Our Playoff System Is Broken (Or Is It?)

What Would You MOST Approve Of To Fix Playoffs?

  • Get rid of Harbin Points/Coaches Rank

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Get rid of all teams with a losing record

    Votes: 8 6.1%

  • Get playoffs to less teams

    Votes: 68 51.9%

  • All Of The Above

    Votes: 11 8.4%

  • Other

    Votes: 3 2.3%

  • It’s fine how it is

    Votes: 41 31.3%
  • Total voters
    131
Quebec

Quebec

Well-known member
While flawed at times, the computer point system “was” awesome. 8 was perfect, then the pandemic showed how OHSAA how to print money by virtually letting everyone in.
Currently we have:
- Entire regions where half the first round games will include teams with losing records

- Manipulated schedules where with this system, it’s about how many wins other teams have opposed to who those wins are against and at what classification. (Westland R2, Walnut Ridge R7)

- Teams in weak conferences with no choice on who they play having stellar records but the computers hate them (Olentangy- R3)

MY PLAN:

- Get rid of predetermined regions. After the season is over, in each division, eliminate all teams with a .500 record or below. Only teams with a winning record makes playoffs (a pre-requisite is 3 wins against schools in your own Division/Region)

- Establish geographic regions once all the losing teams are eliminated, then like all other sports, coaches rank teams in their own region. If there are byes? You earned it.

Do we have a problem? You tell me, and how are some ways we can fix it. Vote Above and/or discuss below 👇
 
 
There are just too many teams. As for regions, there are always going to be easier and more difficult regions. Just like in pro sports or college. But I don't think going the NBA route is the right choice for high school football.
 
Get rid of competitive balance
8 teams make playoffs in each region
First week is at higher seed then neutral sites after
Do odd divisions on Fridays and even divisions on Saturdays
Cut back to 6 divisions
Play state championship games in Columbus

16 games is too many for high school kids
7 divisions dilutes the competition
16 teams in a region makes week 11 pointless for 80% of the schools.
 
ah, yes, who can forget the sanctity of scheduling in the saga of 8 teams per region… that brought us greatest hits in the end like

• conveniently not being able to play the week of your 1-win D7 opponent. Which ended up eliminating a 10-0 team from qualifying.

• ”let’s play club teams instead of teams in our same region.”

With how generally permissive the regulations are on scheduling for playoff eligibility purposes (minimum games threshold), and the fact we don’t have mandated intra-regional scheduling (instead we have conferences formed on their own accord), not real sure where this idea is coming from that the “8 teams per region” was somehow more pure for the regular season. That it somehow encouraged playing ten games, that it gave incentive to play games where you could stake your positioning within the same region as a non-conference opponent.

Or that conferences like the OCC-Central (UA, Liberty, Orange, Coffman, Davidson, Bradley) would somehow want to be ‘a thing’ under the old system.
 
Quebec said:
While flawed at times, the computer point system “was” awesome. 8 was perfect, then the pandemic showed how OHSAA how to print money by virtually letting everyone in.
Currently we have:
- Entire regions where half the first round games will include teams with losing records

- Manipulated schedules where with this system, it’s about how many wins other teams have opposed to who those wins are against and at what classification. (Westland R2, Walnut Ridge R7)

- Teams in weak conferences with no choice on who they play having stellar records but the computers hate them (Olentangy- R3)

MY PLAN:

- Get rid of predetermined regions. After the season is over, in each division, eliminate all teams with a .500 record or below. Only teams with a winning record makes playoffs (a pre-requisite is 3 wins against schools in your own Division/Region)

- Establish geographic regions once all the losing teams are eliminated, then like all other sports, coaches rank teams in their own region. If there are byes? You earned it.

Do we have a problem? You tell me, and how are some ways we can fix it. Vote Above and/or discuss below 👇
Click to expand...
Having coached rank teams instead of using a predetermined point-based system has got to be one of the absolute worst ideas I've heard on these message boards... and I've heard a lot of REALLY bad ones.
 
There should be a rule if you finish one loss or less it’s auto qualify for any team in a conference.
 
reganaustinjames said:
Having coached rank teams instead of using a predetermined point-based system has got to be one of the absolute worst ideas I've heard on these message boards... and I've heard a lot of REALLY bad ones.
Click to expand...
Do you not know how every other team sport does it in the state of Ohio?

It’s 100% better- football did it Covid year. Playoffs were more balanced.
 
Quebec said:
Do you not know how every other team sport does it in the state of Ohio?
Click to expand...
As a coach of a team sport other than football I can tell you most coaches hate the coach ranking system. Too many coaches don’t take ranking seriously or play games by ranking the top teams in the region at the bottom or stuff like that. Then there are the coaches with grudges who purposely rank teams lower than they should b/c they don’t like their coach.

Boys and girls lacrosse are moving to a computer points ranking system in 2025.
 
I’ve stolen this idea from someone but it’s the best I’ve heard. 10 teams make it but ANY school can play in a Week 11 bowl game. Would be a cool end to careers for most, let’s whomever pick a matchup and you’d give a bye to the Top 6 seeds
 
smurfyeah19 said:
I’ve stolen this idea from someone but it’s the best I’ve heard. 10 teams make it but ANY school can play in a Week 11 bowl game. Would be a cool end to careers for most, let’s whomever pick a matchup and you’d give a bye to the Top 6 seeds
Click to expand...
I think teams did it during Covid.
 
Quebec said:
While flawed at times, the computer point system “was” awesome. 8 was perfect, then the pandemic showed how OHSAA how to print money by virtually letting everyone in.
Currently we have:
- Entire regions where half the first round games will include teams with losing records

- Manipulated schedules where with this system, it’s about how many wins other teams have opposed to who those wins are against and at what classification. (Westland R2, Walnut Ridge R7)

- Teams in weak conferences with no choice on who they play having stellar records but the computers hate them (Olentangy- R3)

MY PLAN:

- Get rid of predetermined regions. After the season is over, in each division, eliminate all teams with a .500 record or below. Only teams with a winning record makes playoffs (a pre-requisite is 3 wins against schools in your own Division/Region)

- Establish geographic regions once all the losing teams are eliminated, then like all other sports, coaches rank teams in their own region. If there are byes? You earned it.

Do we have a problem? You tell me, and how are some ways we can fix it. Vote Above and/or discuss below 👇
Click to expand...
Seems to me your first paragraph sums it up. Just turn everything back to 2019.
 
Quebec said:
Competitive Balance would be great.

Send Massillon and Marion Local with the big boys.
Click to expand...
1. I’m sure Massillon wouldn’t mind playing D1 considering they’ve beaten the D1 champ 2 years in a row.

2. Doesn’t Marion Local have a really low CB number?
 
CoachJames said:
1. I’m sure Massillon wouldn’t mind playing D1 considering they’ve beaten the D1 champ 2 years in a row.

2. Doesn’t Marion Local have a really low CB number?
Click to expand...
3 years in a row but if Massillon wanted to play D1 they would. No need say Massillon and Marion. Massillon doesn't dominate the division they are in far from it and While Marion does dominate their division they wouldn't stand a chance in the D1 tournament and would be unfair for them.
 
Last edited:
Football, in my opinion, has the inherent problem of a small sample size (10 games).
Basketball uses the RPI (which the coaches association advocated) and I believe team wrestling has a protocol based on how its athletes fared in the previous season's tournament. Soccer, volleyball, baseball and softball are the only team sports I'm aware of that coaches vote for seeds. I have no idea about ice hockey or field hockey. Someone mentioned above lacrosse is going to a rating system.
I think if the Harbin system was tweaked to include opponents' opponents records, or an RPI format that took into account all opponents, then you (theoretically) might have a more accurate seeding process.
Or maybe I don't know anything. That's definitely a possibility.
 
Last edited:
Leave as is. Harkins generally get the Top 4 right but the 5-12 seeds are a coin toss with seeds 9-12 winning as many as 5-8. This is due to REALLY uneven conferences which create huge variations in strength of schedules.

Want to lighten the load on kids and schools? Drop to 8 or 9 regular season games with everyone getting at least one or two "playoff games." Ranked 17 or below in your region? You play in consolation playoff games with only the top16 being in the real playoffs.

Go with 8 instead of 16 in smaller D1.
 
Last edited:
raising4daughters said:
Leave as is. Harkins generally get the Top 4 right but the 5-12 seeds are a coin toss with seeds 9-12 winning as many as 5-8. This is due to REALLY uneven conferences which create huge variations in strength of schedules.

Want to lighten the load on kids and schools? Drop to 8 or 9 regular season games with everyone getting at least one or two "playoff games." Ranked 17 or below in your region? You play in consolation playoff games with only the top16 being in the real playoffs.

Go with 8 instead of 16 in smaller D1.
Click to expand...
NO!!! This is a horrible idea. Do we want to be Indiana, for crying out loud? Playoffs should be earned by quality play throughout the season, and should only provide enough spots to where the teams capable of winning state qualify; for years, this was proven to be 8 per region. This idea is one of those "everyone gets a trophy" solutions... and we've all seen the problems those cause.

But I do like the idea of going to 8 per region in D1; I just also like the idea of doing it in the other 6 divisions as well.
 
To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "Our playoff system is the worst in all the world. Except for all the others."
Two things I would not be against
1)Getting points for winning a road game.
2)Somehow adjust things so it depends on the size of the opponent compared to your school. If the smallest D2 school beats the largest D1 school that should somehow count more than the largest D2 school beating the smallest D1 school.

I am not sure how to create the formula for either.
 
I like 16 teams in playoffs.

1) As evidenced in college football with 12 teams now, coaches more apt to schedule better games Weeks 1-3.
2) Only 14 teams make it to Week 16, 28 to Week 15. Reality is Week 11 and often Week 12 for those teams serves as a great opportunity to develop younger players as they are usually in the game early and often. For teams on other end, gives them 1 more week to experience a Friday Night and I would personally love to go back and do that one more time.
3) Anything with coaches ranking teams I would be against. Many would just look at records and Yappi members know well there are 6 win teams out there that would absolutely hose 9 and 10 win teams with no quality competition played in a Region and that has to objectively considered to make a fair bracket
 
Logndog said:
I like Drew P’s ranking system, and it is quite accurate. He takes in account of SOS.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. You can take a quick look at Drew's site and have a much higher degree of confidence as to a teams strength. The MAC throws a real wrench in the Harbin system for small school region 28. There will be years where a 4-6 St Henery could beat any other team in the region that is not a MAC school.

I'm going to look it up, but I believe we have already had a 15 or 16 knock off a 1 or 2? Go to an RPI type computer system and I would support going to an 8 team regional.

The Harbin system pretends all conferences are equal in strength, which is a total joke. One year our school got in to the 8 team playoffs by scheduling a cream puff from a weak conference that went 9-1 in the regular season. The one loss being to us. We got the draw of them again (6 vs 3) at their place for the playoffs and knocked them off rather easy. That is the issue with Harbins.
 
Quebec said:
While flawed at times, the computer point system “was” awesome. 8 was perfect, then the pandemic showed how OHSAA how to print money by virtually letting everyone in.
Currently we have:
- Entire regions where half the first round games will include teams with losing records

- Manipulated schedules where with this system, it’s about how many wins other teams have opposed to who those wins are against and at what classification. (Westland R2, Walnut Ridge R7)

- Teams in weak conferences with no choice on who they play having stellar records but the computers hate them (Olentangy- R3)

MY PLAN:

- Get rid of predetermined regions. After the season is over, in each division, eliminate all teams with a .500 record or below. Only teams with a winning record makes playoffs (a pre-requisite is 3 wins against schools in your own Division/Region)

- Establish geographic regions once all the losing teams are eliminated, then like all other sports, coaches rank teams in their own region. If there are byes? You earned it.

Do we have a problem? You tell me, and how are some ways we can fix it. Vote Above and/or discuss below 👇
Click to expand...
No. You have to look at Divisions when looking at scores. Period. Alter is a great example this year. They're DIV and play only two games against DIV. The rest of their games are against DIII - DI. They are 4-5 and ranked #14 and could win R16.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top