Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority

Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority (http://www.yappi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Boys Basketball (http://www.yappi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   No Seeding Meetings - NCAA Style Bracketing (http://www.yappi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=304110)

farnsworth420 08-03-17 11:17 AM

No Seeding Meetings - NCAA Style Bracketing
 
Has anyone heard that starting this year, there will not be a seeding meeting for the tournament? Each team will be seeded like the NCAA? Thoughts? Not sure I like taking the strategy out of it. Is this a done deal?

Yellow_Jacket06 08-03-17 12:17 PM

I can't see it happening. Too much work for OHSAA. What criteria would they even use to seed? Record? If that's the case there would be a bunch of upsets early in the tournament. Plenty of teams with great records against weak schedules. The coaches know by the eye test which teams are truly deserving of top seeds.

Walsh93 08-03-17 01:26 PM

Did it last baseball season, coaches vote and then teams are place in line they are voted. One gets 1, 2 in two and so forth
All done online

farnsworth420 08-03-17 01:39 PM

i think the coaches would still vote for seeds. then 1 plays 16, 2 plays 15 etc.

J.R. Swish 08-03-17 02:37 PM

So, the strategy of placing yourself on bracket goes away with this system then? That was kind of fun to see coaches go at other teams earlier than expected or avoid a certain team until district final. What is the reason for this change?

winbypin 08-03-17 03:11 PM

I don't know that this is a universal change. Maybe in a few districts only?

Personally, I don't like it. I like the coaches to have the ability to get their team the longest life possible in the tourney.

hs sports fan 08-03-17 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by winbypin (Post 6800213)
I don't know that this is a universal change. Maybe in a few districts only?

Personally, I don't like it. I like the coaches to have the ability to get their team the longest life possible in the tourney.

This continues to be my biggest gripe about the tournament. It makes know sense that each of the 6 district boards determine the seeding and bracket format within their district.

bucksman 08-03-17 07:43 PM

Cases where a higher seed takes a game instead of a bye and ends up with two blowouts in the sectional tournament is the probable impetus for this change. At least that's my opinion looking at things across sports.

hvs1717 08-04-17 07:09 AM

Being from another state originally, the way that Ohio does its basketball tournament has always seemed weird to me. Some district play all of their games on neutral sites in big arenas and multiple games in the same day. Some districts play home games most of the rounds and only play single games at those sites. I also could never get used to the way people are allowed to put their team wherever they want in an effort to duck someone to get farther in the tournament. To me that taints the accomplishment. I like to see a more traditional system where everyone plays on a neutral floor or gets a home court advantage ( I prefer neutral sites but as long as everyone is doing the same it doesn't matter which really). To me it is a better tournament if there are more possibilities of upsets as each round progresses. In some of these districts, there are few good games until the later rounds because the good teams are ducking each other.

winbypin 08-04-17 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bucksman (Post 6800341)
Cases where a higher seed takes a game instead of a bye and ends up with two blowouts in the sectional tournament is the probable impetus for this change. At least that's my opinion looking at things across sports.

But wouldn't forcing the top seed to play the lowest seed guarantee this happens every year? Unless OHSAA is thinking of making the top seeds take byes in each sectional...

bucksman 08-04-17 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by winbypin (Post 6800569)
But wouldn't forcing the top seed to play the lowest seed guarantee this happens every year? Unless OHSAA is thinking of making the top seeds take byes in each sectional...

Say you're in a 12-team playoff group under the "NCAA style bracketing" model ...
1-BYE; 8-9
5-12; 4-BYE
3-BYE; 6-11
7-10; 2-BYE

In the "old" model, you had a hypothetical bracket like this from 12 teams
(team)-BYE; 1-(team)
(team)-(team); (team)-BYE
(team)-BYE; (team)-(team)
(team)-(team); (team)-BYE

Once the "1-seed" has chosen a two games position, namely not having a first round bye, you're not going to have any decently seeded team coming into the quarter with the "one". Nobody wants to have their first game be a loss, so you're looking at two of the 10, 11, or 12 in that quarter with the "one".

Philly_Cat 08-05-17 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hvs1717 (Post 6800500)
Being from another state originally, the way that Ohio does its basketball tournament has always seemed weird to me. Some district play all of their games on neutral sites in big arenas and multiple games in the same day. Some districts play home games most of the rounds and only play single games at those sites. I also could never get used to the way people are allowed to put their team wherever they want in an effort to duck someone to get farther in the tournament. To me that taints the accomplishment. I like to see a more traditional system where everyone plays on a neutral floor or gets a home court advantage ( I prefer neutral sites but as long as everyone is doing the same it doesn't matter which really). To me it is a better tournament if there are more possibilities of upsets as each round progresses. In some of these districts, there are few good games until the later rounds because the good teams are ducking each other.

I'm from PA and I've always thought the system here was weird to say the least as well. The biggest thing that has always bothered me is getting to pick where you want to be in the bracket. I've brought up the idea of changing that, along with other ideas, on here to only have people tell me I'm completely crazy to think anything else.

Bennies'01 08-05-17 09:09 AM

Part of the problem is that with coaches voting on seeds, it's becomes very inexact, possibly even extremely biased in districts where one conference has many members participating. Although that problem exists with the tournament committee picking seeds for the NCAA Tournament as well.

But the inconsistencies across districts and regions seems like a bigger problem. Southwest and Central Ohio use a super-districting format that allows for better teams closer to each other to avoid each other until later rounds. While Northeast Ohio tried that for a few years, they're back to a geographic-based district system. I know there are arguments as to why the districts have the freedom to implement their own systems, but I do think it should be standardized as much as possible.

Philly_Cat 08-05-17 10:22 AM

I've brought this up before in this forum when this subject came up. PA does a harbins type ranking system to help keep the voting bias out of it. I'm not saying PA is perfect, for instance every school doesn't make the playoffs, but they do seem to do a lot more things that seem more logical and fair.

For instance, because multiple teams qualify from each district for the state tournament (13 districts with each getting different amounts of qualifying schools based on the size of the district) it allows for 2 better outcomes than what Ohio offers. The state tournament is much larger and looks more similar to the NCAA tournament. And because multiple teams can qualify from a district, and how they are seeded in the tournament, schools from the same district have the potential to play each other in the state championship. So two schools that are right down the street from each other, play in the same league even, could battle for a state title. In my opinion, this type of format ultimately puts the actual best teams against each other later in the tournament.

The biggest downside to this setup is the logistical costs. With multiple teams qualifying from each district, lower seeds get sent to the other side of the state to play their state tournament games. That's a huge cost to the schools, not to mention the families and fans.

Yeoman 08-05-17 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by winbypin (Post 6800569)
But wouldn't forcing the top seed to play the lowest seed guarantee this happens every year? Unless OHSAA is thinking of making the top seeds take byes in each sectional...

No, it guarantees a single blowout, not two. What commonly happens under the current format is in, say, a 17-team draw, #1 will put its name in the single first-round game and everyone else will stay out of that corner of the bracket, leaving #1 to play games against #17 and 16.

This way 16 would play 17 with the winner playing #1. At least they get one competitive tournament game before the inevitable blowout.

And yes, it means the top seeds take the byes if byes are available...at least that's the way it's done everywhere I'm familiar with (Illinois has had this system for years, maybe forever). Other sports are the same--they don't let Roger Federer choose to play a couple of extra matches against qualifiers; in tournaments with byes the byes go the top seeds.

Kballer 08-06-17 12:24 AM

Actually that is not how it would work if the 1 seed team had a bye they would not play the winner of the two lowest seeds. The first round would have the 2 seed vs the lowest seed (for example sake let's say 17). 3 vs 16; 4 vs 15 and so on. If the seeding hold in the outcome of round one (meaning the higher seed wins every matchup), the lowest seed the 1 would play would be a 9. So actually for a #1 seed they are usually benefitting from the current pick-your-own system more so than a automatic seeded bracket set up.

Yeoman 08-06-17 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kballer (Post 6801272)
Actually that is not how it would work if the 1 seed team had a bye they would not play the winner of the two lowest seeds. The first round would have the 2 seed vs the lowest seed (for example sake let's say 17). 3 vs 16; 4 vs 15 and so on. If the seeding hold in the outcome of round one (meaning the higher seed wins every matchup), the lowest seed the 1 would play would be a 9. So actually for a #1 seed they are usually benefitting from the current pick-your-own system more so than a automatic seeded bracket set up.

If there are 17 teams the #1 seed wouldn't have a bye. Or I guess you could say everyone from #1 to #15 would have a bye.

You can see why if you pair up the second round of your tournament. You started from 17 and now you have 9.

WalshBacker 08-06-17 07:51 PM

The Ohio basketball seeding process is very unusual with coaches picking their spots. I am not sure where else it is done this way.

Baseball went to traditional seeding based on coaches rankings this year and it worked well. Football has used computer rankings for years. It would make sense for basketball to have the coaches seed the teams and place them in a bracket accordingly.

SLAGuy 08-06-17 11:16 PM

Selfish coaches ruined it for everyone. If the top seeds would have just taken the bye, then things wouldn't have gotten so bad. Those extra blowouts could have been close games by tow lower seeded teams.

Kballer 08-07-17 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yeoman (Post 6801473)
If there are 17 teams the #1 seed wouldn't have a bye. Or I guess you could say everyone from #1 to #15 would have a bye.

You can see why if you pair up the second round of your tournament. You started from 17 and now you have 9.

Right- didn't do the math on that part was going off the previous posters scenario.the main point was the #1 seed wouldn't play the winner of the two lowest seeds. In brackets that would not happen- top plays bottom until they meet in the middle first round.

vamp2syd 08-07-17 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLAGuy (Post 6801665)
Selfish coaches ruined it for everyone. If the top seeds would have just taken the bye, then things wouldn't have gotten so bad. Those extra blowouts could have been close games by tow lower seeded teams.

It is not selfish it is a strategy. Most coaches do not want to wait 10 days or so between the last regular season game and the first playoff game. It also gives the kids an extra game on a court they may not have played on before....

I do agree that I would much rather see the #16 play #17 and then the winner plays #1 compared to #1 playing #17 and then #1 playing #16 but I do not think it is a "selfish" reason why they do it and I would likely do the same if I was a coach in that situation.

Irish60 08-07-17 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vamp2syd (Post 6801838)
It is not selfish it is a strategy. Most coaches do not want to wait 10 days or so between the last regular season game and the first playoff game. It also gives the kids an extra game on a court they may not have played on before....

I do agree that I would much rather see the #16 play #17 and then the winner plays #1 compared to #1 playing #17 and then #1 playing #16 but I do not think it is a "selfish" reason why they do it and I would likely do the same if I was a coach in that situation.

I agree that it is strategy, just like it is strategy for other high seeds to opt into the lower bracket to avoid a particular team. I am most familiar with STVM basketball, and (with this year being a bit of an exception) the vast majority of the top teams will choose the other side of the bracket from the Irish. Certainly this is sound strategy, but it puts the lower ranked teams in even more of a bind because they will face the Irish in games 1, 2 and 3 while the higher seeded teams avoid the Irish until the final. I think this is a flawed system, but until they change it, I can't blame any coach for choosing a bracket in a way that best benefits his team.

Kballer 08-07-17 10:48 AM

The top seeds earn that choice and is theirs to use as best fits. Many of the smaller division team still aren't deep on the bench and it also gives them a chance to get those players real game experience which will help them down the road.

USA70PP 08-07-17 10:49 AM

[QUOTE=Irish60;6801844]I agree that it is strategy, just like it is strategy for other high seeds to opt into the lower bracket to avoid a particular team. I am most familiar with STVM basketball, and (with this year being a bit of an exception) the vast majority of the top teams will choose the other side of the bracket from the Irish. Certainly this is sound strategy, but it puts the lower ranked teams in even more of a bind because they will face the Irish in games 1, 2 and 3 while the higher seeded teams avoid the Irish until the final. I think this is a flawed system, but until they change it, I can't blame any coach for choosing a bracket in a way that best benefits his team.[/QUOTE]

Is this any different than those coaches that choose to play a slow/delay offense in order to best benefit their team?

Irish60 08-07-17 11:10 AM

[QUOTE=USA70PP;6801878]
Quote:

Originally Posted by Irish60 (Post 6801844)
I agree that it is strategy, just like it is strategy for other high seeds to opt into the lower bracket to avoid a particular team. I am most familiar with STVM basketball, and (with this year being a bit of an exception) the vast majority of the top teams will choose the other side of the bracket from the Irish. Certainly this is sound strategy, but it puts the lower ranked teams in even more of a bind because they will face the Irish in games 1, 2 and 3 while the higher seeded teams avoid the Irish until the final. I think this is a flawed system, but until they change it, I can't blame any coach for choosing a bracket in a way that best benefits his team.[/QUOTE]

Is this any different than those coaches that choose to play a slow/delay offense in order to best benefit their team?

To me, that's kind of an "apples to oranges" comparison. I think a more appropriate comparison would be a team that schedules an easier regular season schedule to bolster their ranking.

Yeoman 08-07-17 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kballer (Post 6801681)
Right- didn't do the math on that part was going off the previous posters scenario.the main point was the #1 seed wouldn't play the winner of the two lowest seeds. In brackets that would not happen- top plays bottom until they meet in the middle first round.

Is that really the proposal, to give the byes to teams in the middle instead of the top? I've never seen that anywhere before--the byes go the top in every state I'm familiar with that's using this system. I'm looking at Illinois's tournament from last year right now--16 played 17 and the winner played 1, 15 played 18 and the winner played 2, etc.

Andy27 08-07-17 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bennies'01 (Post 6801005)
Part of the problem is that with coaches voting on seeds, it's becomes very inexact, possibly even extremely biased in districts where one conference has many members participating. Although that problem exists with the tournament committee picking seeds for the NCAA Tournament as well.

I've also seen coaches vote a team low out of spite.

Unfortunately unless we implement a harbin-style system in all sports, I don't really see a better way of seeding. (I have applied the Harbin method to soccer from time to time, and it does end up giving most of the same last 8 teams for the region I applied it to)

Look Ma No Hands 08-07-17 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yeoman (Post 6802036)
Is that really the proposal, to give the byes to teams in the middle instead of the top? I've never seen that anywhere before--the byes go the top in every state I'm familiar with that's using this system. I'm looking at Illinois's tournament from last year right now--16 played 17 and the winner played 1, 15 played 18 and the winner played 2, etc.

In NCAA seeding of a 12-team bracket, #1 never plays winner of 11 v 12.

It goes:
1 v 8-9 winner
4 v 5-12 winner
3 v 6-11 winner
2 v 7-10 winner

It's like there's two layers of seeding:
1) They seed the top 8 teams, ignoring the latter seeds.
2) Then they ignore the top 4 teams, and seed 5-8 teams with opponents 9-12 (5th seed, being the best of 5-8, will play the worst of 9-12, and so on)

Philly_Cat 08-07-17 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Look Ma No Hands (Post 6802064)
In NCAA seeding of a 12-team bracket, #1 never plays winner of 11 v 12.

It goes:
1 v 8-9 winner
4 v 5-12 winner
3 v 6-11 winner
2 v 7-10 winner

It's like there's two layers of seeding:
1) They seed the top 8 teams, ignoring the latter seeds.
2) Then they ignore the top 4 teams, and seed 5-8 teams with opponents 9-12 (5th seed, being the best of 5-8, will play the worst of 9-12, and so on)

You're really over complicating it. In a standard single elimination tournament with bracket seeding it is a snake type format used to place each team which starts with the 1st seed and ends with the last seed. The 1st seed is placed at the top, 2 is the placed at the bottom, 3 is placed at the bottom the furthest away from 2, 4 is placed at the top the furthest away from 1, 5 is then placed at the top the furthest away from 1 and opposite of 4, 6 is placed in the bottom the furthest away from 2 and opposite 3, 7 the goes to the bottom opposite 2, and 8 goes to the top opposite 1. This format of seed placement continues in this pattern for any number of total teams you have.

To figure out byes all you have to do is pretend to fill out the rest of the bracket with empty slots out to the next in the power of 2 series (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, etc). So say you have 9 teams, 9 would then be placed at the top across from 1, setting up 8 to play 9. Then the rest is empty out to 16. This effectively gives all the other teams a first round bye, or 8 and 9 get a play in game, depending on how you want to look at it.

Follow this simple format and you can fill out a seeded bracket for any number of teams someone can throw at you. From 3 (2 plays 3 and 1 gets a bye) to 200 (144 teams play in the first round and 56 teams get a bye). Now when you start doing double elimination and pool play tournaments, that's when things start getting more complicated. I used to know a website that would generate brackets for whatever type of tournament you wanted to set up based on the number of teams you had.

TheGreatElk 08-07-17 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy27 (Post 6802050)
I've also seen coaches vote a team low out of spite.

Unfortunately unless we implement a harbin-style system in all sports, I don't really see a better way of seeding. (I have applied the Harbin method to soccer from time to time, and it does end up giving most of the same last 8 teams for the region I applied it to)

High school sports were not created for the entertainment of a bunch of internet posters. It's a coach's job to put his team in the best situation to win. Understanding how the draw works is part of doing your job a a coach. Shame on the coaches who never figured it out. Their players paid for it, especially over the long run. Voting a competitor lower to avoid playing them is part of the strategy. It's not unethical. All the good coaches do it. The Centerville Staley and Zawadski were masters. More power to them.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:17 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.