Neutral playoff game sites

ElDuderino said:
I comprehended and quoted exactly what you said, which is that it would force teams to seek out better competition, which I said is an incredibly dumb take because ADs will do the opposite. They will seek out "Harbin cows" that will keep their computer points high, while playing the least amount of competition possible, because losing a game in that scenario has bigger potential impact.

Massillon this year is a perfect example of my point, not yours. They aren't going to schedule games like St Eds they might lose when there is a noticeable difference between a 1 and a 4 seed. Right now, there isn't. If there were, they wouldn't schedule a game like that in favor of seeking out a Harbin cow they can easily win, but they know will win other games due to being in a weak league or having other poor OOC games.
Click to expand...
I guess if you think teams only want home games, then yes, you may be right. However, if all teams do is schedule and beat Harbin cows, then they won't be hosting too may playoff games now will they?

I disagree completely with your take about Massillon. Ever since Moore got to Massillon, he has worked to beef up the schedule. No reason to think that would change if the higher seeded teams had home field advantage throughout the regional portion of the playoffs. Moore went to Massillon to rebuild the program, and he knows that you don't/won't accomplish that playing Harbin cows just to get home games. Any AD that thinks that way, shouldn't be an AD in my opinion.
 
ElDuderino said:
Massillon this year is a perfect example of my point, not yours. They aren't going to schedule games like St Eds they might lose when there is a noticeable difference between a 1 and a 4 seed.
Click to expand...
Right. St. Ed. Pick Central. Moeller. Valdosta. Bishop Gorman. Etc.

And all because it wouldn't cost them a home game. :rolleyes:

BTW, you mock Massillon's schedule, yet Fantastic50 (whom you anoint as a superior evaluator) has them as the best team and with the 4th highest SOS in D2. Seems your point is somewhat dull.
 
ElDuderino said:
No, they wouldn't under the Harbin computer. More wins doesnt mean better. It would make ADs more likely to try to pick out weak opponents with a large number of wins, often from lower divisions, which is how to beat the Harbin game.

If you want a tailor-made example, look at D2R7 from this year Columbus City teams got more Harbin points than several other local teams despite playing far easier schedules. And then they all got destroyed in the playoffs because the league isn't competitive and all of their wins were off each other.
Click to expand...
Nothing says the Harbin System was carved in stone in 1971 trial year & year of first use in 1972. The Harbins got a large change post-1972 when 3rd level points had to be dropped. Adjust mathematically for league quality. If OHSAA can't figure a way to do that (looking at large sample, 10 years? of league OOC play might be tried.) then hire an independent auditing firm to address the problem and analytically make IMPARTIAL calls. On league quality, Out-Of-State opponent quality etc. So Harbins can be adjusted accordingly.

Plus PENALIZE ALL LOSSES. Reverse of the Harbin Win Points. Losses to teams with good records are penalized more lightly than to bad teams. Lose to a 3-7 squad and you are debited for all 7 of those losses on the 2nd level + plus a first level deduction. Lose to a 10-0 squad, you get first level loss deduction only, as on the 2nd level there are no losses to debit. (IOW, you just lost to someone you were "supposed" to lose to.)

When there were classes AAA, AA and A, victory points were differentiated depending on the level of the team you defeated. This needs to be re-installed for wins (Credits) and losses (Debits) IF it went away or got watered down during the switches from 3 classes to 7 Divisions.
 
Last edited:
The Harbins aren't perfect, but they're good enough to identify the potential champions. As long as those teams get in, it doesn't really matter who gets left out or how they're seeded.
 
I recall Van Wert traveling to Orrville for a first-round game back in 1985, but that was rare. Ironton hosted Gallia Academy that same year in round one.
 
Calif_Eagle said:
Plus PENALIZE ALL LOSSES. Reverse of the Harbin Win Points. Losses to teams with good records are penalized more lightly than to bad teams. Lose to a 3-7 squad and you are debited for all 7 of those losses on the 2nd level + plus a first level deduction. Lose to a 10-0 squad, you get first level loss deduction only, as on the 2nd level there are no losses to debit. (IOW, you just lost to someone you were "supposed" to lose to.)
Click to expand...
I'd have to do the math on this, but my gut tells me this would cause all ratings to regress to 0. I don't think it would do what you want.
 
So I assume by Sunday afternoon that there are sites that have signed up to host for week 3. Why aren’t these announced ? It’s odd they are kept “secret”. 🤦🏻‍♂️
 
tom 48 said:
Has the OHSAA lost two prime neutral sites in Euclid and Mansfield?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t think Mansfield is lost for a neutral site, the game was moved because Mansfield was playing at home and there was fear of retaliation at the game.
 
Massillon#82 said:
The participants will be known by 10pm tonight. So by Sunday afternoon they should announce the sites that are willing to host.
As I said earlier.
Click to expand...
Don't they usually release where the games will be Sunday afternoon anyway? Or are you just wanting a list of here is everyone who volunteered to host?
 
Massillon#82 said:
There should be a list made public of sites willing to host.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

One might also suspect that the later in the playoffs you go, the fewer sites are willing to host. If you played on the road in week 10, then either on the road or out of the playoffs, wouldn't you have buttoned up the stadium already? OHSAA doesn't really make it worth your while to put that off because you might get a game in a month. And with all games on Friday, the prospect of off-night hosting for a team which is still alive and practicing (i.e. still using the stadium) goes away as well.

IOW, higher seed hosts through the regionals. That way, you only need one week (14 games) of neutral sites.
 
Altor said:
I'd have to do the math on this, but my gut tells me this would cause all ratings to regress to 0. I don't think it would do what you want.
Click to expand...
No. It would cause some schools to have a positive number of points and others to have a negative number. The NUMBERS DON'T MATTER. What matters is the RANKING POSITION of the teams for seeding. (Not that it matters much with 16 qualifiers per Region. Or when they go to everyone is in.) Take a few teams at random (wide spectrum of WL records) from Joe Eitel and do some rough calculations. You'll see that's how it works.

I had someone else say that once a long time ago. I also had someone else say "that would cause some teams to have negative ratings!!" Well... yes. Yes, it would. But if you think it through you will see all that matters is the relative ranking positions of the teams, not the number that took them there.

To give just one example: Say a team goes 8-2 and the teams they beat average a 5-5 record they get 1st level points 8X and 40 wins worth of second level points. Even if they lost to a pair of 2-8 teams that still results in just 2 first level point deductions and 16 losses worth of 2nd level deductions. They are going to have a positive number. That just one example. Now if you want to say the average rating will be zero if you total every team in the state... well that may or may not be true as there are always Out-of-State opponents. But even if it is true, that statistic is meaningless because you simply trying to rank order the teams in the best order possible. And as I stated above with 16 qualifiers, soon to probably go to everyone, this is a problem with the Harbins that should have been fixed a long time ago and changing it NOW will be almost meaningless.

When everyone is in you may need first round byes and a play-in round, but by the end of round 3, More than 3/4 of the state will be eliminated. This change would have meant a LOT more back when you had to win to get in. I haven't penciled this out except for once a long time ago, but I think it would have the most effect on mediocre record teams say 3-7 to 7-3.
 
Last edited:
Massillon#82 said:
Why shouldn’t it ? Is it a secret ?
Click to expand...
JMO but I could see posting this causing a number of issues.
1. More fighting about this game got put at this stadium instead of that stadium
2. More calls to member schools wondering why they won't host
and thats just off the top of my head
 
chs1971 said:
No there shouldn't.
Click to expand...
Why not?

There was a time several years ago where that absolutely did happen. I know because I'm affiliated with a school where the powers that be above our AD pressured him to put in a bid to host even though we really didn't have the bleacher size, restricted access to parking, and all that jazz.
 
AllSports12 said:
Because it's irrelevant.

Whether or not you or anyone else likes it, the OHSAA is a private organization. They are not required to divulge information such as this to the general public.
Click to expand...
Just another reason to add to the list of how this “private organization” is just an “all out for themselves” mess. Anyone that can defend them is a complete idiot.
 
Ericles said:
Why not?

There was a time several years ago where that absolutely did happen. I know because I'm affiliated with a school where the powers that be above our AD pressured him to put in a bid to host even though we really didn't have the bleacher size, restricted access to parking, and all that jazz.
Click to expand...
What does your second sentence have to do with the first?
 
Massillon#82 said:
Just another reason to add to the list of how this “private organization” is just an “all out for themselves” mess. Anyone that can defend them is a complete idiot.
Click to expand...
Just because the OHSAA doesn't care what you think?

That hilarious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top