The benefit would be cost savings for the schools and the fans. And I’ll get right off your lawn, sir.
Why Doesn't the OHSAA Use Districts for Football?
- Thread starter BelowTheLine
- Start date
Burreaux
Mr. SEO
As for someone who’s school is headed to Springfield to play a first round game and in the SE district for every single sport but football where we are in R16. Same goes for the other SE district teams in R16 it makes no sense as to why we’re in it when we’ve even been in R15 once before
Have the nominations closed for dumbest post of the year yet?
eastisbest
Well-known member
It's kind of saying a team 30 minutes away should drive around for 4 hrs and not complain about it. You don't not improve, because someone else can't.
The less school you can remove an athlete and fan-base from, usually the better. The more parents that can see their kid play, the better. Because we're Ohio argument works there I think. If we can improve the travel times without inhibiting negative effect, try to find a way.
The argument against in Basketball is a division has all the good teams. I counter, then they will have good games locally, with good attendance. Then an easier path to Finals when their winner takes on the weaker division. Happens all the time.
I do think it in best interests to reduce travel times if reasonably possible without changing "fairness." Will the "best" team still win?
eastisbest
Well-known member
They are now. You won.
People are respectfully expressing ideas and opinions about the topic. Until yours. Come on, be reasonable. Don't trash a thread.
Well played sir.
Shelbyrr11
Active member
How much incremental gain is there to be had? One extra long road trip over the course of an entire school year of running athletics?
Region 14. 16 schools out of 23 made playoffs. If we use a district format, how are we going to ensure that each qualifying school gives us a balanced district?
Here are some relatively sound geographic groupings for a potential district:
Glenville, Cleveland Central Catholic, Shaw, Elyria Catholic, Firelands, and Vermilion is a feasible, natural district. Six schools.
Perkins, Bellevue, Galion, River Valley, Clear Fork, Shelby, maybe Upper Sandusky. Maybe West Holmes. Eightish schools.
Van Wert, St. Marys, Bath, Kenton, maybe Ben Logan. Maybe Fostoria. Sixish schools.
Wauseon, Napoleon, Bryan. Kinda hanging out in their own territory.
If we knock those schools down based on playoff qualifiers, then we are looking at:
Glenville, Firelands, Vermilion, Cleveland CC
Shelby, Galion, Bellevue, River Valley, West Holmes
Van Wert, St. Marys, Bath
Wauseon, Napoleon, Bryan
There could be other ways to divide up the schools, but there's no way to ensure an equal amount from each supposed district qualify, not without some maneuvering. Throw Wauseon and Fostoria in with the Sandusky Bay area teams. Maybe shuttle Upper Sandusky, Napoleon, and Bryan in with those WBL teams. Either way, we are dealing with districts where long drive times exist and the potential for an odd number of teams or a stinker district to have way fewer qualifiers than the others.
You could have it be like in Indiana, where the top two schools in Class 6A are playing in the first round. They are super close, so we have an immediate knockout round for two of the best schools in the state in the opening round of the playoffs.
We get away with it in basketball, baseball, etc. because every school gets to play.
We either use a stable, predictable set-up that ensures some modicum of balance, albeit at the hands of a few hearty drives, or we introduce a new one with headaches an uncertainty.
Shelbyrr11
Active member
Here is the D4 map. Benjamin Logan is the most southern blue pin in R14, the northwest region.
If we throw them into the southwest, we are introducing them to potential drives through Dayton and Cincinnati. Then we might have to bump someone like Waverly into R15, the southeast region.
Someone is always going to be a tweener school for region assignments. Shelby has been put in the southeast region before. In the late 90s, we were in the northeast region. It happens. If we are in the northwest like typical, then we have schools like Bryan or Van Wert on the other end. In the southeast, there's schools like Steubenville. In the northeast, there's a big cluster of Youngstown schools. Long drives exist no matter where you put us.
If we try to draw up districts for these schools, how do I know they will make playoffs at an even, consistent rate? If we go fewer divisions, it works more easily. I doubt that's going to be on the table anytime soon though. What if one district has three teams qualify while another one has six?
The theory of making things more tenable for fans exist, but not without more headaches.
There are realities for having a constrained playoff system like football compared to an open-entry basketball tournament.
Shelbyrr11
Active member
How do we make sure any determined district has an equal number of playoff teams.
If we wish to maintain a qualifying aspect to football playoffs, what happens when a pre-determined district is filled with a load of schools with a 3-7 record that don't necessarily make it into a Top 16 of a region? What if there are three schools that do when another district has, say, six schools that do?
There is no way to account for that. I'll tolerate two different 10-0 schools playing in a 1st round game based on district drawings, but there could be a 5-5 school who is the odd-numbered team to qualify in that same district. Or do we make it so X number of schools qualify in each district, and now we have 8-2 schools getting bumped in a tough district to compensate for a 4-6 team in a lesser district who fills that X quota.
It's a can of worms. Bigger regions do a better job of smoothing out those discrepancies. In today's format, there are still regions that are much tougher than others based on W/L records, but it is better to have that shake out over 25-30 teams instead of 6-10 teams.
Calif_Eagle
Well-known member
I think if 8 man helps small schools (and potentially some inner-city schools like in the Senate that only played within the City this season, 3 or 4 of them.) Six-man would help it even more. I bet if there was a 6-man Division lots of schools would at least take a hard look at joining it.
I like your idea about an Open (Top) Division that schools could play up in too. I have a book about both the city and the HS football team of Aliquippa PA. IT seems they can and do play "up" almost every year. Ohio teams should be able to do the same.
Shelbyrr11
Active member
The hallmark of what makes Ohio's HS football playoff system so great is our population distribution.
The majority of states in the U.S. have over 50% of their population in the state capital metro.
90% of Nebraska is in Omaha/Lincoln, which is a very tiny fraction of the entire state's square footage. It takes 7ish hours to drive across, but 90% of the population is within a 50 minute drive.
In Nevada, if you escape the metro areas of Vegas and Reno/Carson City, the biggest towns are around 20k people. Shelby would technically be the 27th biggest municipality in Nevada. We have 9,000 citizens. We are otherwise the 200th biggest municipality in Ohio. The 61st biggest town in Nevada has a little over 1,000 population. Nevada has a little over 3m citizens. If you aren't in the biggest cities, you are nowhere.
Rhode Island does districts for their football. You get 1-3 games to choose for your own liking. The rest of your schedule is dictated by their version of the OHSAA. New England as a whole, NY, NJ, etc. have the same setup. You literally play who the state organization says you play for over half of your games. They don't care how good you are. You play who you fit, population wise. No competitive factor.
Ohio is by far the most capitalistic version of HS sports that I'm aware of. The idea of self-dictated leagues and conferences, realignments, all that is completely foreign to most states. There are plenty of schools in Ohio who are happy with their league arrangement. Marion Harding would be stuck playing some nightmare regular-season travel schedule against other D2 schools if we were using districts. They would likely go 1-9 repeatedly based on their last 20 seasons. At least they are in the MOAC who fits their travel and competitive needs. They have a chance to go 7-3 in football on occasion. They aren't focused on deep playoff runs, they want to avoid long drives and beatdowns based on the state of the program.
I'm not giving that up our cozy flexibility because one sport in a calendar year has a long drive in the first round. It would hardly help southeast Ohio as it is, those guys are spread out pretty far. There's always an odd duckling in a league here and there, but it would not be favorable if we adopted other state formats. Their formats work for them, not for us.
Step outside Ohio, and you see how good we have it with our setup.
The majority of states in the U.S. have over 50% of their population in the state capital metro.
90% of Nebraska is in Omaha/Lincoln, which is a very tiny fraction of the entire state's square footage. It takes 7ish hours to drive across, but 90% of the population is within a 50 minute drive.
In Nevada, if you escape the metro areas of Vegas and Reno/Carson City, the biggest towns are around 20k people. Shelby would technically be the 27th biggest municipality in Nevada. We have 9,000 citizens. We are otherwise the 200th biggest municipality in Ohio. The 61st biggest town in Nevada has a little over 1,000 population. Nevada has a little over 3m citizens. If you aren't in the biggest cities, you are nowhere.
Rhode Island does districts for their football. You get 1-3 games to choose for your own liking. The rest of your schedule is dictated by their version of the OHSAA. New England as a whole, NY, NJ, etc. have the same setup. You literally play who the state organization says you play for over half of your games. They don't care how good you are. You play who you fit, population wise. No competitive factor.
Ohio is by far the most capitalistic version of HS sports that I'm aware of. The idea of self-dictated leagues and conferences, realignments, all that is completely foreign to most states. There are plenty of schools in Ohio who are happy with their league arrangement. Marion Harding would be stuck playing some nightmare regular-season travel schedule against other D2 schools if we were using districts. They would likely go 1-9 repeatedly based on their last 20 seasons. At least they are in the MOAC who fits their travel and competitive needs. They have a chance to go 7-3 in football on occasion. They aren't focused on deep playoff runs, they want to avoid long drives and beatdowns based on the state of the program.
I'm not giving that up our cozy flexibility because one sport in a calendar year has a long drive in the first round. It would hardly help southeast Ohio as it is, those guys are spread out pretty far. There's always an odd duckling in a league here and there, but it would not be favorable if we adopted other state formats. Their formats work for them, not for us.
Step outside Ohio, and you see how good we have it with our setup.
Last edited:
In the other sports, the OHSAA sets up the geographic districts (NE, NW, C, SW, SE, E) with a certain number of bids to regional play (sweet 16). It's based on # of teams vs. total teams overall. Football probably hasn't gone to that structure because of the restricted access playoffs, while every other sport is all in (though I think football is headed that way).
eastisbest
Well-known member
You want to propose they maximize the distance? Make you happier?
Districts would not change the number of games, who get to play nor who doesn't get to play. This is just talk whether it would work better than what is.
Why are you seeing discussion of possible better way to run the house to accompish the same thing as "soft?" Making things more efficient, less expensive, safer, we call "smart." IDK, I'm a conservative so maybe it's just my soft way of thinking that "make-work" is dumbasshit.
eastisbest
Well-known member
!) I'd hope the hallmark is that we don't inhibit attempting to find even better ways.
2) You sure about that? Must be a rather close majority.
3) Which doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make things even better here. There is their business. Here is ours.
The rest of your opposition, maybe I'm not understanding, seems to fear districting PLAY-Offs, would interfere with chosen leagues. Maybe I'm missing something from the discussion. I don't think districting in-season play is the consideration? Did someone propose that?
Sykotyk
Well-known member
Preface: PIAA in Pennsylvania is split into 12 Districts. Each district essentially operates as its own small state association. The only thing they don't control is school classification, player eligibility, and playing calendar. Leagues, schedules, playoffs, etc are up to the district. And there's a big disparity in size of district.
District 8 has 6 football teams (known as the Pittsburgh City League), District 7 has over 120 (known as the Western Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic League, aka the WPIAL), and District 10 has 40, give or take.
District 8 has always operated as one league run by one school district. District 7 has long since operated on a district-wide alignment system. The WPIAL dictates what league the teams play in for all sports, and sets their schedule (except for the first game of the year). Unlike other districts, the geographic reach of the WPIAL is by membership and not hardened lines on a map. There's overlap. For instance, Indiana, and Hollidaysburg all are members of WPIAL and not District 6.
Meanwhile, District 10 used to operate with an Ohio style setup of leagues determined by schools. Playoffs were a bit wonky working around that, since it was always by achievement and not a points system (i.e., you are the best team in your league in AA, you're in the playoffs in AA).
The leagues had teams of all different sizes in them.
The most noteworthy was the Northwest Football Conference. Which was a football only playing conference made up of Erie East, Erie Strong Vincent, Titusville, Meadville, Greenville, Warren, Franklin and Oil City. Spread over the entire district. Then there as the Erie County League, which was Northwestern, Girard, Fairview, Iroquois, Seneca, Harbor Creek, North East, and Corry. There was the French Creek Valley Conference, which was smaller schools south of Erie County. There was Maplewood, Saegertown, Cambridge Springs, Union City, Conneaut Lake, Conneaut Valley, Linesville, Lakeview, and Cochranton. South of that, was the Mercer County Athletic Conference, which had the league split into 3 parts (but schedules covered the entire league) for AAA Slippery Rock, Hickory, and Grove City; AA with Wilmington, Sharon, Mercer, and Reyolds; and A with Sharpsville, West Middlesex, and Kennedy Catholic. There was also General McLane, Fort LeBoeuf, Cathedral Prep, McDowell, and Central Tech, but I forget how they were situated.
This format lasted for a long time. The NWC teams played in the ECL, FCVC or MCAC for all other sports.
Until, the schools were just tired of scheduling. One, the NWC decided to become an all-sports conference in the early 2000s. Which forced Greenville out because though they could handle the travel for football, they weren't about to do it as a small school for all over sports. So, they went to the MCAC for a few years. But still, scheduling issues remained.
So, early/mid-2000s, the district voted to switch to a region setup (basically, what has been discussed here), where the District would assign teams to a region, and schedule their games. And let the schools only worry about scheduling their non-region games.
For the first cycle, it was basically:
MCAC became Region 1(A) and 3(AA). FCVC became Region 2 (A), and ECL became Region 4 (AA). NWC and City/large schools became Region 5 (AAA) and Region 6 (AAAA). Then, the realignments really started moving teams around. Saegertown got bumped to 2A, so they were in the south with all new teams in R3. And struggled. Northern teams did everything they could to stay away from Cathedral Prep.
Overall though, it's been 20 years and the schools have no intention of moving out of the region setup. It works. Sometimes you aren't in a region with a team you regularly play. So you just schedule them non-region yourself. It hasn't been the big scary thing Ohioans seem bent out of shape about.
Are their flaws? Certainly. But if you look around Ohio and see the constant reshuffling of leagues, then you realize the problem with the current system is not being addressed, either. And it's getting worse. MVAC anyone?
Other states do it, and it works. Some districts are far bigger than anything Ohio has to deal with. Where games are hours away in-league. While Ohioans are complaining about 40 minute drives. As someone else said on here... grow a pair.
District 8 has 6 football teams (known as the Pittsburgh City League), District 7 has over 120 (known as the Western Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic League, aka the WPIAL), and District 10 has 40, give or take.
District 8 has always operated as one league run by one school district. District 7 has long since operated on a district-wide alignment system. The WPIAL dictates what league the teams play in for all sports, and sets their schedule (except for the first game of the year). Unlike other districts, the geographic reach of the WPIAL is by membership and not hardened lines on a map. There's overlap. For instance, Indiana, and Hollidaysburg all are members of WPIAL and not District 6.
Meanwhile, District 10 used to operate with an Ohio style setup of leagues determined by schools. Playoffs were a bit wonky working around that, since it was always by achievement and not a points system (i.e., you are the best team in your league in AA, you're in the playoffs in AA).
The leagues had teams of all different sizes in them.
The most noteworthy was the Northwest Football Conference. Which was a football only playing conference made up of Erie East, Erie Strong Vincent, Titusville, Meadville, Greenville, Warren, Franklin and Oil City. Spread over the entire district. Then there as the Erie County League, which was Northwestern, Girard, Fairview, Iroquois, Seneca, Harbor Creek, North East, and Corry. There was the French Creek Valley Conference, which was smaller schools south of Erie County. There was Maplewood, Saegertown, Cambridge Springs, Union City, Conneaut Lake, Conneaut Valley, Linesville, Lakeview, and Cochranton. South of that, was the Mercer County Athletic Conference, which had the league split into 3 parts (but schedules covered the entire league) for AAA Slippery Rock, Hickory, and Grove City; AA with Wilmington, Sharon, Mercer, and Reyolds; and A with Sharpsville, West Middlesex, and Kennedy Catholic. There was also General McLane, Fort LeBoeuf, Cathedral Prep, McDowell, and Central Tech, but I forget how they were situated.
This format lasted for a long time. The NWC teams played in the ECL, FCVC or MCAC for all other sports.
Until, the schools were just tired of scheduling. One, the NWC decided to become an all-sports conference in the early 2000s. Which forced Greenville out because though they could handle the travel for football, they weren't about to do it as a small school for all over sports. So, they went to the MCAC for a few years. But still, scheduling issues remained.
So, early/mid-2000s, the district voted to switch to a region setup (basically, what has been discussed here), where the District would assign teams to a region, and schedule their games. And let the schools only worry about scheduling their non-region games.
For the first cycle, it was basically:
MCAC became Region 1(A) and 3(AA). FCVC became Region 2 (A), and ECL became Region 4 (AA). NWC and City/large schools became Region 5 (AAA) and Region 6 (AAAA). Then, the realignments really started moving teams around. Saegertown got bumped to 2A, so they were in the south with all new teams in R3. And struggled. Northern teams did everything they could to stay away from Cathedral Prep.
Overall though, it's been 20 years and the schools have no intention of moving out of the region setup. It works. Sometimes you aren't in a region with a team you regularly play. So you just schedule them non-region yourself. It hasn't been the big scary thing Ohioans seem bent out of shape about.
Are their flaws? Certainly. But if you look around Ohio and see the constant reshuffling of leagues, then you realize the problem with the current system is not being addressed, either. And it's getting worse. MVAC anyone?
Other states do it, and it works. Some districts are far bigger than anything Ohio has to deal with. Where games are hours away in-league. While Ohioans are complaining about 40 minute drives. As someone else said on here... grow a pair.
Shelbyrr11
Active member
I think my answer to the 1) bullet point as well as the bolded statement go somewhat together. I also think the bolded statement is a good critique of my discussion on here. I would absolutely agree that I haven't been making totally cohesive arguments that flow together, but in my mind they do with a good amount of explanation. I'll try to provide that here.
States that use district setups in a playoff-qualifying format usually require that those schools must play other schools in their district during the season. They get a few non-district games of their choosing, but the remainder is otherwise dictated by the state. The forced scheduling is done so you can more succinctly say that the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th best teams in each district qualify for playoffs, just as we would determine league standings in our self-dictated leagues. The forced scheduling ensures you have an equal number of teams that accumulate a "playoff worthy" win/loss record within each district.
If we don't enact forced scheduling and maintain the Harbins, you wind up with some immediate problems. There would be districts that have many qualified teams and others who send fewer/an odd number of teams. If the goal of this is to reduce playoff trips, how do we handle a district that sends six teams vs. another that sends three? Do we force some of the teams to make a long drive outside of their district? We are back at square one with that. Other states deal with that dilemma via forced scheduling and no such Harbin system.
Of all the other states I've lived in/frequented often, Ohio has by far the most leeway with our methods for football playoffs/league affiliations. I think that stems from the Hallmark quality I stated. Based on this site, https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018052/tables/table_02.asp (albeit from 2015-16), Ohio is one of four states in the US with at least 1,000 school districts, and we have the smallest square footage of the states with that quality.
Since Ohio has way more schools, and way more variation in the size of those schools, it means the best situation for any random town is often going to be best handled by that town's discretion. I view all the conference realignments in Ohio as the invisible hand of the free market. If someone like Orrville decides to play up a few divisions in the OCC (Cardinal) for a decade, they can. If Marion Harding wants to play down a few divisions in the MOAC like they have been doing, they can. Importantly, our Harbin system compensates for that flexibility. Being forced to stomach a long playoff drive is usually worth the convenience of playing who you want. Having lived in Rhode Island and interacting with many different people from different New England states + NY/NJ, they are usually befuddled that we get to choose who we play on a wide scale. Their "league rivalries" are just whoever their athletic association bestowed upon them. My dad moved to Ohio in his 30s and was fascinated that we could just...play whoever. Sure, it opens up the possibility of long drives for a handful of schools during football playoffs, but most seem to enjoy the freedom to be associated with the schools that fit their needs.
This isn't to say that Ohio couldn't simply do a forced district scheduling for football only, but I don't think many would be a fan of severing league ties for the most popular sport.
2) I did think it was a close majority, to be fair. I thought it was something like 26-27 states. A random website search tells me it is 18-19 states where half the state lives in the metro area of the capital (https://vividmaps.com/population-living-in-us-cities/). States that don't have this distinction include the far-flung, sparsely populated states where travel isn't a problem to be fixed, because you can't really escape long drives between schools in the Dakotas or Kansas. I would think forced district scheduling is fine there, because to leave league-affiliations up to the schools would mostly provide the same outcome. They are not like Ohio where you can drive a half hour in any direction and generally run into towns that match your town's profile. In rural Ohio, Shelby can believably exist in the Lake Division of the Sandusky Bay Conference, the MOAC, or the OCC (Cardinal). We go in one of several directions and can find a good mix of schools that fit our needs. In rural Kentucky or Pennsylvania, that luxury doesn't really exist.
If that means a few schools each football season get stuck with a 2hr+ drive, so be it.
I always look at Van Wert in 2020. They had three straight 2hr bus rides in the playoffs, then a neutral site an hour away, and then a 3hr trip to Massillon. The trophy in their cabinet from that year is probably shiny, gas expenses be damned.
Shelbyrr11
Active member
Good write-up. I knew PA had a fairly diverse/complicated history with their football playoffs but never had the nerve to do a full dive. Most states seem to come up with a system that is tenable to what they see presented.
There will be pros and cons to any system, and states will usually be good surveyors as to what best fits their demographic/population situations. Ours will have shenanigans with league shuffling, but that ought to be a lesson about reshaping playoff formats. If there is a seemingly endless wave of schools who are eternally unhappy about their league positioning, how is a new playoff format going to be any different? It's the story of a dog trying to catch a car.
I just cannot abide that Ohio needs to reshape the entire system because a few teams, during playoffs, has to endure a long drive to play another playoff team. Ohio is a big state. It'll happen at some point.
A few years ago, Shelby played Clyde at Tiffin Columbian in the playoffs. Some were saying it was unfair that Shelby had to drive 50+ minutes while Clyde only had to drive about 20-25 minutes. In 2007, Shelby played Big Walnut at Olentangy Liberty. We literally had to drive past the Sunbury exit to get to the playoff site. I'd rather be grateful that I have a game to go to.
EagleFan
Fan of Eagle
has that point been reached in Ohio?
I know a few schools have been re-orged out of a conference, so maybe that school would want the change, but the 7 schools that left that school behind might not be in favor.
This idea of implementing Districts in Ohio may just be a solution in search of a problem.
All that said, it works in other states. We'd all just get used to it here.
Sykotyk
Well-known member
Most of the Ohio changes seem to hinge on the teams not being the same division and teams starting to feel they're too good or not good enough. The thing about districting is that everyone in your district faces the same teams you do. So it's not like you're trying to avoid something that other teams don't deal with. And in most states the playoffs are cross district. In Texas one district plays another district in the first round. Wyoming goes across the entire state to avoid rematches in the first round.
Last edited:
ghsknightsfan
love the Knights and Grey Ghosts!
here’s an idea:
take the top 64 teams in each division (based off harbins) and divide into 8 regions of 8. then rebracket based off geography when you get to the final 8.
this will solve the issue of some regions being stronger than others in any given year, and then shorter bus rides in earlier rounds
take the top 64 teams in each division (based off harbins) and divide into 8 regions of 8. then rebracket based off geography when you get to the final 8.
this will solve the issue of some regions being stronger than others in any given year, and then shorter bus rides in earlier rounds
BelowTheLine
Well-known member
Honestly, it has nothing to do with the players. It's more the economics of it for the fans that would want to go to the game. Very few fans are traveling that far to see an opening round game and many of the ones who do will end up having to spend money on a hotel. The team might even end up doing that. It just lacks common sense when for the most part there is a pretty simple solution.
BelowTheLine
Well-known member
My original post wasn't talking at all about changing anything with leagues or the regular season. It was simply asking is there a way to make the opening round(s) of the playoffs more local like the OHSAA can do in every other sport.
simkon
Well-known member
So what happens when even after doing this you still have geographic outliers that no matter how you group the teams, you still have the same problem of long distances. So for instance I looked at D-II from the year I mentioned previously. I took the top 64 teams in D-II that year, the problem is that there was a odd number of Northeast Ohio schools and an odd number of Columbus schools and also only 1 SEO school, and 3 NWO schools. So the other problem is that this is an unfair advantage perhaps to certain parts of the state. As most of the qualifying schools on that basis were from Cincy Area, Cleveland and suburbs and Akron/Canton/NEO area.
Last edited:
CatFoodFlambe
Active member
This.
When I was playing, we really didn't care how long a trip might be. We just wanted another chance to play a game of football.
ghsknightsfan
love the Knights and Grey Ghosts!
you mention D2 and that’s probably the worst example you could’ve given. that division is NE/Cincy heavy. the regions already suck in D2 so couldnt get much worse.
travel- you could certainly prevent games such as Dawson Bryant @ Northmor in D6. instead they could be sent to a school like Nelsonville York or Paint Valley which is a much more reasonable trip.
it’s just an idea that could be better than what we currently have. now that you mention it, i may go through a division from this year and see what it would look like.
simkon
Well-known member
Rank SCHOOL REG
1 Ursuline 9
2 Central Catholic 10
3 Badin 12
4 Bishop Watterson 11
5 London 11
6 Geneva 9
7 Aurora 9
8 Norton 10
9 Kenston 9
10 Tiffin Columbian 10
11 Granville 11
12 Mansfield Senior 10
13 Rocky River 10
14 Jackson 11
15 Bloom-Carroll 11
16 Cleveland VASJ 9
17 Tri-Valley 11
18 Ontario 10
19 Tippecanoe 12
20 Gilmour Academy 9
21 Trotwood-Madison 12
22 Butler 12
23 Bellefontaine 11
24 Wapakoneta 12
25 Chardon 9
26 East 9
27 Canfield 9
28 Hamilton Township 11
29 Celina 12
30 Medina Buckeye 10
31 Mount Healthy 12
32 Bay 10
33 Wilmington 12
33 CVCA 9
35 Defiance 10
36 Sandusky 10
37 Madison 9
38 University School 9
39 Bellbrook 12
40 Miami Trace 11
41 Dover 9
42 Alliance 9
43 Lutheran West 10
44 Hawken 9
45 John Glenn 11
46 Chaminade Julienne 12
47 New Philadelphia 9
48 Clyde 10
49 Bedford 9
50 Hillsboro 12
51 Tallmadge 9
51 Buckeye Valley 11
53 Athens 11
54 Chaney 9
55 Marietta 11
56 New Richmond 12
57 Cathedral Latin 9
58 Lexington 10
59 Ashland 10
60 Harvey 9
61 Revere 10
62 West Geauga 9
63 Marlington 9
64 Padua Franciscan 10
Division III Region Count for Top 64
Region Nine- 25
Region Ten- 15
Region Eleven- 12
Region Tweleve- 12
eastisbest
Well-known member
Good analysis. Most of it boils down to "welcome to basketball." I feel we "get away with it" (do it) in basketball because we chose to and they can get in two games a week. Otherwise, it was an arbitrary choice. They could harbin basketball and limit play-off participation. Your "One extra long road trip" gets multiplied by every parent or student that might want to see their kids' last game. Ultimately, it's NOT about the championship game. It's about communities and what can sports do to strengthen them.
The regions are arbitrary with facts made up after the fact to justify their choices. It doesn't seem a big deal to me if districts are also, IF they do as we expect; shorten those first couple rounds of travel and get players and fans there and home fresher.
District will more likely create first round games in which teams are known to both sides. I can see that upping attendance, concessions, revenue in general. It's worth the mind experiement you did, across the regions last year and before to estimate how's districts would have affected important things.
$15 if you buy ticket at game!
This would make scheduling weak opponents very unattractive in reg season!