16 Team per Region Playoffs

M

moonshadow

Active member
"The OHSAA sent a survey to football member schools today with one of the questions asking if the postseason should expand from 12 to 16 qualifying teams in each region.
From the survey:
As you know, the OHSAA Board of Directors approved an expansion to 12 teams from each region qualifying for playoffs in 2021 under a regular season start date of 8/20 (first Friday).
When it was approved (in May), there was some concern with four teams in each region having a "bye" in the first round. The 2020 tournament gave us experience in two major areas:
1. More teams qualified for the tournament
2. Many teams experienced a "bye."
We could maintain the proposed expansion for 2021, or we could instead qualify 16 teams per region. Qualifying 16 teams would eliminate the first round "byes." Which option do you prefer?
1. Maintain the original proposal, qualify 12 teams per region, with 4 first round "byes"
2. Adjust the original proposal, qualify 16 teams per region, eliminate the first round "byes"
The OHSAA said the survey is available until the afternoon of Dec. 14."
 
 
Does this proposal include a 10 game regular season schedule?
 
Local station last year asked the bye question to A LOT of playoff coaches during their interview.

Most stated they wouldnt really know how to act/plan/etc for that week. Personally, I dont think they would have had a problem.

I knwo this year, our team had probably its sloppiest game after their playoff bye. Maybe there is something to this.

A few weeks ago I posted a thread about what it would take to make the playoffs with the new 12 team format.

These numbers are for D5-D7 with data pulled from 2013, the first year of 7 divisions:

DIVISION 5:
10 wins: 100%
9 wins: 100%
8 wins: 100%
7 wins: 93.3 %
6 wins: 65.9%
5 wins: 40.2 %
4 wins: 9.9 %
3 wins: only one team would have finished in the top 12 with 3 wins, and I did not track all the 3 win teams who did NOT make it.

DIVISION 6:
10, 9, 8 wins: 100%
7 wins: 90.2%
6 wins: 66.3%
5 wins: 22.6%
4 wins: 3.6%
3 and below: ZERO.

DIVISION 7:
8-10 wins: 100%
7 wins: 98.4%
6 wins: 91.3%
5 wins: 65.7
4 wins: 35.7
3 wins: 4 teams would have finished in the top 12, did not track all three win teams who did make it.



If we go to the TOP 16 teams, then these numbers will obviously change. I would see in D5 that it a team gets to 6 wins they are almost assuredly in the playoffs and 5 wins you are likely over 50% liklihood of making it.

D6: 6 wins you likely are in, and 5 wins probably around 50 percent.

D7: 5 wins likely gets you into the playoffs, and probably about 50 percent for 4 win teams.

Just the data, you all can discuss...
 
Personally, I would keep it at proposed for 12 teams.
If we take the whole $$ out of it....


I would like to keep it at 12 with the 4 byes. No one wants to see 1 vs 16, 2vs 15, etc.

The argument in the past was this: Are some of those teams who just missed the playoffs worthy of making it based on the lsat few that make it?

If we keep it as it, the 5 vs 12, 6v11, 7v10, 8v9 we SHOULD see some good matchups and a way of those teams 9-12 of proving they belong.

By putting all 16 I just think it is too much, not warranted and winning 5 games should not warrant a likely playoff bid.
 
If we have 16 teams we’re talking about 1 win teams making the playoffs. I think that’s a little too far.
 
Just.here said:
If we have 16 teams we’re talking about 1 win teams making the playoffs. I think that’s a little too far.
Click to expand...
JFK has already made it in the playoffs with 4 wins with8 getting in because of our schedule. If they go to 16 we would get in with 1. At what point do we stop the everybody gets a trophy kick. I know this year is different, but the regular season had a whole different feel knowing we were in the playoffs from the get go. I guess the only upside would be teams willing to take on games everyone wants to see, but doesn’t benefit them to play as it is now.
 
7B73AFEE-D398-4A8E-9459-DA2C1937D5C3.jpeg
 
Division I has 18 teams per region. There will be 1 win teams making the playoffs. Although unlikely, it would be possible that a team could make it without winning a game. Not sure what the tiebreaker would be if two teams tied for the last spot with 0 wins.

I'm split on this proposal. I really don't want to see a 16 vs 1 game. Hopefully the 1 seeds would take advantage by getting their kids some reps but pull the plug quickly if it gets out of hand. On the other hand, I was never a big fan of the bye week for some of the teams. Either way they decide it, it will be fine with me. Both have their pluses and minuses.
 
The only reason 12 teams works is because of the bye, so a 12 seed doesn’t have to play 1 seed.

If you go 16 teams the 16 will have to play the 1, that’s a waste of time. I think you will get a lot of low seed teams forfeit, their is nothing good that comes from them getting killed in the 1st round when they already have a losing record.
 
If you expand to 16 and maintain the 10 game regular season how can you not have a 16 game season?
 
what we did this season worked well. I agree, it only worked because #24 never had to play #1. I would have to say stay at 12, but I wouldn't hate 16.
 
D1 R1 St Ed’s 42 Glen Oak 0
D1 R2 Coffman 56 Beavercreek 7
D1 R3 PC 49 Grove City 0
D1 R4 Lakota West 44 West Clermont 0

D2 R5 Hoban 63 Kent Roosevelt 0
D2 R6 Avon (no contest)
D2 R7 Massillon Perry 42 Canal Winchester 0
D2 R8 Winton Woods 28 Xenia 13

D3 R9 Chardon 49 Howland 14
D3 R10 Tiffin Columbian 45 Norton 13
D3 R11 Columbus DeSales (no contest)
D3 R12 Bellbrook 58 CJ 0

D4 R13 CF Northwest 52 Girard 29
D4 R14 Bellevue 34 Galion 9
D4 R15 St Clairsville 47 Sparta Highland 30
D4 R16 Clinton Massie 63 Thurgood Marshall 6

D5 R17 Kirtland 42 Manchester 0
D5 R18 Liberty Benton 33 Elmwood 13
D5 R19 Ironton 49 New Lexington 3
D5 R20 Roger Bacon 49 Carlisle 6

I’ve lost motivation to finish the list, but the bottom 2 divisions show more of the same. Closest game being a 21 point margin. 8 is plenty. 12 is better than 16.
 
I get letting everyone in this year given the uncertainty of how many games teams might play.

But 16 moving forward, just say no.
 
Don’t like it you don’t have to earn it as much as say 12 team and for division 1 teams everybody makes the playoffs if there gonna expand it to 16 may as well just do it the way they did it this year
 
My vote has always been and will always remain:
*No regions
*Top 16 in each division; 1 plays 16, etc. regardless of travel
*Highest seed plays at home throughout the playoffs until the championship regardless of type of field and seating available
*I have zero qualms about reducing number of divisions by any amount
 
crudog said:
My vote has always been and will always remain:
*No regions
*Top 16 in each division; 1 plays 16, etc. regardless of travel
*Highest seed plays at home throughout the playoffs until the championship regardless of type of field and seating available
*I have zero qualms about reducing number of divisions by any amount
Click to expand...
In my mind I think the first two points could work but you lose me with the last two.

I understand the point of rewarding the 1 seed but some of these grass fields can become a safety hazard by mid November. Also some of the worst case scenario travel times are steep. We can give the 1 seed preferential treatment for neutral site location but I am not sure giving them homefield all the way through is a good idea. Also, I have been to some stadiums that have less seating than my Honda Civic.
 
moonshadow said:
"The OHSAA sent a survey to football member schools today with one of the questions asking if the postseason should expand from 12 to 16 qualifying teams in each region.
Click to expand...
So a team would have to win 16 games to win a State Championship, yeah OHSAA cares about what's best for the " student athlete ".
 
crudog said:
My vote has always been and will always remain:
*No regions
*Top 16 in each division; 1 plays 16, etc. regardless of travel
*Highest seed plays at home throughout the playoffs until the championship regardless of type of field and seating available
*I have zero qualms about reducing number of divisions by any amount
Click to expand...
I do not know why people continue to hang on something that is never going to happen.

NEVER.


All those are garbage except for the last one. I could live with that but again, the cat is out of the bag and it is NEVER going to happen unless we see a DRASTIC drop in amount of teams playing football.
 
D6 R22 round of 16 results this year:
Archbold 42 - Gibsonburg 0
Carey 42 - Ashland Crestview 14
Columbus Grove 59 - Ottawa Hills 0
Tinora 34 - Hicksville 13
Colonel Crawford 44 - Seneca East 6
Liberty Center 42 - Western Reserve 18
Fairview 67 - Bluffton 6
Northwood 43 - Van Buren 10

Average margin of victory: 38.25 points

The round of sixteen was a joke for most regions in the state. Is this really what the goal is for the playoffs? How many teams seeded 8-16 made it to the regional championship, let alone the final 4?

The playoffs never should have expanded to 12 in the first place. 8 per region was almost perfect nearly every year except for 2019 because the OHSAA pissed the bed on dividing up Division 6, which kept out 10-0 Gibsonburg, and poor Northwood missed at 10-0 because they only played 2 teams the whole year that won more than 5 games and none their size. This is just a straight money grab for the OHSAA.
 
If Ohio continues to water down the playoff system they will soon find themselves about as nationally relevant in high school football as Indiana. I was cool with this year bc of the circumstances but to make such a dramatic change that really does nothing to improve Ohio football seems counter-productive.

-Keep the Harbins
-12 is too many and 16 is really too many, once you go to either of these numbers there will be no going back
 
12 is the MAX it should be . I think that covers teams that may have gotten off to a slow start or had significant injury's at some point and allows a bit more margin for error , AND allows for slightly more ambitious scheduling choices . If your program consistently made it most years with the 8 a region qualifying , it was a real accomplishment . It is slightly less of one now perhaps but it is a positive thing to allow a few more teams in I believe .

We see in other sports letting everyone in results in some absurd match-ups that benefit NO ONE . 16 is reaching a bit , but 12 is likely to be a positive thing in the long run .
 
Harrycrane said:
12 is the MAX it should be . I think that covers teams that may have gotten off to a slow start or had significant injury's at some point and allows a bit more margin for error , AND allows for slightly more ambitious scheduling choices . If your program consistently made it most years with the 8 a region qualifying , it was a real accomplishment . It is slightly less of one now perhaps but it is a positive thing to allow a few more teams in I believe .

We see in other sports letting everyone in results in some absurd match-ups that benefit NO ONE . 16 is reaching a bit , but 12 is likely to be a positive thing in the long run .
Click to expand...
Congrats.

Your first cogent post of Yapp.
 
It should have stayed at 8 , but 12 is plenty. Another week on these kids bodies is enough. And it makes the top 4 have an easier road because of the rest from the bye week.
This years "tournament" (not playoffs) I get, but by next fall normal life should return, and with it, having to earn a place in the playoffs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top