Do you wish the OHSAA would reduce the playoff teams (4? 6? 8?) like the "old days"

Do you wish the OHSAA would reduce the playoff teams (4? 6? 8?) like the "old days"?


  • Total voters
    199
Here is another thought. Just go to top 32 in points in each Division. The long distance drives arguments are irrelevant. Look at the SE & NW regions across most divisions, a lot of games are 2.5-3 hour drives in 1st 2 weeks anyway. If it’s over “X” amount of miles, go find a neutral site in between somewhere.
The distance argument is relevant enough that the schools will not approve it.

In the past when the Top 32 idea was proposed the further idea of make the regions after the top 32 were picked was brought up. If top 32 is the direction we go that will probably be more of a winning argument.
 
As a Warren G. Harding fan, I’ve seen both sides of the coin. 1998 was the final year with four teams per region making it. In week 8 of that season, Canton McKinley erased a nine-point second half deficit to beat WGH 20-16. That loss resulted in WGH eventually finishing fifth in the region while McKinley went on to win the state title by double digits. Fast forward to the ‘22 season and WGH failed to qualify for a watered down 16-team field.

Eight was perfect.
 
Like just about everyone else, I think 8 teams per region was the absolute sweet spot. But now that we have 16 teams per region, the inevitable next step is letting everyone in. It's just a matter of how that comes to be.
Those days are over unfortunately, OHSAA will let everyone in before they go back to 8 teams, high school athletics is now a mirror to society: all inclusive, everybody gets a treat win or lose winning doesn't matter.
 
If I am not mistaken, at some point the following sports did not include all teams in the playoffs:
Boys Golf
Boys Tennis
Boys Ice Hockey
Boys LaCrosse
Boys Bowling
Boys Swimming and Diving
Girls Golf
Girls Tennis
Girls Bowling
Girls Swimming and Diving

For some of the sports you have to go back to the early days of the sport being offered or back to the 70's or earlier for when the state tournaments did not include all teams. And I may not be correct about all of them since I wasn't around in the 70s and earlier. And I may have missed some that at one point did not include all teams as well.
 
Maybe someone who knows the inner workings can elaborate, but... can't the schools introduce a referendum and bring it to a vote? I'm pretty sure no one wants an "all-in" playoff
 
Maybe someone who knows the inner workings can elaborate, but... can't the schools introduce a referendum and bring it to a vote? I'm pretty sure no one wants an "all-in" playoff
Nobody voted for the OHSAA to allow 16 teams per region into the playoffs either. The OHSFCA had done the leg work to get their members on board with expanding the playoffs to 12 teams per region, and the next thing anyone knew, the OHSAA expanded it to 16 teams per region.
 
That year alone in that region (2018, R21), there was not only 9-1 Springfield who missed, but 3 other 8-2 schools that did not make it. Springfield would have finished 3rd, 6th, and 6th in the other D6 regions.
The Browns went 10-6 and missed the playoffs in 07. In 08 the Patriots went 11-5 and missed.

Good luck next year 🤷‍♂️
 
What I find funny is the fact that people think 8 teams brings about more competitive seasons when in reality it makes teams formulate schedules that will let them make the playoffs. Teams aren't able to take risks and bring in a power house when they can just play a team that will guarantee them some points. The only thing 16 teams dilutes is some of round 1, but it provides much better regular season matchups.

Upsets happen as we saw last year so it makes teams in the top 8 actually earn their spots. The way I see it, 16 teams gives us better regular season matchups, then some lopsided first round games, then a true 8 team per region playoff where we know we have it right. The playoffs aren't watered down, just the idea that making the playoffs is something to hang your hat on. Now you gotta win a game to make it matter, which in my opinion is a greater accomplishment than just making it.
It has changed zero schedules. There were always great regular season matchups that actually mattered because lose and you might be sitting home. That added an edge to the competition...now they are, outside of league implications, basically 10 exhibition games.

Not only are the playoffs watered down but the regular season as well.
 
If everyone feels this way why do all schools make it in every other sport? Should we not come up with similar formulas for other sports? With the basketball ranking system in place it would not be too difficult.
Yes every team sport should have qualifying rather than automatic admission to the playoffs.
 
Most people today try to arrange leagues and play schedules within a division. Over the years we have grown to too many divisions (7). Six was just right. That is a reflection now of larger vs smaller schools in the old AAA, AA and A classifications.More care in breakdown of numbers in enrollment is also needed. Doesn’t have to be perfect numbers but there is little difference now between some of the small divisions enrollments. I like the competition and the incentives to making the playoffs but wish there was some “ rounding “ off of numbers of divisions and enrollment numbers. Otherwise, I’ll live with the system. Creates interest, important games to win for getting in or seeding and chances for upsets with tougher scheduling by some. The kids like it. That’s all that’s important.
 
I think the number now is wrong because it's just short enough to just do "everyone is in the tournament".

8 worked cause the logistics of it worked best.

I think if we stick with 16 per region the regions should split and do top 8 of the smaller regions. Have more local playoff games the first few weeks where the matchups have a better chance of being rivalries.

Long travel in the early rounds was okay when the playoffs were a difficult thing to get into. You were just excited to be there. Now, randomly playing a school 100 miles away in week 11 is just a letdown.
 
Less is more; however, I can accept 8 teams, NO regions, just 1-32. As you can tell, I also can care less about travel.
 
It has changed zero schedules. There were always great regular season matchups that actually mattered because lose and you might be sitting home. That added an edge to the competition...now they are, outside of league implications, basically 10 exhibition games.

Not only are the playoffs watered down but the regular season as well.
Oh, yes it has changed schedules. The 10-team Greater Miami Conference now plays a full-round robin after every team plays a non-league game in Week 1. All 10 schools are D1 and there are just 17 or 18 schools in the region, virtually assuring all 10 schools qualify for the playoffs. All GMC schools used to play non-league games the first two weeks of the season. I don't think it was coincidence this change was made in the wake of the OHSAA expanding the regions from eight to16 teams. Now the GMC schools don't have to hunt for points outside the league.
 
Nobody voted for the OHSAA to allow 16 teams per region into the playoffs either. The OHSFCA had done the leg work to get their members on board with expanding the playoffs to 12 teams per region, and the next thing anyone knew, the OHSAA expanded it to 16 teams per region.
It is currently being discussed among OHSAA Officials that they want to add an 8th Division and reduce from 16 to 12 per region. they are looking at eliminating neutral sites because of cost and no one wants to host. There are 4 schools that have said yes and have never rejected an offer to host. with that being said the Regional final would be hosted by the top seed in the region.
the State Semi finals would change as well all to one location under a proposed plan
 
1685973683302.png
 
Most people today try to arrange leagues and play schedules within a division. Over the years we have grown to too many divisions (7). Six was just right. That is a reflection now of larger vs smaller schools in the old AAA, AA and A classifications.More care in breakdown of numbers in enrollment is also needed. Doesn’t have to be perfect numbers but there is little difference now between some of the small divisions enrollments. I like the competition and the incentives to making the playoffs but wish there was some “ rounding “ off of numbers of divisions and enrollment numbers. Otherwise, I’ll live with the system. Creates interest, important games to win for getting in or seeding and chances for upsets with tougher scheduling by some. The kids like it. That’s all that’s important.
Maybe in your part of the state.
 
I like what they talked about doing before they changed it to 16. 12 teams make it, top 4 get a bye then you re-seed and start off with the top seed against the lowest seed and so forth. Also, many years some of those teams in the 8-12 slot that had brutal schedules could beat many of the upper seeds.
 
I like what they talked about doing before they changed it to 16. 12 teams make it, top 4 get a bye then you re-seed and start off with the top seed against the lowest seed and so forth. Also, many years some of those teams in the 8-12 slot that had brutal schedules could beat many of the upper seeds.
In 2021 #2 Dover only beat #15 SV-SM by 3 Pts. And also #16 East easily could have potentially knocked off everyone else in region 9 besides Chardon, Canfield, and maybe one or two others.

Mind you however I am not generally a fan of the 16 teams in a region. But in this year for instance #15 SV-SM probably would have won region 10, 11 or 12. I am conflicted because in very few other regions does the #15 or #16 team have a chance to win the state championship. So I think 8 is the right number, but it would really prioritize scheduling in region 9 as it has usually been one of the deepest regions pound for pound of late.
 
Here are my honest thoughts on this.

TBH, the OHSAA has painted themselves in a corner with the expansion to 16 teams. This past year, there were a couple of upsets, including up here in NE Ohio where THREE #13 seeds (Cardinal Mooney, Buchtel, Kenston) made it to the regional semifinals, and two of those lost by one possession to the eventual regional runner-ups. None of these teams would not have made it even under a 12-team format. And a #16 ended up pulling off an upset over a #1 in 2021 in Region 14. The only feasible way that it would make sense is if you cut the number of regions in half from 4 to 2, and took the 16 best in THOSE combined regions. The downside of that would be a potential nightmare travel wise. Division I experimented with this for a couple of years.

In my honest opinion, they should go back to the combined regions on the Division I level. There is no reason that 1, 2, and 3 win teams should be anywhere NEAR the playoffs, tough schedule or not. I would not object to the playoff field being cut to 12 teams, with a bye for the top four seeds. Makes the most sense IMO. Would there be teams over .500 missing the playoffs? Yes. Under this format, a 7-3 team and 8-2 team would have been sitting at home Week 11 in Region 9 and two 5-5 teams would have made it in Region 10. In Regions 7, 21, and 25, a 4-6 team would have qualified.

12 is the perfect happy medium. 16 is too watered down unless you combine the regions. 8 won't happen again IMO.
 
Going to take it a step further and say,

1) any system that strips autonomous league formation, and instead pursues what’s akin to “district play” with opponents predetermined from ‘above’, is going to be fraught with its own inconsistencies year-over-year with incorporation of CB.

2) It’s just… brutal… to think of a situation where Marion Local would be forced to kick games versus the likes of Coldwater, Versailles etc in order to accommodate the likes of Bradford, Tri-County North, Waynesfield-Goshen or whoever into their regular season schedule.
I coach in South Carolina where every two years the South Carolina High School League re-aligns the classes and regions based on 9-11 enrollment (boys AND girls) and geography. Works pretty well IMO but by far the two biggest differences would be Ohio has something like 5x as many high schools as SC and we don't have competitive balance (although with the number of athletically based charter schools popping up down here it may come sooner rather than later).
 
Being able to witness firsthand the evolution from 4, to 8, and now to 16, here’s my take:

4: Too many teams who were good enough to compete were left out because a combination of a difficult schedule or 1 “off” night against a quality opponent . That said, 4 was probably the best number to create epic regular season games because you had to schedule, and beat, quality teams to make the top 4.

8: Perfect number. Still had to schedule a decent game or two to ensure you got in, but didn’t necessarily have to schedule a murder’s row to do so. 1st round playoff games seemed to be way more competitive than the jump to 16.

16: Absolutely ludicrous to ask 15-18 year old kids to play 16 games to win a State Championship.
Agree completely.
 
We should go back to Classes AAA, AA, and A, four teams per region, and 8pm starts.

...and get off my lawn.
I played in the era of 1 team per region in the late 70's. Stinks when you don't lose a regular season game for 2 years and can't make the playoffs.
 
.
Top