Great example on Morris/TP. Tomorrow I’d be glad to point out the % of blowouts that involved CPS vs nonCPS. I’m sure it won’t be near even
LWE 35. Taft 0 not even halftime.
- Thread starter WIU78
- Start date
you're right. The IHSA should revoke all CPS membership and not even allow them to bother playing football.
Taking it right to the extreme. Show me where I said that. You seem exhausting IRL.
That's what you're implying. You keep coming up with reasons they don't belong in the playoffs.
The fan is presumably not interested in anything prior to another showdown with LA is the way I took it.
The good news for Marist now is they can beat up on the public schools in the prep bowl and prove their dominance. Maybe the state will observe the beatdown and change the rules to help the private school victims of system inequity.
What? When posting, it’s best to have clarity of thought, to save yourself from looking like an idiot. It seems to be catching around here.
Oh please enlighten us as to who this naive fan was John. The age and gender would be helpful. There is a LOT of football yet to be played and Loyola is NOT the team the LWE coaching staff is concerned with. Minooka is a huge hurdle and last I looked a certain team from Park Ridge is also on the same side of the bracket. Taft was out of their element but it is still a stout path to ISU.
Certain people look at LA and LWE and think it’s forgone conclusion. There is a lot of games to be played before we can even think about what may happen.
They can beat up on other private* schools. They would only face a public school in the championship. Brackets are divided
I have, in the past, suggested that any conference that has not placed a team in the quarterfinals in the last five seasons, or the semifinals in the last ten seasons, should only be allowed one representative in the playoffs. That representative would, of course, be the conference champion. This additional requirement is just as clear and transparent as the existing criteria, but it would replace many teams that are not playoff caliber with other teams that are.
The Chicago Public League, to its credit, has already moved in that direction. There are some CPL conferences whose members are not eligible for the playoffs, and there are other CPL conferences that restrict the number of teams from their conference who will participate in the playoffs.
Under the proposal made in the first paragraph, Taft still would have participated in this year's playoff. That is because they play in the extraordinarily large 16-team "RED" conference the CPL created, and Phillips is also part of that conference. [Phillips won a state championship in 2017, and thereby has been a semifinalist in the last ten seasons.] However, Taft did not even play Phillips, nor Morgan Park (the conference champion). That type of artificial situation might need to be addressed at some point, but at this point in time I am merely offering a broad concept as a possible solution.
One doesn't see the NCAA offering multiple bids (to the year-end national basketball tournament) to the Ohio Valley Conference just because more than one team in the conference had a winning record. They don't because they exist and think in the real world where rational people understand there are qualitative differences between conferences. Yes, every team should have a chance to participate in the tournament/playoff, and they do (by winning the conference championship). But no, all conferences do not have to be treated the same when there is objective historical evidence demonstrating a qualitative difference.
Last edited:
Interesting proposal, but it brings up a few questions. Let's say a conference, not the CPS, hasn't had a team reach the quarters or semi's in your given time frame and then one year has a conference champion that is 9-0 and the next team is 8-1 with their only loss to the 9-0 team. The 8-1 team had an average to above average non conference schedule. You're saying that team doesn't get in?
If those teams don't get in how do you get the 256 teams for the playoffs? Let me guess you start taking more 4-5 or maybe even 3-6 teams from conferences that you deem to be the stronger conferences.
Lot of whining over one team that didn’t make the playoffs and would have gotten beat first round anyway. Just because your team is in the Catholic league doesn’t give it a pass from the rules.
Ah, I can tell you are a thinking man. Yes, under the broad proposal I laid out, the 8-1 team you describe above would not qualify for the playoffs. With that said, I will quickly add that the proposal I laid out in more detail last year had some additional refinements. This was the case largely because of the need to deal with independents. If the independent team met the criteria that was established for the conferences, there is no problem; the independent team would qualify. For example, Quincy Notre Dame was a semifinalist in 2019 and would therefore qualify for the playoffs this year. Still, it might not be considered fair to hold a single team to the same standard that an entire conference is held to. In most cases an 8 to 10-team conference would have an easier time having at least one team make the quarterfinals than an individual team would. It was for that reason that I suggested all teams with a record of 7-2 or better should automatically qualify for the playoffs. This standard could/should be extended even to conference members of conferences that did not meet the standard proposed in the message I posted a short while ago. So, let us begin by saying all teams with a record of 7-2 or better would qualify for the playoffs (unless the conference itself chose to impose further restrictions). That means only teams with a record of 6-3 or worse would be impacted by the proposal set forth in my earlier post. In this case, the team described in your first paragraph above would qualify for the playoffs. That still leaves the question you posed in your second paragraph.
Yes, the elimination of teams from the playoffs that would result from my proposal would be addressed, in part, by adding 4-5 and possibly 3-6 teams from conferences that met the standard that was established. Before moving in that direction, though, I would propose decreasing the number of 11-man football classes from eight to seven, and then adding the 8-man football teams as the eighth class. In this way we still have a total of eight football classes, and we now include the 8-man schools under the existing playoff umbrella.
In essence, with the introduction of 8-man football we went from eight classes up to nine. We now would be going back to an eight-class system.
Naturally, these proposals are open to further suggestions and refinement. The point I was trying to make was that there are ways to further improve the current system.
