OHSAA Considering A Strength-Of-Schedule Component For Football Playoff System

The biggest problem I see with this is the Top 8 or Top 10 component.

According to the article, If they used Top 10, if you lost to a teams ranked #10 (say 50-0), you would get points for losing, but if you lost to the #11 ranked team (say 21-20 in 2OT) you would get nothing.
 
CoachHoversten said:
Good lord, just do what they did this year. Everyone who wants in is in. Any team that is terrible is going to opt out bc losing to mentor or Ed’s 84-0 isn’t worth it , even if you were 8-2 against the worst schedule in the state
Click to expand...
The voting last year in Region 4 was a joke. After one year it was proven the GMC coaches voted in blocks. But when games are going to be hosted by the higher seed that matters. The harbins take the human bias out .
 
Vincent and Regina said:
The voting last year in Region 4 was a joke. After one year it was proven the GMC coaches voted in blocks. But when games are going to be hosted by the higher seed that matters. The harbins take the human bias out .
Click to expand...

Seed based on Harbin’s then. Whatever happens, it’d be nice to not punish teams for playing a tough schedule. I’ve been living in Texas for 12-13 years now and there are regularly early season games of the best teams in the state against each other (or taking on out of state powers). The losers of these games don’t hurt when it comes to making the playoffs, that’s all based on district placement. Basically, the state creates leagues every few years for the teams based on division and location (called districts). - Ohio doesn’t need to go that far, but create a system where state powers aren’t afraid to schedule each other. This makes for fun weeks of football throughout the state.

If these points are added in, it should be for everyone. There’s no reason to hold them back. This could potentially encourage teams to schedule games that aren’t guaranteed wins.
 
adog said:
3rd tier points were used to break any ties after 1st & 2nd points were calculated
Click to expand...
There was a time when 3rd level points were a regular part of the computer point calculations, but were dropped at least in part because in a convoluted way, a team could earn more points by losing a game.
 
Maybe OHSAA should just go to the plan CYO uses for basketball, a playoff for all of the best teams, a playoff for all of the good teams, a playoff for all of the average teams, a playoff for the bad teams and a playoff for the really bad teams....
 
Not a completely horrible proposal. That said, let's go back to DEC 2019 - other than the fans of folks who ended up 9-12 in their region, was anyone screaming that we needed a change in the playoff format?

Legitimately curious. Considering the playoff formats in other states (PA, NY, TX), Ohio has one of the "cleaner" formats in the US. And that's with the addition of D7.
 
Yappi said:
If it's not broke, don't fix it.

This seems like a solution in search of a problem. Like @chs1971 said, this seems like it is designed to help powerhouse teams fill schedules. Let's wait until we see how things play out with 12 teams. It might already solve this perceived problem.
Click to expand...
Exactly. What brought this about? Why do we never hear what issue is causing the need for a new regulation?
 
Not my idea but make it 16 and forget the byes. Play 9 reg. season games and you end up with 8 teams in the same week like before.....at the same spot on the calendar.
 
Last edited:
Raylan_Givens said:
Not a completely horrible proposal. That said, let's go back to DEC 2019 - other than the fans of folks who ended up 9-12 in their region, was anyone screaming that we needed a change in the playoff format?

Legitimately curious. Considering the playoff formats in other states (PA, NY, TX), Ohio has one of the "cleaner" formats in the US. And that's with the addition of D7.
Click to expand...

I used to agree with this, but the more I’m in Texas the more I think their way makes sense. In Texas, if you place high enough within your district (league), you get a spot in the playoffs. You can play a tough non-district schedule and lose them all and it doesn’t matter. It’s basically taking the regions and splitting them into smaller parts To start the playoffs during the regular season. You beat those teams, you have a shot in the playoffs. The worst part is that there are always districts that are loaded and some that are weak, but it all comes out in the wash as that happens with leagues in the current format.
 
Ericles said:
There was a time when 3rd level points were a regular part of the computer point calculations, but were dropped at least in part because in a convoluted way, a team could earn more points by losing a game.
Click to expand...
Thats true, I forgot about that happening
 
As the article hinted at, it really would mess with Week 10's. A team you lost to could be giving you those bonus points after week 9, and not after Week 10...and vice versa. Potential for big movements among the seeds.
 
EagleFan said:
A school like Steubenville might have to rethink their scheduling. Playing out of state schools could become a decent disadvantage.
Click to expand...
Steubenville is across the river from West Virginia and nine miles from Pennsylvania. People worry too much about state lines. It is probably easier to go to some places in Pennsylvania than Ohio for Steubenville and other boarder towns.
 
Isn’t that what the second level points already is? You get more points when the teams you beat win so it already had a strength of schedule factor already to it. You shouldn’t get strength of schedule point for beating a bad d1 team! At the end of the the day wins matter as it is now.
 
Jokerswild said:
Isn’t that what the second level points already is? You get more points when the teams you beat win so it already had a strength of schedule factor already to it. You shouldn’t get strength of schedule point for beating a bad d1 team! At the end of the the day wins matter as it is now.
Click to expand...

The issue, and it's a real one, is that the top programs (think St. Iggy, St Ed, Mentor, etc) have trouble finding ANY game in state some weeks, and some top level matchups that should happen don't because the loser gets nothing. It's easier for a good team to schedule a city league team (any city) that routinely goes 5-5 or better because they're usually no real threat but worth decent points. Why play a tough game you might lose or even an equal when you can get mega points playing a scrub from a bad league?

I'm not sure this proposal is the answer, but I'm glad they're finally admitting there's a problem.
 
duckunder said:
Seed based on Harbin’s then. Whatever happens, it’d be nice to not punish teams for playing a tough schedule. I’ve been living in Texas for 12-13 years now and there are regularly early season games of the best teams in the state against each other (or taking on out of state powers). The losers of these games don’t hurt when it comes to making the playoffs, that’s all based on district placement. Basically, the state creates leagues every few years for the teams based on division and location (called districts). - Ohio doesn’t need to go that far, but create a system where state powers aren’t afraid to schedule each other. This makes for fun weeks of football throughout the state.

If these points are added in, it should be for everyone. There’s no reason to hold them back. This could potentially encourage teams to schedule games that aren’t guaranteed wins.
Click to expand...

I coached in TX for a number of years and prefer their system to Ohio's.. as you said, there were big matchups prior to district play that didn't knock you out of playoff contention
 
I don't really understand the need to add this factor into making the playoffs? I also hope they don't go to a 16 team playoff. Go back and look at most of the teams that would be 16 seeds. Most of their records are losing records some would be 3-7. This is classic case of "Participation awards." 8 team playoffs work fine and our system works fine, and this is coming from someone who was a 9 seed my senior year.
 
dhsdog06 said:
The issue, and it's a real one, is that the top programs (think St. Iggy, St Ed, Mentor, etc) have trouble finding ANY game in state some weeks, and some top level matchups that should happen don't because the loser gets nothing. It's easier for a good team to schedule a city league team (any city) that routinely goes 5-5 or better because they're usually no real threat but worth decent points. Why play a tough game you might lose or even an equal when you can get mega points playing a scrub from a bad league?

I'm not sure this proposal is the answer, but I'm glad they're finally admitting there's a problem.
Click to expand...

This is what is happening and if you have a good team or a team that plays a tough schedule you do not get a lot of teams to play. That is why I say get rid of the half-point and go to whole points ( new point program would be 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...and no 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, 6.5) that you accumulate in the Harbin set up. Make it a benefit to schedule up.....keep it simple and let the schools still control their schedule.
 
dhsdog06 said:
The issue, and it's a real one, is that the top programs (think St. Iggy, St Ed, Mentor, etc) have trouble finding ANY game in state some weeks, and some top level matchups that should happen don't because the loser gets nothing. It's easier for a good team to schedule a city league team (any city) that routinely goes 5-5 or better because they're usually no real threat but worth decent points. Why play a tough game you might lose or even an equal when you can get mega points playing a scrub from a bad league?

I'm not sure this proposal is the answer, but I'm glad they're finally admitting there's a problem.
Click to expand...
That's what I am thinking.
 
Didn’t all of this talk about playoff expansion start because of what happened to Winton Woods a couple of years ago? They beat eventual state champion LaSalle in the regular season but ended up falling short of the points they needed because of a brutal schedule?

Im all for getting the right teams in, but they are making this more complicated than it needs to be. Wanna go to 12 teams, okay fine! Hope they expect some even more lopsided results in the first round.
 
GoArrowsGo said:
Didn’t all of this talk about playoff expansion start because of what happened to Winton Woods a couple of years ago? They beat eventual state champion LaSalle in the regular season but ended up falling short of the points they needed because of a brutal schedule?

Im all for getting the right teams in, but they are making this more complicated than it needs to be. Wanna go to 12 teams, okay fine! Hope they expect some even more lopsided results in the first round.
Click to expand...
I totally agree if we expand the playoffs then the first round wont hardly be worth watching. It also sounds like its a D1 problem more so than any other problem.
 
SmallTownFootball said:
I totally agree if we expand the playoffs then the first round wont hardly be worth watching. It also sounds like its a D1 problem more so than any other problem.
Click to expand...

Hell the way the D1 regions are split up, if you went to a 16 team format then literally every team would get in!
 
GoArrowsGo said:
Didn’t all of this talk about playoff expansion start because of what happened to Winton Woods a couple of years ago? They beat eventual state champion LaSalle in the regular season but ended up falling short of the points they needed because of a brutal schedule?

Im all for getting the right teams in, but they are making this more complicated than it needs to be. Wanna go to 12 teams, okay fine! Hope they expect some even more lopsided results in the first round.
Click to expand...
I think 10-0 Gibsonburg and 10-0 Northwood missing the playoffs in the same year helped get the ball rolling.
 
duckunder said:
Seed based on Harbin’s then.
Click to expand...

I presume you mean the SOS component?

Harbins calculated when? At end of year and what you thought was 1-8, isn't? Entering the game? After the game? Five games after the game? Something to consider.

The best ADs at playing the "game" are still going to be the best ADs at playing the game. Harbins cows have been putting money into some pockets, they might not be so easy to get on board. I think SOS is fine to consider but only after simulating a few of the past years to see how it would have affect the outcomes. I'm not sure there is predicting how it will affect future scheduling. Otherwise, KISS.
 
eastisbest said:
I presume you mean the SOS component?

Harbins calculated when? At end of year and what you thought was 1-8, isn't? Entering the game? After the game? Five games after the game? Something to consider.

The best ADs at playing the "game" are still going to be the best ADs at playing the game. Harbins cows have been putting money into some pockets, they might not be so easy to get on board. I think SOS is fine to consider but only after simulating a few of the past years to see how it would have affect the outcomes. I'm not sure there is predicting how it will affect future scheduling. Otherwise, KISS.
Click to expand...

I’m simply saying to take the voting from schools out of it, seed how they normally would no matter the number of qualifiers. Nobody has to know early who they play, find out after game 10. I may be misunderstanding you, but I’m trying to keep it simple, as you say, by keeping the human element out.
 
StateChampion2012 said:
I think 10-0 Gibsonburg and 10-0 Northwood missing the playoffs in the same year helped get the ball rolling.
Click to expand...
Oh wow, didn’t realize that happened. Yeah something just doesn’t seem right about a 10-0 team not getting an opportunity to prove themselves in the postseason. Even if they scheduled cupcakes and didn’t get the harbins
 
GoArrowsGo said:
Oh wow, didn’t realize that happened. Yeah something just doesn’t seem right about a 10-0 team not getting an opportunity to prove themselves in the postseason. Even if they scheduled cupcakes and didn’t get the harbins
Click to expand...

Our current formula works great. Why must everything change because a couple teams went 10-0 vs little competition. If you want to play with the big dogs stay away from the puppies. It’s not anyone else’s fault that didn’t make it but themselves.
 
Jake22 said:
Our current formula works great. Why must everything change because a couple teams went 10-0 vs little competition. If you want to play with the big dogs stay away from the puppies. It’s not anyone else’s fault that didn’t make it but themselves.
Click to expand...
I think if the OHSAA didnt make region 23 got tier that year, G-Burg probably would have made the playoffs. Something happened to cause Northwood to miss. I think a forfeit became a no contest which lowered the divisor for I think Lutheran East. Really it was 2 unfortunate coincidences I think. If my information is incorrect then my apologies. I wouldn't have expanded the playoffs personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top