OHSAA survey asks Ohio high schools for feedback on 16-team football playoff format
- Thread starter Yappi
- Start date
ItsTheHornets
Member
My 2 cents.
A state champions and runner up are playing 60% of a FULL SEASON after that game. There are closer to as many playoff games as regular season games as not. Eight teams is the right number, I'm even willing to listen to 6 teams and the top 2 get a bye.
- Do you believe a 10-week regular season football schedule is too long? No.
- Do you believe a six-week tournament to become a football state champion is too long? Yes.
- Did your school qualify for the playoffs in the last four years? (This question is followed by two more asking the best and worst seed a given program has earned within that time frame.) Yes.
- What is your preference on the number of qualifiers per region? (Choices are 16 or 12 with a first-round bye for the top four teams. Respondents can submit a different number in general comments at the end of the survey.) 8
- If the number of qualifiers were reduced to 12 teams, would you prefer to have a first-round bye as one of the top four seeds of a region? Yes? (I'd rather just have 8 teams, and 12 teams doesn't work without a bye, so it's kind of a loaded question.)
A state champions and runner up are playing 60% of a FULL SEASON after that game. There are closer to as many playoff games as regular season games as not. Eight teams is the right number, I'm even willing to listen to 6 teams and the top 2 get a bye.
Sykotyk
Well-known member
Do you believe a 10-week regular season football schedule is too long? NO
Do you believe a six-week tournament to become a football state champion is too long? NO (but 16 games overall is too much combined)
Did your school qualify for the playoffs in the last four years? (This question is followed by two more asking the best and worst seed a given program has earned within that time frame.) Irrelevant
What is your preference on the number of qualifiers per region? (Choices are 16 or 12 with a first-round bye for the top four teams. Respondents can submit a different number in general comments at the end of the survey.) 8. But since that's not an option, 12 with first round byes.
If the number of qualifiers were reduced to 12 teams, would you prefer to have a first-round bye as one of the top four seeds of a region? Yes. Because it's a week to heal up, it's still a home game in the next round. Though the bracket should be reseeded after the first round so that #1 gets the lowest ranked team, #2 gets second lowest, etc. #1 shouldn't be playing #8 when #12 beat #5 giving #4 a matchup with #12. After the second round, all games are neutral so who plays who or where is less necessary to 'get right'. But awarding home games and favoring higher seeds in those games SHOULD.
Squintz
Well-known member
- Do you believe a 10-week regular season football schedule is too long? No, but I wouldn't be opposed to 9 and keep the 16 team format.
- Do you believe a six-week tournament to become a football state champion is too long? No. But 16 games is too many for high school.
- Did your school qualify for the playoffs in the last four years? (This question is followed by two more asking the best and worst seed a given program has earned within that time frame.) Yes
- What is your preference on the number of qualifiers per region? (Choices are 16 or 12 with a first-round bye for the top four teams. Respondents can submit a different number in general comments at the end of the survey.) 16 or 8. 12 is a bad option - byes for high school teams can negatively impact the team with the 'advantage'.
- If the number of qualifiers were reduced to 12 teams, would you prefer to have a first-round bye as one of the top four seeds of a region? No. I don't believe a bye is an advantage. The only advantage is staying healthy, but that can be washed out by getting out of routine.
reganaustinjames
Well-known member
No. That would only validate what that money-laundering criminal Doug Ute has been doing for the last half-decade. But I agree on the going back to 8 part.
ghsknightsfan
love the Knights and Grey Ghosts!
I both like and dislike the new format.
Pros:
- It seems like most schools across the board are more agressive in non-league scheduling, because they know it takes less to get into the dance. More good regular season games in weeks 1-3.
- I have seen some playoff games between 8/9, 7/10, 6/11, and 5/12 that have been an absolute delight. These schools may not be regional champ quality, but they are great football games
- More football is fun. 9/10 kids you ask will say the more games the better.
Cons:
- Too many blowouts in 1st round of 14, 15, 16 seeds. 95% of games with these seeds have not been competitive.
- 6 round playoff is too much. I almost forgot at times what round I was watching.
My solution:
12 team playoff
- Instead of having set seeds play, do a tournament draw. Use the harbin seeding and then do the draw like you would in basketball or soccer. Do it the Sunday after week 10.
- This way, the top 4 seeds can be the ones to decide if they want to take a “bye” or not.
- Doing a draw and giving coaches the choice of who they play might may cut down of travel if they choose.
- Still a lot of good games with middle seeds
Pros:
- It seems like most schools across the board are more agressive in non-league scheduling, because they know it takes less to get into the dance. More good regular season games in weeks 1-3.
- I have seen some playoff games between 8/9, 7/10, 6/11, and 5/12 that have been an absolute delight. These schools may not be regional champ quality, but they are great football games
- More football is fun. 9/10 kids you ask will say the more games the better.
Cons:
- Too many blowouts in 1st round of 14, 15, 16 seeds. 95% of games with these seeds have not been competitive.
- 6 round playoff is too much. I almost forgot at times what round I was watching.
My solution:
12 team playoff
- Instead of having set seeds play, do a tournament draw. Use the harbin seeding and then do the draw like you would in basketball or soccer. Do it the Sunday after week 10.
- This way, the top 4 seeds can be the ones to decide if they want to take a “bye” or not.
- Doing a draw and giving coaches the choice of who they play might may cut down of travel if they choose.
- Still a lot of good games with middle seeds
Mr. Red Raider
Well-known member
I like this idea to be honest. Wonder if the state championship would be able to be moved to the week before Thanksgiving, for there to be somewhat of a rest period between fall and winter sports.
Here would be my answers:
Do you believe a 10-week regular season football schedule is too long? I can take it or leave it.
Do you believe a six-week tournament to become a football state champion is too long? YES.
Did your school qualify for the playoffs in the last four years? (This question is followed by two more asking the best and worst seed a given program has earned within that time frame.) YES
2021 - #15 seed, lost to Medina
2023 - #9 seed, lost to Barberton
What is your preference on the number of qualifiers per region? (Choices are 16 or 12 with a first-round bye for the top four teams. Respondents can submit a different number in general comments at the end of the survey.) As long as it isn't 16, 12 teams is fine.
If the number of qualifiers were reduced to 12 teams, would you prefer to have a first-round bye as one of the top four seeds of a region? YES
The Infidel
Well-known member
I've saying this for the past 5-6 years, 16 teams are fine but eliminate 2 regions. Too many divisions have regional disparity. I don't buy the "Well its about saving on travel" There are a handful of regions that playoff opponents in the first round have traveled 3+ hours for a game. It's the playoffs, cut the state in half (North/South) (East/West)
Perfect example is look at the previous years of D3R9 vs R10.
Or D4R13 vs R15
Perfect example is look at the previous years of D3R9 vs R10.
Or D4R13 vs R15
Oil Filter
Well-known member
Tell that to Massillon.
Sykotyk
Well-known member
Because harbins have no care, whatsoever, to losses. So there's no incentive to schedule a game you have a decent shot of losing. Even with more teams in the playoffs, it just doesn't help.
At this point, with 16 teams, I figure might as well just go the Indiana route and make it a tournament and not a playoff. Whole new slate. Random draw the entire region. No one knows who they play or where they play. Entirely random. Makes regular season scheduling entirely open. Only possible fear is health to keep very small teams from playing really large teams with a lot of depth.
- Do you believe a 10-week regular season football schedule is too long? No.
- Do you believe a six-week tournament to become a football state champion is too long? No
- Did your school qualify for the playoffs in the last four years? (This question is followed by two more asking the best and worst seed a given program has earned within that time frame.) Yes.
- 13, 9, and 6 seed. Won first round all 3 years.
- What is your preference on the number of qualifiers per region? (Choices are 16 or 12 with a first-round bye for the top four teams. Respondents can submit a different number in general comments at the end of the survey.) 12
- If the number of qualifiers were reduced to 12 teams, would you prefer to have a first-round bye as one of the top four seeds of a region? Prefer a draw where teams can decide for themselves
reganaustinjames
Well-known member
When the Harbin system was implemented in 1972, only the top team in the region in Harbin points made the playoffs, so the system was clearly designed to identify the best teams. Given that 1 and 2 seeds have overwhelmingly won the most state championships, the Harbins have largely succeeded in that regard. After about the 4 seed is where the Harbins don't work as well. It could use some tweaking to identify who is better amongst the mid to upper tier, but overall the Harbin system is better than most of the other options and systems.
15 weeks total
No byes
Just take Top 32 in points in each division, no regions. Top 16 host week 1. Obviously OHSAA doesn’t care about travel distances. Look at NW and SE regions across most divisions. Maybe if over “X miles or drive time” let schools decide if a nutural site is needed.
What ever computers points format is used for seeding, just make sure there is no human bias in the formula. I’m fine with the Harbon points formula, not perfect but over all good.
No byes
Just take Top 32 in points in each division, no regions. Top 16 host week 1. Obviously OHSAA doesn’t care about travel distances. Look at NW and SE regions across most divisions. Maybe if over “X miles or drive time” let schools decide if a nutural site is needed.
What ever computers points format is used for seeding, just make sure there is no human bias in the formula. I’m fine with the Harbon points formula, not perfect but over all good.
smurfyeah19
Well-known member
Messing with the 10 games shouldn't happen as you'd cut into schools revenue
CedarBuck92
Well-known member
So really you want to cut the number of teams back to 32 per division.
The Dock
Champion, 2024 Yappi Challenge
Wisdom in asking this question coupled with the “what was your highest/lowest seed.”Yappi said:
Seems unlikely this question in particular will get the “yes” responses people on here think. Disruption of routine is a concern held by many coaches of good teams; a bye seen as a hindrance, not a reward.
doubtme
Go outside nerd.
by going 16 teams, they also cut a week of the preseason off. I think this hurts the quality of football being played, especially in the early season. It puts more pressure to get kids at all the summer camp days so you can hit your 5 acclimation days after July 10 or whatever it is, so you can more easily scrimmage that first week of August.
The biggest issue is this, when they split D1 because of enrollment disparity, it then led to 7 divisions, and D1 is still much smaller. Then, you add in covid and everyone getting in along with the greediness of generating revenue, etc.
I think that 8 is still ideal. I would say 12 is good but I think the top four seeds should get to choose if they want a bye or play the first round and that bye is then passed to the 5 seed and on down if others in the top 4 do not want a bye.
I think if you stay 16, then they need to evaluate going back to 6 divisions.
Maybe there will be traction to actually change the playoff system again to make it more agreeable between the OHSAA and the Member schools.
I also don't think every school should get in the tournament for sports like basketball, baseball, softball, soccer, etc. Especially now that they have rating systems for those sports.
Burreaux
Mr. SEO
12 teams per region, keep the regions. There will always be a few regions where teams geographically don’t make sense and will be put there I’ve come to terms with this bc this happens to my high school and many others in this area. Cutting from 16 to 12 will still let you schedule some tough games and not feel a large risk when you lose and can still make it in the playoffs. Also there are plenty of teams that get better as the season goes on than they were in week 1. Same thing for teams who start out hot and say get injury plagued. I think 12 is the sweet spot.
Keep the 10 game season also
Keep the 10 game season also
The Dock
Champion, 2024 Yappi Challenge
Going further: there is the dilemma of “my sport is more important than your sport” that has jeopardized the sharing (and availability) of kids in the summer.
Football has the 13 + 5 days by July 31st permission. Baseball and basketball, each, have their 10 days (instructional) by July 31st. Speaking strictly to the school side of athletics in the summer, before one considers summer ball (travel/AAU) or vacations, the packed summer does not help football. Not to mention you have football coaches who tend to be their own worst enemies in how they go about pushing the primacy of football in June and early July ahead of other sports their kids play… to the unintended end that kids stop playing after their soph/junior year because their coaches (football + other sports) are not being realistic on their personnel situation when setting offseason expectations.
CedarBuck92
Well-known member
A lot of this can be resolved by the AD getting involved. Make the coaches actually sit down and figure out a reasonable schedule for June/July. Kids should still get some time to be kids and the AAU/Travel ball thing does complicate matters. But, making the coaches actually put it on the calendar and be reasonable could help.
HSsportfan
Member
A 10 game regular season cannot change. 5 home, 5 away. Football finances most districts athletic program. Losing a home game every other year by going to a 9 game season would cripple athletic departments.
8 teams per region is enough in the playoffs.
8 teams per region is enough in the playoffs.
RedRider1
Well-known member
- Do you believe a 10-week regular season football schedule is too long? If keeping 16 teams per region in the playoffs...yes
- Do you believe a six-week tournament to become a football state champion is too long? YES
- Did your school qualify for the playoffs in the last four years? (This question is followed by two more asking the best and worst seed a given program has earned within that time frame.) yes. Lost in 1st round in 2022.
- What is your preference on the number of qualifiers per region? (Choices are 16 or 12 with a first-round bye for the top four teams. Respondents can submit a different number in general comments at the end of the survey.) 12 with a first round bye for the top 4.
- If the number of qualifiers were reduced to 12 teams, would you prefer to have a first-round bye as one of the top four seeds of a region? First round bye preferred. Reward for being a top 4 team. Those top 4 teams should host in round 2 also.
scbuckeye99
Well-known member
False.
For example. My school's athletic department budget is around $200k annually (I use the word budget loosely though because I really should be saying that's about what we spend each year on athletics. A budget I guess would imply that's what the BOE is giving us to operate with). Our football stadium holds 5,000 capacity. At $8.00 a ticket (current price set by the district for home varsity football games) at best we can bring in what our annual budget for the entire department would be around. That's IFFFFF we sell out every home varsity football game.
The reality is, while football brings in the most revenue, it also spends the most. It's kind of a double edge sword unfortunately.
Last edited:
The Dock
Champion, 2024 Yappi Challenge
Ideally speaking, yes. The reluctance to be involved can be an issue of their intervention (as a matter of good organizational practice and enforcer of what is good for the kids) being mistaken for interference/lack of program support from the coaches’ POV, however.
One or two generations ago, it’d have been easier for AD’s to intervene. There wasn’t the heightened sense of athletics (who has a good team/program, who doesn’t) being seen as a differentiator for schools in the marketplace of education that exists today. There also wasn’t the ubiquity of going outside your school’s confines in hiring head coaches across all sports back then, nor was there the practice of “sweetening the pot” (in-building job offering / total comp packages between day job and coaching job) to entice who today’s HS sports ideology oft confers to be ‘the best coach’ to accept an offer.
That pressure to have first-in-class athletics, as opposed to being consistently bottom of the barrel — coupled with significantly harder talent acquisition/retention responsibilities today — makes the AD chair lofty. If an AD tries to put a halt to “my sport is more important than your sport” disputes on setting a summer schedule with boundaries, it may come to an unintended end of one head coach at the table saying “if I can’t run my program’s offseason on the schedule and expectations I want, then I’m out of here.” It might be a coach worth parting on the retention side, but then you have to acquire a new coach…
So much of our HS athletics, today, has become an ultimate arms race on so many levels across so many parties. It doesn’t encourage coaches to prioritize balancing their multi-sport players’ interests if it’s seen as being at odds with their program winning. And it doesn’t encourage AD’s to put the kids before winning, either, when conflict arises.
The Dock
Champion, 2024 Yappi Challenge
If byes were forced on the top four by region, then the Monday of week 11 has no film review + gameplanning while the Saturday of that week 11 has no film review of the team’s performance from the night before.
What motivation exists to accept a bye, despite that, for a coach of a top four team?