Football Playoff Format Changes Being Considered By OHSAA

R

radiodaveagain

Well-known member
Football Playoff Format Changes Being Considered By OHSAA
statelinesportsnetwork.net

Football Playoff Format Changes Being Considered By OHSAA

The changes are listed above in a Tweet by OHSAA Executive Director Jerry Snodgrass.
statelinesportsnetwork.net statelinesportsnetwork.net

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIPucPnXYAgNRc7?format=jpg&name=small
 
Last edited by a moderator:
 
Shortening pre-season, no concern this would lead to more injuries? In MY view injuries happen as much from inexperence as they do the physicality of the game.

I don't see how it will add to the competitiveness of the games. It's one more week for a weaker team to build injuries for the one week delayed statistical mismatch.

Adding four more teams I THINK will increase costs. By this time of year, most of those fan bases I would predict to have moved on so revenue down also. The weather week 11 is not really condusive to the casual fan or maybe to getting people to man the events. Might put more money into the AD's, Asst AD's and whoever else gets paid per game but for some programs, I think that hits the school's bottom line. I can see why AD's would vote for this but not responsible school or board leadership.

The only ways I can think of to reduce first round travel costs is smaller regions or reseeding the original eight based upon locality instead of a strict 1-8, 2-7....
 
The Butler said:
How many "quality" teams finish 9th to 12th? Maybe 1 or 2 a season if that.

Sounds like an OHSAA money grab.
Click to expand...

going by current harbins
There are 12 regions who would qualify 9 or more schools for the playoffs when using the top 32 harbins to determine playoffs
 
At this rate they need to hand out regional champion trophies to all the teams the made the playoffs back when the only took 1 per region. Lol

Seriously I’m for anything that increases the popularity of the sport.

1 bad thing is while 4 teams are getting rest... and healing the other 8 are losing players to injuries or at the least becoming even weaker due to a extra game.

Most teams in the top 4 usually are your regional winner anyways.

It could help the schools that get blacklisted as to good to play, that are forced to play a ridiculous schedule make the playoffs.
 
I like this idea. Everyone is complaining about more games or this and that, but as a player that is what I loved about the playoffs. Especially on teams that routinely made it somewhat deep in the playoffs, this means more games against teams you’ve never played before. More neutral site games which means new fields played on. I was always jealous of teams that didn’t have to play 9 conference games as they could fill their schedule up with new teams.
 
They want to go to a 16 week season? Seems the season is already long enough. But if we are going to do this, might as well go to 16 teams making the playoffs. I don't see any reason for giving 4 teams a bye.

The biggest reason I don't like this idea is that it seems that the biggest issue facing OHSAA football is that participation rates have declined in Ohio. This proposal does not address that and arguably, it will make things worse.
 
It def helps the teams that should be in the playoffs, In most regions but get left out of others because of the quality of teams in that region. I’m sure the kids would be all for it, and if that’s the case then I’m all for it because this game is about the kids.
 
eastisbest said:
Might put more money into the AD's, Asst AD's and whoever else gets paid per game but for some programs, I think that hits the school's bottom line. I can see why AD's would vote for this but not responsible school or board leadership.
Click to expand...
I would wager that not a single AD or 't AD in the state gets paid per game.
 
I agree with some regions being completely loaded and some regions in the same division being completely week. Perfect example would be D2 R5 and D2 R7 last year..so why don’t we just get rid of 4 regions to 2? Go to a 1-16 regional format like D1 did a few years ago. Before people thrash me for travel time problems it still exists in the current format. Few years ago I recall Doylestown Chippewa driving 3.5 hours to Coldwater to play a first round playoff game
 
radiodaveagain said:
Football Playoff Format Changes Being Considered By OHSAA
statelinesportsnetwork.net

Football Playoff Format Changes Being Considered By OHSAA

The changes are listed above in a Tweet by OHSAA Executive Director Jerry Snodgrass.
statelinesportsnetwork.net statelinesportsnetwork.net

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIPucPnXYAgNRc7?format=jpg&name=small
Click to expand...
Ridiculous idea when you look at history!
yappi.com

State Champions from all divisions and Harbin rank for playoffs since 1999.

Below are the state champs Harbin rank/seed they had to start the playoffs. 1999 was the start of the current 8 team per region playoff system. 2013 was the start of Division 7. All time rank/seed percentage that won state. #1 - 54 times the #1 seed won state (43%) #2 - 31 times the #2 seed won...
yappi.com yappi.com
 
Buckeye Elite said:
It def helps the teams that should be in the playoffs, In most regions but get left out of others because of the quality of teams in that region. I’m sure the kids would be all for it, and if that’s the case then I’m all for it because this game is about the kids.
Click to expand...
The problem is this generation of kids have been getting participation ribbons since they were in flag football and t-ball. Not everyone wins, not everyone gets the job they really wanted. It’s ridiculous that some kids won’t know a loss or not getting what they want until they are adults.
For D1 this proposal would mean 48 of the 72 teams would make the playoffs, why on earth should 67% of the teams make it ? At that point put them all in and be done with it.
 
Massillon#82 said:
The problem is this generation of kids have been getting participation ribbons since they were in flag football and t-ball. Not everyone wins, not everyone gets the job they really wanted. It’s ridiculous that some kids won’t know a loss or not getting what they want until they are adults.
For D1 this proposal would mean 48 of the 72 teams would make the playoffs, why on earth should 67% of the teams make it ? At that point put them all in and be done with it.
Click to expand...
I agree. My issue is really about some really strong regions and some very weak regions, you’ll have teams that get left out of week11 and would have a chance to win a different region in their division
 
Yappi said:
They want to go to a 16 week season? Seems the season is already long enough. But if we are going to do this, might as well go to 16 teams making the playoffs. I don't see any reason for giving 4 teams a bye.

The biggest reason I don't like this idea is that it seems that the biggest issue facing OHSAA football is that participation rates have declined in Ohio. This proposal does not address that and arguably, it will make things worse.
Click to expand...

Teams should make the playoffs because they performed well enough above average to earn it. 12 teams per region allows more teams in that were much closer to average than well above average. To heck with taking 12 teams or the 16 teams that you suggest. Go 1 step further. Make it a 9-game regular season and let everyone make the playoffs. Let the teams split the revenue from that week 10 game, so that schools are less worried about the revenue shortage they'd experience in the years when they're only playing 4 regular season home games.

I'm not sure if this proposal would pass or not. I'm sure coaches would love the playoffs to be expanded, but would they want it at the expense of shortening the preseason? How good are most teams going to look with 1 less week of practice before their 1st game? Are they hoping 1 less week of preseason is going to increase player participation?
 
Last edited:
Some te
Mr. Slippery said:
Teams should make the playoffs because they performed well enough above average to earn it. 12 teams per region allows more teams in that were much closer to average than well above average. To heck with taking 12 teams or the 16 teams that you suggest. Go 1 step further. Make it a 9-game regular season and let everyone make the playoffs. Let the teams split the revenue from that week 10 game, so that schools are less worried about the revenue shortage they'd experience in the years when they're only playing 4 regular season home games.

I'm not sure if this proposal would pass or not. I'm sure coaches would love the playoffs to be expanded, but would they want it at the expense of shortening the preseason? How good are most teams going to look with 1 less week of practice before their 1st game? Are they hoping 1 less week of preseason is going to increase player participation?
Click to expand...

most teams And players who take their season very seriously have a year round obligation towards football, shortening the preseason by a week doesn’t affect all that much, you’re not really allowed to practice the same way with hours etc as before, I’m all for adding a week of the postseason where a game matters and get rid of 3-4 practices
 
Last year there were 40 teams with winning records in Division 1, 45 in 2, 54 in 3, 49 in 4, 48 in 5, 50 in 6 and 36 in 7. 321 total or approximately 44 percent of total teams. Just numbers for thought.
 
Buckeye Elite said:
It def helps the teams that should be in the playoffs, In most regions but get left out of others because of the quality of teams in that region. I’m sure the kids would be all for it, and if that’s the case then I’m all for it because this game is about the kids.
Click to expand...
Terrible ideal bro just keep it the same it's simple win your games!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top