There could be a possibility of districts being eliminated and just going to 4 regionals right away with teams seeded 1-whatever....Like the NCAA does with their basketball tournament and four regionals.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Martin RPI
- Thread starter Hback
- Start date
There could be a possibility of districts being eliminated and just going to 4 regionals right away with teams seeded 1-whatever....Like the NCAA does with their basketball tournament and four regionals.
Interesting idea, and the stated reasoning on the MartinRPI website for starting the RPI. I would be for it if you could figure out a seeding system that accounts for the "eye-test" and you could figure out a way to account for travel time/expense, you could have first round games where the teams are 5 minutes apart and first round games where the teams are two hours or more apart.There could be a possibility of districts being eliminated and just going to 4 regionals right away with teams seeded 1-whatever....Like the NCAA does with their basketball tournament and four regionals.
Interesting idea, and the stated reasoning on the MartinRPI website for starting the RPI. I would be for it if you could figure out a seeding system that accounts for the "eye-test" and you could figure out a way to account for travel time/expense, you could have first round games where the teams are 5 minutes apart and first round games where the teams are two hours or more apart.
Like football.
There will not be an “eye” test lol.
Wrong. The discussion with SWOHHoops has always included how dominate Taft was and where they could have been seeded. In regards to them, being seeded 1st or 3rd didn't matter. IF a formula would be invented and could be used for seeding purposes, it would be because the Coaches Association along with the OHSAA wants it.By this logic, why even seed teams? Why not just put them on a bracket alphabetically if the best teams will find a way to move on? That’s obviously an extreme example, but you’re essentially arguing that the seeding mechanism doesn’t matter, as long as all districts do it the same, right?
And there’s where I have a problem. Why must they all do it the same? What’s the benefit? Who is hurt by districts doing things differently? You’ve already admitted that the cream will rise to the top, so why should the OHSAA care?
I’m a fan of local control when it comes to school issues because one-size-fits-all approaches are often unwieldy and generally only serve to placate bureaucrats at the state level. You know why different districts have different approaches? It‘s because the state isn’t homogenous. NWO could not be much more different than Central Ohio in many ways, so why not let the districts send their teams to regionals in the best way they see fit? Why even have different districts if you’re not going to let them operate?
Like football.
There will not be an “eye” test lol.
"Like Football"...not sure what that is replying to. If that is answering the travel question they are very different since football plays one game per week and basketball has played as many as 3 tnmt games in 8 daysWrong. The discussion with SWOHHoops has always included how dominate Taft was and where they could have been seeded. In regards to them, being seeded 1st or 3rd didn't matter. IF a formula would be invented and could be used for seeding purposes, it would be because the Coaches Association along with the OHSAA wants it.
Taft has been the example to illustrate the flaw in the ranking system. The harm/change comes for those teams that want to avoid Taft and now would have to go in the bracket before them. I agree that Taft could have been seeded 20th and it wouldn't have changed how dominant they were.
"Like Football"...not sure what that is replying to. If that is answering the travel question they are very different since football plays one game per week and basketball has played as many as 3 tnmt games in 8 days
Taft has been the example to illustrate the flaw in the ranking system. The harm/change comes for those teams that want to avoid Taft and now would have to go in the bracket before them. I agree that Taft could have been seeded 20th and it wouldn't have changed how dominant they were.
This is tough explaining to you…lol.
The new format you would play 2x a week. Like the NCAAT. Say a Tuesday/Friday. Or Thursday/Saturday.
maybe it’s a southern Ohio thing..
Flaw? You are trying to argue details about something that has not been created yet.Taft has been the example to illustrate the flaw in the ranking system. The harm/change comes for those teams that want to avoid Taft and now would have to go in the bracket before them. I agree that Taft could have been seeded 20th and it wouldn't have changed how dominant they were.
This is tough explaining to you…lol.
The new format you would play 2x a week. Like the NCAAT. Say a Tuesday/Friday. Or Thursday/Saturday.
maybe it’s a southern Ohio thing..
Not sure what is tough, you are sharing new information that has never been done in SWOH. Who introduced the new format?Flaw? You are trying to argue details about something that has not been created yet.
"You are trying to argue details about something that has not been created yet" - the name of the thread is "Martin RPI" and the original post talks about how it might be used more in the future and the rest of the thread is you and I sharing pros and cons. All of my posts are in regard to Martin RPI being used to do seeding. If there is a new yet-to-be-created ranking system, I'm all ears to hear what it is. The only flaw I am referring to is the one that caused Taft to be 49th in Ohio in the RPI last year.
If you read everything, then I guess you already know that the director of the SWOH region is in favor of this change.Not sure what is tough, you are sharing new information that has never been done in SWOH. Who introduced the new format?
"You are trying to argue details about something that has not been created yet" - the name of the thread is "Martin RPI" and the original post talks about how it might be used more in the future and the rest of the thread is you and I sharing pros and cons. All of my posts are in regard to Martin RPI being used to do seeding. If there is a new yet-to-be-created ranking system, I'm all ears to hear what it is. The only flaw I am referring to is the one that caused Taft to be 49th in Ohio in the RPI last year.
How about the coaches? It’s my understanding that the NWO coaches are not fans of the change.If you read everything, then I guess you already know that the director of the SWOH region is in favor of this change.
Your statement…Wrong. The discussion with SWOHHoops has always included how dominate Taft was and where they could have been seeded. In regards to them, being seeded 1st or 3rd didn't matter. IF a formula would be invented and could be used for seeding purposes, it would be because the Coaches Association along with the OHSAA wants it.
…seems to indicate that seeding isn’t that important. My apologies if I misunderstood. I still don’t understand the perceived need to make all districts do things the same way.BUt the cream always rises to the top and regardless of who you play in the first or second round, if you are good and ranked ANYWHERE you will move on. Again, the goal of OHSAA is to find a uniformed system that can work across the state and provide every team the same process.
There has been no change. The The NWO coaches will be asked to vote later this month in response to the idea of using the Martin RPI formula or something like it to assign tournament seeding instead of coaches voting. I assume most will be against it. Specially schools with basketball tradition. The end result may be a tweaking of the formula (if possible).How about the coaches? It’s my understanding that the NWO coaches are not fans of the change.
The only thing I can see that seeding provides is bragging rights and the ability to select when and were you play IF your district still plays at a neutral site. If your district has turned to the "high seed host" format, then seeding would be equally valuable for the top half of the teams in a district.Your statement…
…seems to indicate that seeding isn’t that important. My apologies if I misunderstood. I still don’t understand the perceived need to make all districts do things the same way.
I definitely don't read everything but would love to read that, can you provide a link? Tough to say who is "the director of the SWOH region" in this scenario though because the regional tournament itself is under the OHSAA but the district/sectional tournament, including seeding, is under the SWDAB. If you are talking about the coaches association the southwest region is split up into districts, mainly 15 and 16, who have separate directors.If you read everything, then I guess you already know that the director of the SWOH region is in favor of this change.
I just quickly looked through some district websites and it appears in districts that play at the higher seeds home, the process is exactly the same except the better seed hosts the first two games. So coaches still can choose who they play, based on the order of seed, which is the biggest thing that results from seeding. Being seeded 7th and being able to look at where seeds 1-6 are on the bracket is huge!
Read the opening post. There are 16 Directors in the state and each one was voted on and speaks for the membership inside their district. Most of SWOH would probably be in Districts 15 and 16.I definitely don't read everything but would love to read that, can you provide a link? Tough to say who is "the director of the SWOH region" in this scenario though because the regional tournament itself is under the OHSAA but the district/sectional tournament, including seeding, is under the SWDAB. If you are talking about the coaches association the southwest region is split up into districts, mainly 15 and 16, who have separate directors.
I just quickly looked through some district websites and it appears in districts that play at the higher seeds home, the process is exactly the same except the better seed hosts the first two games. So coaches still can choose who they play, based on the order of seed, which is the biggest thing that results from seeding. Being seeded 7th and being able to look at where seeds 1-6 are on the bracket is huge!
In the areas with high seed host, being 7th probably means you are playing at home so they do not care about 1-6 until the 3rd round.
My fault, I missed that part of it. I will be interested to see what the rest of the coaches in their districts think. You said above that you expect the NW coaches to vote against it and I agree.Read the opening post. There are 16 Directors in the state and each one was voted on and speaks for the membership inside their district. Most of SWOH would probably be in Districts 15 and 16.
In the areas with high seed host, being 7th probably means you are playing at home so they do not care about 1-6 until the 3rd round.
I think match-ups are much more important than where the game is. If 6 teams went in the bracket before me I'm looking at those brackets and going in the one that has the best match-ups for me to get farther in the tnmt. For example, last year Africentric was the 1 seed in Columbus and went in the bracket. The 7 and 8 seeds could have had two home games in Africentric's bracket but they chose other options because they couldn't beat Africentric. The 7 chose the path that took them on the road in the 2nd round against the 5 rather than playing two games at home against lower seeds before playing Africentric.
I feel that most coaches will not want to give up the control of voting. BUT, There are also a lot of coaches at schools that do not have traditionally strong programs and are regularly voted in the bottom half of the district that may be in favor of this. Specially a coach that likes the football format.My fault, I missed that part of it. I will be interested to see what the rest of the coaches in their districts think. You said above that you expect the NW coaches to vote against it and I agree.
I think match-ups are much more important than where the game is. If 6 teams went in the bracket before me I'm looking at those brackets and going in the one that has the best match-ups for me to get farther in the tnmt. For example, last year Africentric was the 1 seed in Columbus and went in the bracket. The 7 and 8 seeds could have had two home games in Africentric's bracket but they chose other options because they couldn't beat Africentric. The 7 chose the path that took them on the road in the 2nd round against the 5 rather than playing two games at home against lower seeds before playing Africentric.
The Central Board has two districts and seeds all teams together. So in D3 the seeded all 24 teams and allowed them to pick a spot on either district bracket. 12 teams had the change to be a high seed host. You probably also saw that the #2 seed stayed in the Africentric district. #3 and #4 went to the other district and it worked out the #1 play #2 and #3 played #4 for the district final in each.
Good point, I hope it doesn't work out that way but time will tell.I feel that most coaches will not want to give up the control of voting. BUT, There are also a lot of coaches at schools that do not have traditionally strong programs and are regularly voted in the bottom half of the district that may be in favor of this. Specially a coach that likes the football format.
The Central Board has two districts and seeds all teams together. So in D3 the seeded all 24 teams and allowed them to pick a spot on either district bracket. 12 teams had the change to be a high seed host. You probably also saw that the #2 seed stayed in the Africentric district. #3 and #4 went to the other district and it worked out the #1 play #2 and #3 played #4 for the district final in each.
My guess is Ready felt like nobody else would jump in that district if they did and they could cruise to the districts and take their chances with Africentric. Almost worked out, only lost by 3!
Philly_Cat
Well-known member
This conversation has been had on Yappi.com many times in different forms over the years. In the past I have brought up what PA does. They have 13 (I believe) districts geographically, across the state. Every school does NOT make the playoffs, they use a RPI to rank teams. Each district holds their own playoff. Teams from each district make the state tournament based on the size of the district. So a district 1 could get 5 teams while a district 8 may only get 1 team because of the amount of schools within that district (this also changes based on division). The state tournament then seeds the teams teams in a NCAA style bracket with the top seeded teams from a district playing the lower seeded teams from a different district. I personally like their setup. It creates from historic local rivalries and also allows two incredible teams that may just happen to be down the street from each other to end up playing against each other for a state championship.
Positives
It allows 2 teams from the same geographic area to make the state championship.
You can lose a game in the district tournament and still make the state tournament based on the size of your district
Negatives
Lower seeded teams could potentially have to travel across the state to play a state tournament game
Everyone doesn't make the post season
Positives
It allows 2 teams from the same geographic area to make the state championship.
You can lose a game in the district tournament and still make the state tournament based on the size of your district
Negatives
Lower seeded teams could potentially have to travel across the state to play a state tournament game
Everyone doesn't make the post season
Interesting...is that similar to Kentucky's Region set-up?This conversation has been had on Yappi.com many times in different forms over the years. In the past I have brought up what PA does. They have 13 (I believe) districts geographically, across the state. Every school does NOT make the playoffs, they use a RPI to rank teams. Each district holds their own playoff. Teams from each district make the state tournament based on the size of the district. So a district 1 could get 5 teams while a district 8 may only get 1 team because of the amount of schools within that district (this also changes based on division). The state tournament then seeds the teams teams in a NCAA style bracket with the top seeded teams from a district playing the lower seeded teams from a different district. I personally like their setup. It creates from historic local rivalries and also allows two incredible teams that may just happen to be down the street from each other to end up playing against each other for a state championship.
Positives
It allows 2 teams from the same geographic area to make the state championship.
You can lose a game in the district tournament and still make the state tournament based on the size of your district
Negatives
Lower seeded teams could potentially have to travel across the state to play a state tournament game
Everyone doesn't make the post season
Is the RPI used within each district to determine who plays in the district tournaments? So similar to the harbin rankings for football?
Philly_Cat
Well-known member
I'm not sure if it's by state or district. That's actually a good question. But yea, it's similar to harbins. I'm not familiar with Kentucky's setup.Interesting...is that similar to Kentucky's Region set-up?
Is the RPI used within each district to determine who plays in the district tournaments? So similar to the harbin rankings for football?
Talk some sense
Active member
Losing a game and still advancing seems more like a negative, although I see why that team might like it. Why not play round robin pools and then advance to a double elimination tournament? JK.This conversation has been had on Yappi.com many times in different forms over the years. In the past I have brought up what PA does. They have 13 (I believe) districts geographically, across the state. Every school does NOT make the playoffs, they use a RPI to rank teams. Each district holds their own playoff. Teams from each district make the state tournament based on the size of the district. So a district 1 could get 5 teams while a district 8 may only get 1 team because of the amount of schools within that district (this also changes based on division). The state tournament then seeds the teams teams in a NCAA style bracket with the top seeded teams from a district playing the lower seeded teams from a different district. I personally like their setup. It creates from historic local rivalries and also allows two incredible teams that may just happen to be down the street from each other to end up playing against each other for a state championship.
Positives
It allows 2 teams from the same geographic area to make the state championship.
You can lose a game in the district tournament and still make the state tournament based on the size of your district
Negatives
Lower seeded teams could potentially have to travel across the state to play a state tournament game
Everyone doesn't make the post season
Philly_Cat
Well-known member
It makes sense for example if you have say an Ignatius and Edward's, who are clearly head and shoulders light-years better than every other team in the state one year, but they have to beat each other to get out of the same region, or even worse, they have to beat each other to get out of the same district. As opposed to having the opportunity to play in the state championship as the top two teams in the state.Losing a game and still advancing seems more like a negative, although I see why that team might like it. Why not play round robin pools and then advance to a double elimination tournament? JK.
That is a huge plus for that system, seems like too much change for something like that to end up here in Ohio.It makes sense for example if you have say an Ignatius and Edward's, who are clearly head and shoulders light-years better than every other team in the state one year, but they have to beat each other to get out of the same region, or even worse, they have to beat each other to get out of the same district. As opposed to having the opportunity to play in the state championship as the top two teams in the state.
When I googled this I found an article on their competitive balance as well. Many in Ohio want some type of "success factor" added by the OHSAA, which PIAA has, and it appears to be having no impact on the classifications in Pennsylvania.
In Ohio the OHSAA only has one tournament. I suppose you could break it down to smaller sections, but the lower levels are used as qualifiers to the eventual state tournament. To have a District tourney completely separate and have a losing team advance is a little odd. I used to live in KY for a short time and I never understood their logic for their sports playoffs.
Philly_Cat
Well-known member
Again, I really have no idea how Kentucky is ran. Just speaking about PA, I love it. I don't think it can happen here because the entire state has one way too engrained into how they believe it should be. Not saying that's good or bad, just what is the reality.In Ohio the OHSAA only has one tournament. I suppose you could break it down to smaller sections, but the lower levels are used as qualifiers to the eventual state tournament. To have a District tourney completely separate and have a losing team advance is a little odd. I used to live in KY for a short time and I never understood their logic for their sports playoffs.
What I don't like about Ohio is mainly how the entire state is ran differently. In some parts districts are a specific set of schools, mainly geographically aligned. In other parts of the state, like SWO, a district is just a name for a portion of the regional bracket. It has no bearing on who is in it. In my eyes, that type of setup diminishes the value of a district and even sectional title, because every year who knows who you actually played to win that.
An example of what I mean is take a school like Moeller, where they may be the overwhelming dominate team in the region and rattle off 5 or 6 district titles in a row. While, yes, it is impressive in its own right. If you were to look at what it took to win each of those titles, because of how the region is set up, they may have had to win 1 semi tough game each of those years to win a district title. Meanwhile, the other 3 districts would be lopsided with the rest of the talent in the region, creating a true meat grinder for 3 teams to win those titles. Again, it still would be an impressive streak, when just looked at it on its face, but a little digging shows it's kinda not. And that's all due to how the region has their tournament structured.
This is all my opinion on what I see as truly the most competitive way to run a state tournament. I'll say it again, Ohio will never go to anything close to those changes for the reason I stated, and that's fine. But again, just my opinion on it all.
I wouldn't mind a system like Pennsylvania's but agree Ohio will never make that drastic of changes. Because of the unwillingness to go all-in on a new system, I am not a big fan of making everyone in Ohio do things the same and definitely think the current Martin RPI system is not the way to go.Again, I really have no idea how Kentucky is ran. Just speaking about PA, I love it. I don't think it can happen here because the entire state has one way too engrained into how they believe it should be. Not saying that's good or bad, just what is the reality.
What I don't like about Ohio is mainly how the entire state is ran differently. In some parts districts are a specific set of schools, mainly geographically aligned. In other parts of the state, like SWO, a district is just a name for a portion of the regional bracket. It has no bearing on who is in it. In my eyes, that type of setup diminishes the value of a district and even sectional title, because every year who knows who you actually played to win that.
An example of what I mean is take a school like Moeller, where they may be the overwhelming dominate team in the region and rattle off 5 or 6 district titles in a row. While, yes, it is impressive in its own right. If you were to look at what it took to win each of those titles, because of how the region is set up, they may have had to win 1 semi tough game each of those years to win a district title. Meanwhile, the other 3 districts would be lopsided with the rest of the talent in the region, creating a true meat grinder for 3 teams to win those titles. Again, it still would be an impressive streak, when just looked at it on its face, but a little digging shows it's kinda not. And that's all due to how the region has their tournament structured.
This is all my opinion on what I see as truly the most competitive way to run a state tournament. I'll say it again, Ohio will never go to anything close to those changes for the reason I stated, and that's fine. But again, just my opinion on it all.
Ha ha, so you wouldn't mind changing Ohio to be like Penn but you do not want everyone in Ohio following the same system? Part of what Philly_Cat was saying as his issue with Ohio is that some areas do there own thing. Specifically SWO.I wouldn't mind a system like Pennsylvania's but agree Ohio will never make that drastic of changes. Because of the unwillingness to go all-in on a new system, I am not a big fan of making everyone in Ohio do things the same and definitely think the current Martin RPI system is not the way to go.
Glad I could give you a chuckle! Multiple things can be true:Ha ha, so you wouldn't mind changing Ohio to be like Penn but you do not want everyone in Ohio following the same system? Part of what Philly_Cat was saying as his issue with Ohio is that some areas do there own thing. Specifically SWO.
1. I'm not a fan of everyone doing it the same using the Martin RPI, just to do it the same way. I don't think there is a competitive disadvantage anywhere in Ohio bc of the current system.
2. I think the Martin RPI is a great topic to talk about, but flawed as a ranking system bc it doesn't recognize tough schedules unless you win the game.
3. I could get behind a complete revamp that uses a RPI like Pennsylvania's that incorporates strength of schedule even if you lose and allows multiple teams from the same region to meet in the state finals