I give up ....it is clear to anyone in those meetings the impact the tournament match-ups have and how those are impacted by seeding.
Having been a part of those meetings for many years I agree and respect the value the seeding has. But it is all about early match-ups. If their is a coach in the room who feels he will be playing on a regional court or beyond, the seeding is not important(other then a sign of respect) since he is going to work his way thru the sectional and district teams regardless. In my experience the seeding and bracket placement can be more important for lower seeds trying to win a single game or two. Many coaches in competitive districts would rather be a 3-5 seed. If you are hands down the best team in the district, you don't care what seed you are. Other than being respected by your fellow coaches being voted #1.I give up ....it is clear to anyone in those meetings the impact the tournament match-ups have and how those are impacted by seeding.
Again, we have no documented proof that OHSAA wants everyone to use this or that all the districts like it, except for posters saying so. The only facts are that the NW coaches voted to use it and its rankings were amazingly inaccurate for D3 last year
Getting the 1 is so much more important than just respect. For example....
Nope, and yep. The bureaucrats in Columbus are winning, I guess.
Again you are using the SW layout where you play super sectionals and then match up with another for a district title. Most of the districts in the state have a district champ from the 10-15 teams inside their district. IF the SW would have a Piqua champ ad a Troy champ then it would be closer to apples and apples around the state. Not everyone but most play 2 sectional games and 2 district games to have a district champ.
Nope, coaches who have been asked, are voting for this.
You said bracket placement would follow. Have they voted for that yet?
You are failing to see that a similar match-up scenario (I played someone harder earlier because I was a lower seed) can take place in any bracket, at any point through regionals in any part of the state.
That is just a guess that i have from some talks with people who sit in the meetings.
High or low seeds can play at any time in the tournament and teams get hot and we have seen 8th seeds do well. Asa few of us have said, the cream will rise regardless of the seeding.
I dunno. You seemed awfully authoritative when you posted it.
I apologize if it came across that way. It’s just a guess this will be a topic down the road.
I've tried every way I know how to explain how important match-ups are in the tnmt (any tnmt) and you continue to reply about upsets
Has anyone denied how important match-ups are? Coaches are always looking for what they feel is the best match-up for their teams. What I'm trying to get you to understand is that an unfavorable seeding is not the end of a team's season. If you get the 5 seed and I get the 7th, I can still win and move on. Had Taft actually received the 3rd seed in one of the SW sectionals they would have not been doomed to lose. Coaches will jockey for position regardless of their seed. Many coaches would rather be the 3rd-5th seed so they can see some where some of the good teams are going. Being the #1 seed only gets you a venue and time if they have them pre-listed on the bracket.I've tried every way I know how to explain how important match-ups are in the tnmt (any tnmt) and you continue to reply about upsets
You have to give credit to the Northeast District for showing how coaches voted. Too bad the other 5 districts around the state aren't as transparent.
This proposed RPI will take care of that.
Some districts do everything online using Baumspage. I'm not sure if everyone does or not.
My last 6 posts have been in response to you saying "seeding doesn't matter after the first couple games". Seeding leads to placement which leads to every potential match-up in the tournament through regionals.
SW coaches see it
Just to clarify, I was referring to non-coaches.
So you feel seeding is the reason teams make it to regionals. I think the most talented teams make it to regionals.
You appear to be deliberately misconstruing what he said. He clearly said seeding is the first domino, which leads to others. He didn’t says it’s ‘the’ reason.
First domino and biggest domino is TALENT. You need the Jimmy’s and Joes. Talent can be 5-8 kids buying into a system and playing very well together or 1-3 studs who carry the team. Bobby Knight said it best when he said “some people think/say I am a pretty good coach. However, I am a heck of a lot better when I have talented kids to coach”. Never heard a coach say if we were the 6th seed instead of 10 we would have won the title…
Seeding is the first domino set without a doubt. The next is bracket placement. But as those dominos start to fall it becomes less and less about where they began.
Clearly teams must win to advance and that is MOST important. Again, I have been responding to you saying "Seeding can be a factor for maybe the first 2 games of tournament".
True, but I have definitely heard coaches say if we got the X seed instead of X seed we could have gone farther because of match-ups. That is especially true the deeper into the seeds you go.
So with that philosophy (I need a higher seed because my Jimmy and joes suck) all you need to do is schedule a bunch of cupcakes out of conference so the computer gives you a higher seed.