SEHSSTORM1 said:

My friend, and I mean that, Quincy lost to MC the same reason everyone else loses to MC...talent. MC has a QB going to Vandy, and a DE going to USC. Those are upper level players. They make plays. Quincy has had an amazing run, but at some point you are met with the indisputable fact that talent wins. It's why MC has been good for 50 years. Look at this years Title games. Who won? Teams with elite talent.

Click to expand...

This!

It’s laughable to think that Batavia didn’t prepare enough or play in a tough enough conference. (The common response to the debate is prepare better/play tougher schedule)

At the end of the day, talent wins. What was the difference when BR beat MC a few times in row a few years ago? Talent.

Why did Hun beat MC this year? Talent.

The talent is typically a little more spread out throughout BR/MC/RITA as to where it’s more fair for public schools but no one’s had a chance vs MC for three years now.

No reason they shouldn’t be in 8A.

4 steps you could take that would solve a lot of issues.

1. Seed 1-32
2. Get rid of or modify the multiplier waiver (For example you're only waived if you have not made the playoffs last 4 years or something like that)
3. Bring back what I think was the old success factor of 2 title games in 4 years you move up 1 class, 3 in 4 you move up 2 classes and 4 in 4 you move up 3. Feel free to apply it to the public schools as well to create more competition in higher classes and also avoid having to do the next item on my list.
4. Get someone to turn a 6 into an 8 after East St. Louis submits their play-up proposal each year and then just play dumb towards the rest of the Southwestern Conference.

Nevada Dude said:

STF has 19 returning starters from their semi-final team

Click to expand...

5A favorite for sure

Isn’t Fenwick also dropping down?

SiuCubFan8 said:

I believe Rice and Marist are dropping down.
No way Montini goes to 6A, they get the multiplier back so whatever that is.

Click to expand...

Montini could border 5A, but 4A looks more likely.

EdgyTim said:

Pretty simple question this week........so what's the fix in your opinion? How do we fix the current IHSA state playoff format and system? Do we separate public from private? Add stricter guard rails in place?

My feeling? Can we TRY seeding 1-32 in all classes to start with....then also look at the whole impact of multipliers/success factors? Personally...after seeing literally daily debate on this subject for well over 30 plus years.....can we finally just put public/private to a member wide vote and just accept the results and live with them/move on?

Click to expand...

Where have you been all weekend?

MMA_Det said:

the playing field is watered down

Go down to 6 or 7 classes

1-32 seeding as well

Click to expand...

6/7 classes isn’t happening.
Start with 1-32, it’s an easy and logical change.

I believe Rice and Marist are dropping down.
No way Montini goes to 6A, they get the multiplier back so whatever that is.

colin2229 said:

Caleb Tucker (Aka - Bonecrusher) from Mt Carmel will be the highest rated player ever from the state of Illinois.

Click to expand...

Will he stay in Illinois? The running back from Decatur that moved to Texas is going to be very highly rated.

Naz to 6A
Chicago Christian to 3A (Maybe borderline 4A)
St Laurence to 6A

Not Catholic, but I believe University High Normal will bump up to 5A as a non-boundary public without a waiver now as well.

Caleb Tucker (Aka - Bonecrusher) from Mt Carmel will be the highest rated player ever from the state of Illinois.

cigaros said:

You make very good points. However, in Michigan, the Publix are dominating. How is it that it’s actually pretty even in Michigan year to year and yet Illinois seems to always complain about this issue? Maybe public school kids in Illinois just can’t play football at a high level. East Side doesn’t care. Rochester doesn’t care. Both of those examples are diametrically different in community, income level, and geography. Yet both are feared the moment they step onto the field.

Click to expand...

To be fair, the population of Michigan is much more spread out than that of Illinois, making it harder to create private school juggernauts.

Also, I think the folks in division 6 and division 7 in Michigan probably have similar comments about Lumen Christi, who like Montini in Illinois, should probably be playing at least 3 classes higher.

Ha ha ha
Thank You for the public service announcement

the playing field is watered down

Go down to 6 or 7 classes

1-32 seeding as well

USA Today ...

Snetsrak61 said:

In what sense? Certainly not from a competetive balance standpoint. The power imbalance among public schools is only a bit less extreme than among private schools.


There are PLENTY of private schools with no business being as high as 6A. There's still huge enrollment discrepancies that matter every bit as much for private schools as public.

A VERY basic football enrollment would do a great job of moving both strong private and public schools up classifications, with some exceptions. Write a few extra rules to smooth out some of the anomalies and you could fix a lot with an low burden administrative system.

Click to expand...

From a competitive balance standpoint enrollment is fine amongst publics. But should something like what happens with privates arise i would also support trying to determine if there is an "unfair" factor and try to address it. A couple years ago the board voted that a number of schools whose colors are red/white/black under achieve so maybe I implement a divider if those are your colors.

The ones that you say have no business in 6A can get better coaching and try harder because apparently make up of enrollment is not actually a factor, just coaching and trying hard. Which apparently doesn't work for basketball.

The USA Today picked up the Althoff title game story.

wickerpark wildcat said:

What don't you like of my proposal of classifying according to total kids in program. The more I think about it, the more I like it... essentially self-identifies a school on how important football is to them. Similar to NCAA... Northwestern and Wash U are very similar enrollment, but one has significantly more interest in football, so plays in B1G, while other is d3.

Click to expand...

Who said I didn't?

The IHSA should go ask all the CCL/ESCC schools about their own experience trying to weigh competetive balance. I beleive program numbers is one of the metrics they do use in their current bi-annual conference reclasses (though certainly shouldn't be the only one).

Maybe those Catholics would have valuable insights to offer though.

wickerpark wildcat said:

What don't you like of my proposal of classifying according to total kids in program. The more I think about it, the more I like it... essentially self-identifies a school on how important football is to them. Similar to NCAA... Northwestern and Wash U are very similar enrollment, but one has significantly more interest in football, so plays in B1G, while other is d3.

Click to expand...

This is really interesting. Loyola has 300 playing football and some CPS schools have 20, how would you break up classes to fit 32 in each? Still use 256 to qualify and than separate? What would that look like?

33corndog33 said:

We also learned that complaining about seeding is comical and apparently still a thing. Insert old man yells at cloud meme here. The IHSA will never go to a subjective system for seeding. This will open the door for people to blame the system for showing favoritism when someone's team gets a seed they disagree with. That will only lead to more obnoxious vitriol than we already have.

Now the real question is, can there be a better objective system? That answer is probably yes, so whatever a new system would be, it must be based on facts and evidence, not opinions. This leaves us with wins and losses, opponents wins, points allowed can be thrown in as well.

Click to expand...

But they seed in every other team sport.

Snetsrak61 said:

In what sense? Certainly not from a competetive balance standpoint. The power imbalance among public schools is only a bit less extreme than among private schools.


There are PLENTY of private schools with no business being as high as 6A. There's still huge enrollment discrepancies that matter every bit as much for private schools as public.

A VERY basic football enrollment would do a great job of moving both strong private and public schools up classifications, with some exceptions. Write a few extra rules to smooth out some of the anomalies and you could fix a lot with an low burden administrative system.

Click to expand...

What don't you like of my proposal of classifying according to total kids in program. The more I think about it, the more I like it... essentially self-identifies a school on how important football is to them. Similar to NCAA... Northwestern and Wash U are very similar enrollment, but one has significantly more interest in football, so plays in B1G, while other is d3.

wickerpark wildcat said:

Just to put some numbers behind the swing... Private schools have always punched above their weight in football, but the last 5 years have been dramatically more dominant. I split the data into 5 year periods, and the split was always somewhere around 2/3 public & 1/3 private champs. In last 5 years, it is 50/50.

*Note that I am eyeballing which schools are private & public, possible made an error or 2.

Year (group)		Private	Public
1974-75 ->1978-79	% of Total	32%​	68%​
1974-75 ->1978-79	Count	8​	17​
1979-80 ->1983-84	% of Total	38%​	62%​
1979-80 ->1983-84	Count	11​	18​
1984-85 -> 1988-89	% of Total	37%​	63%​
1984-85 -> 1988-89	Count	11​	19​
1989-90 -> 1993-94	% of Total	37%​	63%​
1989-90 -> 1993-94	Count	11​	19​
1994-95 ->1998-99	% of Total	27%​	73%​
1994-95 ->1998-99	Count	8​	22​
1999-00->2003-04	% of Total	31%​	69%​
1999-00->2003-04	Count	11​	25​
2004-05 ->2008-09	% of Total	33%​	68%​
2004-05 ->2008-09	Count	13​	27​
2009-10 ->2013-14	% of Total	28%​	73%​
2009-10 ->2013-14	Count	11​	29​
2014-15 ->2018-19	% of Total	33%​	68%​
2014-15 ->2018-19	Count	13​	27​
2019-20 ->2024-25	% of Total	50%​	50%​
2019-20 ->2024-25	Count	20​	20​

Click to expand...

Right around the time the multiplier waiver program was way eased.

Go back to a strict or no waiver system. Then look at impacts of 1-32 seeding (at least 5A and 6A). Also should study alternatives to W-L/PP seeding system. Then let's see where next 5 years shake out. Would be very interested in seeing return of football enrollment too.

Cross Bones said:

Here's the fix.

Enrollment is perfectly fine in classifying public schools so no need to do away with that.

Click to expand...

In what sense? Certainly not from a competetive balance standpoint. The power imbalance among public schools is only a bit less extreme than among private schools.

We create a committee of Private school coaches/AD's. Then we take the Private playoff qualifiers and divide them into thirds. This Private committee then determines which 33% go into 8A, 7A, and 6A. For numbers not divisible by 3 the extra team(s) go into the larger class first.

Click to expand...

There are PLENTY of private schools with no business being as high as 6A. There's still huge enrollment discrepancies that matter every bit as much for private schools as public.

A VERY basic football enrollment would do a great job of moving both strong private and public schools up classifications, with some exceptions. Write a few extra rules to smooth out some of the anomalies and you could fix a lot with an low burden administrative system.