from the regular season for the playoffs. The AD's should and can deal with the minimal non-conference scheduling to come up with a 9-game schedule.
This post was edited on 1/14 9:36 AM by OldLeaf

 

[LHSTigers94]

I agree with Ram.
I will also say that the conference jumping issue is mainly around the chicago area. I say let those conferences police themselves. Doesn't make sense at all to adjust the STATE for a couple of conferences.

 

[Cross Bones]

Agree with Ramblin...

 

[gmach22]

It isn't just a Chicago issue. The former NCIC, former Northern Illinois Big 12 has had mass exits and realignment over the last 5+ years. I know most people hate Geneseo because we are out in the middle of nowhere compared to the rest of the schools still in the conference but no conferences of comparable size in our area would even entertain the idea. Dixon, Streator left last year after years of being doormats (Dixon made the playoffs this year, their plan worked) and I am sure schools like Lasalle Peru and Ottawa would love to be out too, their problem is that they are too big. Geneseo and Rochelle are the smallest schools in the conference by an average of 300-500 students. Going forward the Northern Illinois Big 12 north and south doesn't get an automatic birth because they are 5 team conferences. The problem is wide spread and a nightmare for good to great teams. No system is perfect, and I understand change is scary, but I think something drastic needs to change. Sadly I am not intelligent enough or have enough time to offer a suggestion.

 

[LHSTigers94]

GMach,
Combine North and South and your problem is solved. 10 team conference no out of conference games. If you are not interested in doing that, I have to go back to my original statement of making it a state issue. Central Illinois has made the move (Central State 8) of a closed conference (meaning no non-conference games).

 

[gmach22]

Northern Illiniois Big 10 by enrollment.

Dekalb-1,638.00
Kaneland- 1,334.00
Morris- 916.00
Sycamore- 1,174.00
Yorkville- 1,650.00

Geneseo- 832.00
LaSalle Peru- 1,250.00
Ottawa- 1,404.00
Rochelle- 895.00
Sterling- 1,010.00

Avg. enrollment is 1,210. Which is brought down heavily by Geneseo, Rochelle, and Morris.
For Geneseo that is about a 400 student difference on average. Geneseo is shrinking every year as well. Can Geneseo handle it in football? Sure but it really affects the other sports in the community. You fix that with football districts, as the other sports can create conferences that work in relation to enrollment and distance. Local schools of similar size have said no thanks in the past over and over and as far as non con games you end up playing fairly uncompetitive games because that is who will play you. It just seems to be a nightmare for AD's.

 

[ramblinman_rivals165935]

Originally posted by gmach22:
Northern Illiniois Big 10 by enrollment.

Dekalb-1,638.00
Kaneland- 1,334.00
Morris- 916.00
Sycamore- 1,174.00
Yorkville- 1,650.00

Geneseo- 832.00
LaSalle Peru- 1,250.00
Ottawa- 1,404.00
Rochelle- 895.00
Sterling- 1,010.00

Avg. enrollment is 1,210. Which is brought down heavily by Geneseo, Rochelle, and Morris.
For Geneseo that is about a 400 student difference on average. Geneseo is shrinking every year as well. Can Geneseo handle it in football? Sure but it really affects the other sports in the community. You fix that with football districts, as the other sports can create conferences that work in relation to enrollment and distance. Local schools of similar size have said no thanks in the past over and over and as far as non con games you end up playing fairly uncompetitive games because that is who will play you. It just seems to be a nightmare for AD's.

As far as football is concerned, I don't understand your argument as to why combining the two Northern Illinois Big 10 divisions won't work or won't work well. Enrollment is a non-factor for Geneseo in football conference play.

Combining the two divisions makes perfect sense from a scheduling perspective. If football scheduling is a big problem in your conference, the conference has nobody but itself to blame. Form a 10 team single conference and the scheduling problem goes away.

 

[OldLeaf]

Originally posted by ramblinman:

Enrollment is a non-factor for Geneseo in football conference play.




What's that exactly mean? Need more specifics, details and your elaboration on that statement so I can follow you with complete and correct understanding and meaning. Is enrollment a non-factor just for Geneseo in just this football conference in this specific scenario? Or does that statement apply to all schools in this conference in any scenario? Or is that a global statement that applies to all schools or any school in all conferences or any conference.....in all scenarios or any scenario?