Playoff Home/Away Game Discussion

[colin2229]

Totally agree. It is a weird, quirky, and unique system, but I really like the basic randomness to decide who hosts, as schedules are so different that seeding means little anyway.

Getting to see new venues, especially for a big time Saturday semifinal is a great part of the experience.

Would really like to see a revamp of seeding philosophy before any consideration of rewarding home field to the "better" seed.

Would love to see the current system used to determine the 256 qualifiers and 32 per class. But then go to a computer algorithm the IHSA contracts with to determine the order of the 32 seeds.

And even then, I prefer the alternating of hosting sites just for the enjoyment of seeing a big game somewhere new.

Could just have the coaches vote on the one through 32 seating. Don’t need an algorithm.

To that point, I see the biggest issue with the current set up is teams getting an easy road to the quarters mainly bc of CPS teams.

I like the idea of a new way to rank the playoff seeds.

 

[JCHillmen]

Could just have the coaches vote on the one through 32 seating. Don’t need an algorithm.

To that point, I see the biggest issue with the current set up is teams getting an easy road to the quarters mainly bc of CPS teams.

I like the idea of a new way to rank the playoff seeds.

I'd be ok with the coaches seeding, but don't think it would be as good as baseball and basketball coaches self seeding. They are more familiar with their local sectional foes in their class than most HS football coaches. A suburban 6A coach likely doesn't have much to go on when comparing schools in his area vs Chatham vs ESL, etc. There would be a lot of blatant guessing or local bias. I imagine the downstate schools would prefer the algorithm because they would likely feel slighted when coaches who are less familiar with their programs vote them down further than necessary.

Closed conferences or conferences with limited nonconference game opportunities also make it hard. But I would be happy with an algorithm or coaches vote compared to the current seeding system. But I am ok with the current system for how the 256 are chosen.

 

[cigaros]

Could just have the coaches vote on the one through 32 seating. Don’t need an algorithm.

To that point, I see the biggest issue with the current set up is teams getting an easy road to the quarters mainly bc of CPS teams.

I like the idea of a new way to rank the playoff seeds.

I like the current evaluation of teams based upon opponents wins, and defeated opponents wins along with the record. However, going one – 32 while using this formula is the best way to go, in my opinion. I wish the higher performing teams would have the easier path to the finals. It would eliminate the 9–0 teams which play no one. And allow teams that have been scheduling responsibly a better path through the playoffs.

 

[Dave Brody]

how does playing at home for 2 consecutive games come into play? I just assume it’s home then away but realize that’s not always possible

 

[corey90]

But wouldn't the lower ranked team had to have beaten a higher ranked team in order to advance?

Let's look at an real, very hypothetical example.

Sterling #13 beats WSF # 4 played in Wheaton, and if #5 PR beats Goode, Sterling hosts. You could say that Sterling haven beaten the #4 seed, takes that seed, so you have the new #4 hosting the #5.

So you make a good point except for the first round of the playoffs. It doesn’t matter to me if a team plays a higher ranked team before the playoffs and wins. If the lower seeds record was worse than the higher seed. That said in the second round your point makes more sense to get a lower seed a chance to host a playoff game. I still believe the higher seed with a better record should host the game. I will concede you open eyes on a different way to look at giving a team a chance at hosting a game in the playoffs.

 

[Green Knights 17]

Basketball and baseball have regionals and each regional is seeded based on coaches vote.
I don’t think that would work in a statewide football bracket. Yeah everybody might agree on the top seed, maybe the top 2 or 3, but it’s just too much for coaches to try and rank 31 other teams that aren’t set until right before the tournament starts.
Regionals are set months before they begin. Way fewer teams and more time to scout.
Outside of the current method, they could use calpreps/massey power ratings to seed the teams, or perhaps some formula that combines the current system and the computers.

Regionals are not set months in advance, it’s a few weeks before the state tournament

 

[doctor_d]

Regionals are not set months in advance, it’s a few weeks before the state tournament

I believe the seeding meetings are a couple weeks before the regional tournament, but the team assignments to the regionals are set well before that.