IHSA Proposal....
- Thread starter cornerrat
- Start date
Yeah good luck with that....one look at what potentially the City of Chicago would look like would end all discussion
Seemingly, a 64-team field per class would need to include one of:
- only 8 regular season games
- starting the season earlier or ending it later
- playing 1st 2 playoff rounds in the same week.
Actually, at Sectionals, more than the #1 makes it downstate. For track I think top 2 or 4 and qualifying standards make it and in wrestling top 2, 3, or 4 make it. So your answer is:
Yes, it is fair. Are there instances where a team or individual doesn’t make it downstate and they are clearly better that another team from another area of the state who did? Sure. But that happens in all sports, every year so trying to fix that would not be a feasible task.
I actually like the idea of districts. All this conference shuffling and non-conference scheduling is b/s.
How is conference reshuffling killing schools?
I don't like it particularly.
But, it's been going on for 30 years.
Usually due to football and jockeying to make the playoffs.
I don't like it particularly.
But, it's been going on for 30 years.
Usually due to football and jockeying to make the playoffs.
Then put everyone in the playoffs, beginning in Week 9, with a properly seeded playoff or use a true strength-of-schedule calculation in playoff invites. Why is that so difficult?
Instead, the whiners avoid competition to get to a 5-4 record, as if "making the playoffs" were a major accomplishment. And, now that they've caused the problem, their only solution is to impose districts with their new goal becoming to become slightly above average in their neighborhood.
Slightly above average in many areas is damn good. In the end, the state championships will still be debated because of private vs. public issue. I'm not saying one way or the other is correct, but the solution proposed is to correct conference reshuffling and non-conf. scheduling issues that more and more school are having. they have been informed of a problem occurring in many conferences, so they offered a solution. By my best thought process, it seems a logical, reasonable, and do-able solution. If they move forward with this, it will not take place until the 2019 season so there will be plenty of time to argue about who got placed where and what multipliers should or should not be.
What about letting all teams make the "playoffs"
Keep the current format to win the state championship, wins and playoff points.
two options:
1. start a week earlier, keep same schedule
2. week 9 playoffs start
IHSA: 256 teams qualify
NIT: 256 qualify
512 total make playoffs,
533 total HS teams eligible (21 teams 0-9, 1-8, their season is over)
Add a "NIT-type" tournament for the teams not included in the State Championship Bracket, call it the challenge bracket or something.
Using the same formula, 0-9 and some 1-8 get cut from NIT
Then most kids get an opportunity to play in a lose-and-done format.
Keep the current format to win the state championship, wins and playoff points.
two options:
1. start a week earlier, keep same schedule
2. week 9 playoffs start
IHSA: 256 teams qualify
NIT: 256 qualify
512 total make playoffs,
533 total HS teams eligible (21 teams 0-9, 1-8, their season is over)
Add a "NIT-type" tournament for the teams not included in the State Championship Bracket, call it the challenge bracket or something.
Using the same formula, 0-9 and some 1-8 get cut from NIT
Then most kids get an opportunity to play in a lose-and-done format.
Non-conference games that don't count aren't exciting at all. So essentially what we'd have is a 7 game season against the same schools forever, then turn around and play them again in the playoffs?
And this doesn't help those reshuffling schools make the playoffs so I can't see how they'd be happy with it either. Other than my school likely playing a completely different schedule due to districts outside of maybe a couple schools nothing about this idea is appealing to me.
I can see how it may be for some.
But I wonder what they do with the private schools? Are they multiplied into conferences of larger publics? Maybe JCA, JC, JW, Lockport, Provi, LW(E,C,W) could be a thing?
And this doesn't help those reshuffling schools make the playoffs so I can't see how they'd be happy with it either. Other than my school likely playing a completely different schedule due to districts outside of maybe a couple schools nothing about this idea is appealing to me.
I can see how it may be for some.
But I wonder what they do with the private schools? Are they multiplied into conferences of larger publics? Maybe JCA, JC, JW, Lockport, Provi, LW(E,C,W) could be a thing?
All.... Here is a radio interview on this subject. Ratsy
http://wrmj.com/wrmj-interview-ihsa...-key-role-in-district-scheduling-discussions/
http://wrmj.com/wrmj-interview-ihsa...-key-role-in-district-scheduling-discussions/
No private schools and no non-boundaried schools represented on that committee.
Same old same old.
All.... Yes indeed, I noticed that as well when I first found the minutes of the meeting on the IHSA site. Ratsy
It happens in every other team sport...In 2017, Coal City was ranked #2 and Wilmington was ranked #5 in wrestling in 1A. CC had won the conference tournament and hammered the Wildcats in a dual meet the week before. But because the wrestling sectionals aren't seeded, the Coalers and Cats are in the same regional. The Cats win the regional in an upset...while a couple other regionals in the sectional have the majority of classes with only three wrestlers, so they all qualify for individual sectionals. Basically by winning the regional they cruise to the semifinals...whether it was CC or Wilmo they woud have cruised...and if the sectional was seeded, they might have met in the team semis....Cats get second place state trophy...seems to the truth every year, the winner of the regional between these two has a nice path to the semis...
Basketball...almost every year there is a regional with two 20 win teams in it. My favorite was always the Kankakee regional vs. the Iroquois regional...Kankakee area regional would have Herscher or McNamara usually with 20 wins (sometimes St. Anne or Momence would sneak in), and the rest of the regional would have losing records. Meanwhile, the Iroquois County area regional just to the south often would have the 5 seed with 15 wins...or 1988, when Herscher & Watseka were both ranked in the top 8 and in the same regional.
Cross Country...for years the 1A sectional at Amboy would have 12-15 of the top 20 programs in the state....
Needless to say, fairness does not always work state wide...How many titles, or at least deep playoff football runs, might I-8 schools have but for McNamara? Right now, the same can be said for 4A south with Rochester, or teams running into Tuscola or Maroa...
Panther: Excellent post.
No doubt there are imperfections in any system - and other sports aren't limited by the 1game/week limit football has - but for football a solution is present.
The people on this board could craft a fair, properly-seeded, 64-team bracket in an afternoon. And it would reward a competitive schedule, not punish it.
No doubt there are imperfections in any system - and other sports aren't limited by the 1game/week limit football has - but for football a solution is present.
The people on this board could craft a fair, properly-seeded, 64-team bracket in an afternoon. And it would reward a competitive schedule, not punish it.
Bring on the DarkSideRankings!!!
DSR seeds the playoff bracket each year.
A rotating restaurant from the top food places before games is picked each year.
Edgy moderates and manages the cats.
It’s televised so a 25 page thread can critique in real time and throw peanuts from the gallery.
DSR seeds the playoff bracket each year.
A rotating restaurant from the top food places before games is picked each year.
Edgy moderates and manages the cats.
It’s televised so a 25 page thread can critique in real time and throw peanuts from the gallery.
All.... The IHSA's Sam Knox talks about the district proposal. Ratsy
http://wrmj.com/wrmj-interview-district-football-scheduling-reaction-from-ihsas-knox/
http://wrmj.com/wrmj-interview-district-football-scheduling-reaction-from-ihsas-knox/
Actually, for some smaller schools the non-conference games could be the MOST exciting...The attempt at districting on the Souc's post gives me a prime example of how districts could ruin historic rivalries...Gilman/Onarga's Iroquois West (280+ kids), consolidated in the early/mid 80's, is about 20 minutes south of Kankakee. It's current conference includes: Clifton Central (low 330's), immediately bordering the north of them; Paxton Buckley Loda (3A), immediately bordering south of them; Watseka (4A coop with St. Anne) immediately east of them; and Momence (upper 330's)...Iroquois West is one of the biggest 1A schools on the list, and in many years would be one of the smallest in 2A. It has played possible opposing district schools in non-conference games. But I'm guessing that if they are in different districts, Iroquois West kids would look forward to a non-conference game against Clifton Central way more than a "district" game against Jacksonville Routt, almost 2 hours (?) away...
Meanwhile, districts could force some logical games to occur...which could be the biggest games on some schools schedules. One obvious example: the 4A district including McNamara with the I-8 schools. Manteno & Herscher at some point were conference members with almost every school in the proposed district...
I am not disputing that the possible matchups would be otherwise compelling, but the fact that they are turned into exhibition games take all of the luster away for me.
Districts also don't fix the issue which was schools changing conferences in order to hopefully make the playoffs. The district format may lock these schools into districts where there is no hope and the exhibition schedule cannot help them. Look at a school like Matea Valley for example.
I think about the comparison to d3 football playoffs system, there are very few at large bids so it basically means that conference games are the only ones that matter (unless you come from a tough conference that has a chance to get two teams in) and those games are still exciting. I look at a conference like the Iowa Conference who most years will only get their conference champ into the playoffs and all of those non conference games are still fun to watch especially when they are good match ups. It would be cool if they could come up with a way to reward a team for a tough non conference schedule, maybe even as a tie breaker for seeding, but even without it I still think the non con games will be fun to watch.
Last edited:
And I'll counter that system any day of the week. I'd take the top 2-3 WIAC (Wisconsin public D3 schools) every season compared to several non WIAC champions...and you'll be hard pressed to get too many arguments from even those outside of the WIAC. Big inbalance of level of competition and the WIAC schools are punished in many years because they need to allow in multiple Cupcake conference champions.
I think this is being overthought. Most schools participate in the conference that makes most sense for them geographically and competitively. The 5-4 cutoff seems pretty fair. Outside of the outlaying circumstances, if your record isn’t .500 you aren’t going anywhere in the playoffs anyway.
No doubt, I didn't say it's a great system, I wish that certain conferences didn't get AQs, I am just saying that non conference games are still worth watching in D3, because the comment was made that non conference games that don't mean anything are a waste of time. So to clarify, I never said it was a good system.
The WIAC schools have benifieted more then any other conference with the expanded D3 playoffs. Under the old system only 16 teams made it so only the WIAC champion got in but by allowing the non power conferences champions in and expanding the at large bids the WIAC is pretty much guaranteed 2 playoff teams a year.
The WIAC is an outlier in D3 in the sense that all their schools are substantially larger than the typical D3 school. The smallest WIAC school (River Falls) has an undergraduate enrollment of 5,500, and the largest (Oshkosh) has 12,000 undergrads. However, the median undergraduate enrollment in D3 is 1,748.
From an IHSA enrollment classification perspective, this is the equivalent of 8A schools playing against 3A and 4A schools.
Not to mention public school tuition rates versus almost all private school tuition rates.... which matters since there is no athletic scholarship money inclvolved. They really should be playing d2 like the Minnesota d2 schools.
Enrollment really plays no factor in college football. Schools arent getting their football players from the general student population. Resources and money devoted to football is what makes the real difference
Agree it doesn't make much difference in Division I. Disagree as it pertains to Division III.
Division III is primarily comprised by small schools, roughly half of which have enrollments of under 1700 students. Here are the undergrad enrollments of last year's D3 football semifinalists:
Oshkosh: 12,060
Brockport: 7,128
Mary Hardin Baylor: 3,278
Mt Union: 2,095
Here are the 2016 semifinalists:
Oshkosh: 12,060
Mary Hardin Baylor: 3,278
John Carroll: 3,028
Mt Union: 2,095
Here's 2015:
Whitewater: 10,522
St. Thomas: 6,199
Mt Union: 2,095
Linfield: 1,632
See any enrollment trending going on here relative to the D3 enrollment mean of 1,748?
Where are you getting your figures? Per the NCAA site, the average enrollment of D3 schools is 4,084. Based on this number, the smaller school are doing better than the larger schools when it comes to playoff success.
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2018DIII_FactsandFigures_20170906.pdf
I really did not mean to start a debate about the D3 playoff landscape...my bad. I do love the debate though!
http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2017RES_institutional_characteristics_edited_20180119.pdf
That link also provides data that says that 77% of D3 schools have enrollments under 3,000, while just 2% have enrollments over 10,000.
The average enrollment number you see is driven up by including the large outlier schools like UW Oshkosh, UW Whitewater, etc. in the calculation. The median enrollment represents the midpoint of all the schools. That number is 1,784, according to the link above. That means there are the same number of schools larger than 1,784 undergrads as there are below that number. Based on that number, the larger schools are doing better than the smaller schools. Just one of twelve D3 semifinalists in the past three years has been below the median enrollment.
Last edited:
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Transfer portal back open - local kids
- Latest: DadCoachSports