OHSAA HS PLAYOFFS

Z

Zezzo!

Well-known member
So realistically you’re goal coming into the season can be just to win one game and finish 1-9 and you’re goal’s accomplished because you made the playoffs? What a joke! This format can’t last.

To make sense of it all, why not either extend the season by a week or shorten the season by two or three weeks and just allow everybody into the playoffs? There are 0-10 that missed the playoffs by less than 5 computer points!
 
Last edited:
 
1697893822115.png
 
Zezzo! said:
So realistically you’re goal coming into the season can be just to win one game and finish 1-9 and you’re goal’s accomplished because you made the playoffs? What a joke! This format can’t last.

To make sense of it all, why not either extend the season by a week or shorten the season by two or three weeks and just allow everybody into the playoffs? There are 0-10 that missed the playoffs by less than 5 computer points!
Click to expand...
If the money keep rolling in, it won't end. It would take a season of all playoff early rounds being boycotted.
 
I think 8 teams should still be the limit. Maybe 10 teams. Where the top 2 seeds get a buy in the 1st round. That would help to get most if not all of the 7-3 teams in.
 
Wonder if Iggy will beat Mentor again. Would be kinda cool if their only two wins were against the same team. Once during the season and once during the playoffs
 
Zezzo! said:
So realistically you’re goal coming into the season can be just to win one game and finish 1-9 and you’re goal’s accomplished because you made the playoffs? What a joke! This format can’t last.

To make sense of it all, why not either extend the season by a week or shorten the season by two or three weeks and just allow everybody into the playoffs? There are 0-10 that missed the playoffs by less than 5 computer points!
Click to expand...
You’re trying to bring the carbonation back into a pop that was opened a year ago lol
 
HTFF said:
Will one of the mods please merge this with the other 47 threads that discuss this same old topic 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
I know this is repetitive I’ve even commented on the other threads this is more less a vent of continued frustration with the system I know it won’t change.
 
Big Lex Fan said:
I think 8 teams should still be the limit. Maybe 10 teams. Where the top 2 seeds get a buy in the 1st round. That would help to get most if not all of the 7-3 teams in.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. The first week of the playoffs are a waste with mostly blowouts. Week 2 is where it starts.

Teams that are 1-9, 2-8 likely don't want to play anyway.
 
Big Lex Fan said:
I think 8 teams should still be the limit. Maybe 10 teams. Where the top 2 seeds get a buy in the 1st round. That would help to get most if not all of the 7-3 teams in.
Click to expand...
That would work but i think 12 teams in and top 4 get a bye would be best. I know you'd still have some under .500 teams making it in some regions but there are others that have teams with winning records at number 11 and 12. Just my .02.
 
Freak Hands said:
That would work but i think 12 teams in and top 4 get a bye would be best. I know you'd still have some under .500 teams making it in some regions but there are others that have teams with winning records at number 11 and 12. Just my .02.
Click to expand...
Try region 9 where 7 or 8 teams with a .500 or better record will miss the playoffs this year even with a 16 team bracket.
 
Zezzo! said:
I know this is repetitive I’ve even commented on the other threads this is more less a vent of continued frustration with the system I know it won’t change.
Click to expand...
Ya. I’m just venting frustration of the duplicate threads on this website
 
Zezzo! said:
So realistically your goal coming into the season can be just to win one game and finish 1-9 and your goal’s accomplished because you made the playoffs? What a joke! This format can’t last.

To make sense of it all, why not either extend the season by a week or shorten the season by two or three weeks and just allow everybody into the playoffs? There are 0-10 that missed the playoffs by less than 5 computer points!
Click to expand...
The problem with this format is that it CAN last. More money, more money, more money. The prevailing sentiment seems to be to let everyone in with the rationale that "all" other sports let everyone in, except tennis, hockey, & lacrosse (?).

The problem with that, to me, is that football isn't like the other sports. It's very physical and playing a small squad team against a State Power could result in injuries. (I know, that risk is always there.) Plus, I like the argument that teams that are 1-9 are probably not all that enthused after terrible seasons to be facing potential State Champions at their home fields. Wait till some outmanned and outgunned Cleveland Senate team makes it at 2-8 with 2 wins over 1-9 teams and gets blasted by 100 points. (I seriously doubt any coach is out for THAT kind of blood, but it's there to be taken, if one was inclined. Or will be some season.)

And for me personally, I would like to see all sports have smaller fields in the tourney. I KNOW it will never happen. Just a preference is all. You should have to win / earn your way into the tourneys IMO. I know many of you disagree with that. As I said, it's just opinion no need to try to "convince" me that I am wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2h
Calif_Eagle said:
The problem with this format is that it CAN last. More money, more money, more money. The prevailing sentiment seems to be to let everyone in with the rationale that "all" other sports let everyone in, except tennis, hockey, & lacrosse (?).

The problem with that, to me, is that football isn't like the other sports. It's very physical and playing a small squad team against a State Power could result in injuries. (I know, that risk is always there.) Plus, I like the argument that teams that are 1-9 are probably not all that enthused after terrible seasons to be facing potential State Champions at their home fields. Wait till some outmanned and outgunned Cleveland Senate team makes it at 2-8 with 2 wins over 1-9 teams and gets blasted by 100 points. (I seriously doubt any coach is out for THAT kind of blood, but it's there to be taken, if one was inclined. Or will be some season.)

And for me personally, I would like to see all sports have smaller fields in the tourney. I KNOW it will never happen. Just a preference is all. You should have to win / earn your way into the tourneys IMO. I know many of you disagree with that. As I said, it's just opinion no need to try to "convince" me that I am wrong.
Click to expand...
All the teams make it in hockey and lacrosse.
 
hammer89 said:
All the teams make it in hockey and lacrosse.
Click to expand...

hammer89 said:
The 1-9 and 2-8 teams don't have to play if they don't want to.
Click to expand...

It makes sense for Hockey as I am reasonably sure relatively few Ohio High Schools have hockey teams. Expensive sport, including the ice arena. I know little about Lacrosse as I thought it was stated here that they don't all get in. But I didn't know, one way or the other.

I think after all the horrible problems Euclid has had this season, they should opt out and get this season over with. Just look to next year with a new coach and hopefully with all the incident/crime problems around the school suppressed. Let Normandy take a 60 burger. But if they do play, Cleveland Heights or Canton McKinley should wipe them out easily in the opener. A Euclid win would be the upset of the century.
 
Last edited:
hammer89 said:
All the teams make it in hockey and lacrosse.
Click to expand...
It formerly was not the case for many years, it now is presently the case. Boys Ice Hockey and Boys and Girls LaCrosse all used to limit playoff participation. At present the only sport that does not allow everyone to participate is boys tennis for the OTCA team tournament and the OHSAA sanctioned singles/doubles tournament and girls tennis only for the OTCA team tournament. As was explained previously this is due to OHSAA rules limiting how many matches or sets can be played in a day, and in total for the whole weekend/tournament. And then needing a contingency (privately owned indoor courts) for inclimate weather (rain/snow/excessive wind).
In the future if there should be more member institutions sponsoring boys ice hockey they would likely need to limit participation or drastically change things to facilitate everyone's participation.
 
Calif_Eagle said:
It makes sense for Hockey as I am reasonably sure relatively few Ohio High Schools have hockey teams. Expensive sport, including the ice arena. I know little about Lacrosse as I thought it was stated here that they don't all get in. But I didn't know, one way or the other.
Click to expand...
It was formerly the case for both, they now have since changed it. But hockey would eventually have to limit participation due to not having enough ice arenas to play at, or greatly extend the duration if there should be more member institutions with teams.
 
cometrules said:
I don't think teams that are 5-5 or less wants to play and got beat by a 10-0, 9-1 or 8-2 end under .500. Plus loss by 40 points or more.
Should only 12 at most, 10 is best and 8 is best.
Football is OHSAA CASH cow.
Click to expand...
St X won a state championship with a 5-5 record going into the playoffs. So there’s that
 
Bolts_Fan said:
The big D1 schools are an obvious exception because of their SOS
Click to expand...
What about teams in lower divisions that play all the perennial powers in D-I and D-II?
Mooney won only 3 games against a SOS that was top 10 in the state for all divisions (not just their division), and one win included beating the eventual state champion in their division by 40 points (SV-SM).
Mooney's schedule resembled that of a typical schedule of St. Ignatius or St. Edward.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top