IHSA 14 Proposals Advance

[mc140]

If districts want to achieve the goal of making scheduling easier, you can not count the first two games for seeding purposes.

 

[sac'em]

Define "strong".

Outside of an outlier 3-6 CCL team that could probably win a few playoff games, I think +/- the best 256 teams make the playoffs in the current system. I realize the CPS schools screw that up a little, but that will happen in districts too.

What my gut doesn't like about districts, is that before a single game has been played, you have a group of 8 teams, and 4 make the playoffs. Could have a strong district, that goes 16-0 in their 2 non-district games, then round robin each other, and 4 make the playoffs. Another district goes 0-16, then round robin each other, and 4 make the playoffs. All of us will "know" the 5th and maybe even 6th team from the one district are better teams than ones making the playoffs from the weaker district. How is that creating opportunities? Keeping the 230th best team (picking a random number) out of the playoffs, to "create an opportunity" for the 270th, is wrong.

The example that keeps sticking in my head, as a biased Sterling supporter, is the district they were in for 2019 proposal (5A South C). Six of the 8 teams were "perennial" playoff teams, with success of winning games in the playoffs. Why should 2 of them have no chance of making the playoffs, so that a 3-6 team from a crappy district make the playoffs? That's not "creating opportunities".

No one is ever going to be able to put schools in districts that will allow everything to be equal. Teams will get better, teams will get worse throughout the season. Programs will get better, programs will get worse over time. A quick example for me is Kankakee. Few years ago, they were a non-contender. Now, they rack up wins against state champs. Some years the districts will be competitive and good, others, maybe not.
Should we make special rules for schools like Bolingbrook, that were perennial powers that fell off?

 

[lurker74]

No one is ever going to be able to put schools in districts that will allow everything to be equal. Teams will get better, teams will get worse throughout the season. Programs will get better, programs will get worse over time. A quick example for me is Kankakee. Few years ago, they were a non-contender. Now, they rack up wins against state champs. Some years the districts will be competitive and good, others, maybe not.
Should we make special rules for schools like Bolingbrook, that were perennial powers that fell off?

I'm not looking at any specific teams. I used the Sterling example, just because it was a team I follow.

My issue is, that as a whole, I think districts will do a worse job of selecting the best 256 teams for the playoffs. Some years a conference has stronger teams, and they send more to the playoffs, other years, it drops off. Districts don't allow that. The district that has a really strong group of teams gets 4 playoff spots. Their "neighbor" district is full of freshman on varsity that year, they get 4 playoff teams. I don't like that.

There are complaints/comments here all the time about closed conferences. Districts basically put everyone in a closed conference.

 

[cigaros]

So the IHSA should stay with the current format because the strong teams deserve it?
or they should stay with the current format because the poor teams might have some successes under the new format?
I would think the broad interest of high school sports is to create opportunities for all high school students to participate in athletics. Not to make sure only the strong survive and that the poor football schools and poor football kids should just realize that the strong football schools and rich football schools should make all decisions.

I do not believe the poor teams will be any more successful outside of a class which sprouts up as good for a certain year as the likes of a Macomb or Herrin do from time to time. And you are correct but utilizing a false equivalence. Those teams have the same off-season parameters and the same 9 weeks of games to prove themselves. The better programs will hurt because they are diluted in their SOS due to districting. Furthermore, the excessive travel caused will inevitably supersede any perceived success by an individual program. Tell us why Edwardsville must make a 7-hour round-trip (by car) for a game against LWE. And then Lockport must do the same for a trip to Eville?

 

[Snetsrak61]

I'm not looking at any specific teams. I used the Sterling example, just because it was a team I follow.

My issue is, that as a whole, I think districts will do a worse job of selecting the best 256 teams for the playoffs. Some years a conference has stronger teams, and they send more to the playoffs, other years, it drops off. Districts don't allow that. The district that has a really strong group of teams gets 4 playoff spots. Their "neighbor" district is full of freshman on varsity that year, they get 4 playoff teams. I don't like that.

There are complaints/comments here all the time about closed conferences. Districts basically put everyone in a closed conference.

I don't know if it's gonna have a material aspect in overall strength of playoff pool. Now it certainly won't get applied equally. But for your Sterling example there's probably a group of 2 middle-strength teams who suddenly get an easy path because they got split off from a challenging conference (certainly would be the case in the escc/ccl as their wide geography will get split). I'm sure there's some public conferences like that too though.

Which isn't to say I like districts. Because I don't. But I think it's playoff impact is somewhat negligible.

 

[Snetsrak61]

So the IHSA should stay with the current format because the strong teams deserve it?
or they should stay with the current format because the poor teams might have some successes under the new format?
I would think the broad interest of high school sports is to create opportunities for all high school students to participate in athletics. Not to make sure only the strong survive and that the poor football schools and poor football kids should just realize that the strong football schools and rich football schools should make all decisions.

The biggest benefactor of districts seems to be the ADs. I haven't heard many pro district arguments that have a particularly strong student focused argument to them.

 

[Panthers1211]

The harsh reality is Districts will happen for at least one year. In the end, semi's and championships will look similar to the current format however there will be a lot of different teams finally make the playoffs in this district format.

A lot of new teams will make it for sure. And you will see alot of 70-0 games in the playoffs.