Biggest Upsets Tonight?

eastisbest said:
A mapping of upsets by region would probably confirm what most know. The larger geographically the region, the more upsets as there are fewer in-season games between those teams to allow Harbins to settle. As much as some do not want to buy into transitive logic, it is sound. If A beats B beats C it is more likely that A beats C. But if B never plays C as occurs in the larger geographical regions, the Harbins lose predictive value when A meets C in the first round of play-offs. Anecdotally: most in the NWO threads knew immediately that Findlay was in trouble, not based on Harbins but based on transitive thinking. Looking at what few games did occur between NWO and Central Ohio in-season and over the years, even if not one-step removed linking Findlay and Central Ohio, we knew. Findlay losing would not be an upset. It would be an "upset."

Unless OHSAA wants to considering districting, the high rate of upsets more than justifies 16 teams/region. There is more than one poster here would bet half a year's salary with 1:5 odds to predict upset.

View attachment 48937



If "fewest Harbins upsets" is the goal, would districting reduce upsets and allow the number of participants to reduce to 8/region?

Tracking upsets by geographical region and public vs. private would be instructive. There is meaning hidden there.
Noted most of the upsets were 9 going to meet 1.
NWO, the region with lowest population density in the higher divisions had the highest proportion of upsets by far: 9/24.
In the lower divisions, again NWO 8/32 and I think that's SEO 7/32.
Click to expand...
Not sure logic works on the internet, but thanks for the good points.

I agree with the many on multiple threads saying (1) 16 per Region is too many and (2) no one below 0.500 should make the playoffs. Unfortunately, those opinions depend on the assumption of roughly equal competition levels within a Region during the regular season. We're far from that. Taking 16 per Region covers for Harbin selection errors.

How about requiring all schools to schedule at least 3 games within their Region unless they can demonstrate an above average strength of schedule otherwise? I sampled my D3/R10 (since my youngest's school is there). Exempting #1 TCC for playing a tough schedule outside R10, I noticed that 2 playoff teams played 0 games within R10 and 6 played just 1 in R10.

Does it matter? If the OHSAA goes back to the top 8 based on (flawed) Harbin points, it's unlikely the eventual Region winner gets excluded. At the same time, it's just as unlikely that the Harbin system actually chooses the best 8. Going back to 8 will result in #9 - #12 canvassing for changes often with good reason. At least with 16, it's very hard for $17 - #20 with sub 0.500 records to make their case.
 
MahoningFan said:
Do you believe that prior to 16-team playoff regions, the state champion was not proven to be the best team in the state?
Click to expand...

I believe that there are multiple reasons for post-season tournament play for high school athletes and that the discussion doesn't have to be dumbed down to there only being 1 reason post-season play exists.
 
raising4daughters said:
Not sure logic works on the internet, but thanks for the good points.

I agree with the many on multiple threads saying (1) 16 per Region is too many and (2) no one below 0.500 should make the playoffs. Unfortunately, those opinions depend on the assumption of roughly equal competition levels within a Region during the regular season. We're far from that. Taking 16 per Region covers for Harbin selection errors.

How about requiring all schools to schedule at least 3 games within their Region unless they can demonstrate an above average strength of schedule otherwise? I sampled my D3/R10 (since my youngest's school is there). Exempting #1 TCC for playing a tough schedule outside R10, I noticed that 2 playoff teams played 0 games within R10 and 6 played just 1 in R10.

Does it matter? If the OHSAA goes back to the top 8 based on (flawed) Harbin points, it's unlikely the eventual Region winner gets excluded. At the same time, it's just as unlikely that the Harbin system actually chooses the best 8. Going back to 8 will result in #9 - #12 canvassing for changes often with good reason. At least with 16, it's very hard for $17 - #20 with sub 0.500 records to make their case.
Click to expand...

They should do this in college football, so the G5s can get a game from the P5s. In high school, my first thought is it brings back the travel issue but in-season.

Two districts per regions should solve most of the problems. The obvious one it raises, is the two best can end up meeting in a district final instead of a regional final, when one district is considerably better than the other. Same as in basketball. The organization would have to figure, which devil to live with.


I feel districts would raise attendance and reduce travel. R2 is a mess because it would cover three natural geographical areas: the only real issues being Whitmer and Perrysburg, Both have held their own in regional finals and semi-finals and even finals so to exclude them... Until I saw a district map, I wouldn't confirm it would work as intended. They might have to redefine who is in what region. But if districting would reduce the travel along small state routes for the towns and farming communities, I think it worth a look.
 
Let's just keep letting almost everyone make the playoffs so they can make their playoff qualifier T-shirts and get beat by 40 week 11! Participation trophy culture is awful...
 
dhsdog06 said:
Never fails to amaze me how many people are against letting kids be kids and have fun while they're young. A few blowouts don't ruin your life as a supposed full grown adult. In fact, I'm betting most are actually jealous THEY didn't get one extra game with their friends back in the day.

Seriously, why are there so many damn adults living their life through teens?
Click to expand...
I've asked many of my kids' friends, from multiple schools. EVERY SINGLE ONE said they would hands down love to play one more game. Most of these kids never want it to end. It's the parents that whine about OHSAA making $ and forgetting about the kids living the best years of their life with their friends. And the student sections, and the bands, and the cheerleaders...
 
queencitybuckeye said:
No, a blowout loss won't ruin anyone's life, but my experience as a member of a bad team was that the vast majority of us would not have preferred to play another game, particularly against a state or regional powerhouse. We much preferred to move on to wrestling or basketball or taking the winter off and just being kids. One can love a sport and still be ready to put it away for the year.
Click to expand...
So why even have playoffs in Region 5 (or any other region with a Catholic powerhouse)? Just advance Hoban. We could probably just move straight to week 15 for most regions - how many 8 seeds actually have a chance to beat a 1 seed? Every other sport is expanding playoffs, and in most cases, it's more exciting for the sport.

45 teams had upsets. Only 2 Regions (out of 28) didn't have an upset.
Seeds with upsets:
9 seed - 16
10 seed - 8
11 seed - 5
12 seed - 6
13 seed - 4
14 seed - 3
15 seed - 3
16 seed - 0

I feel like these results are enough to justify that more games are better. Especially for those that won't be playing football ever again.

I respect that you were ready to be done when your regular season ended. However, I have yet to meet a high school football player that felt that way. It's the adults that are speaking for the kids. My college football player came back for most of the Friday games as a spectator because it is the one thing he missed the most from high school.

Just my experience/2 cents.
 
Bolts_Fan said:
Let's just keep letting almost everyone make the playoffs so they can make their playoff qualifier T-shirts and get beat by 40 week 11! Participation trophy culture is awful...
Click to expand...

Show me one program from D1 or D2 that made a "we made the playoffs Tshirt" this year or last. Just one.
 
scbuckeye99 said:
The stat that stands out to me the most is of the 28 #8/#9 games, 18 of them so far have gone to the #9 seed. IMO 9's beating 8's are not upsets but going through the results it did strike me as interesting that so many 8's went down tonight.
Click to expand...
Seriously? I'm a basketball guy but aren't 8/9 meant to be 50/50. So statistically speaking these results aren't crazy.
 
ElDuderino said:
I believe that there are multiple reasons for post-season tournament play for high school athletes and that the discussion doesn't have to be dumbed down to there only being 1 reason post-season play exists.
Click to expand...
Cute. But the ultimate reason and genesis is/was to determine a champion. Not for kids to enjoy the experience of some extra games.
 
ElDuderino said:
I believe that there are multiple reasons for post-season tournament play for high school athletes and that the discussion doesn't have to be dumbed down to there only being 1 reason post-season play exists.
Click to expand...
Let's hear your best argument for 16 (or more) teams that has nothing to do with winning a championship.
 
MahoningFan said:
Let's hear your best argument for 16 (or more) teams that has nothing to do with winning a championship.
Click to expand...

Last week's games already made that argument for me. Ten teams seeded 13-16 won games (13-15 if you want to be precise). We had things like R2 and R7 where half the games in the region were won by teams seeded 9 and higher. Kids dont need to win a championship to have a memorable experience.

The kids from 14 seed Olentangy Liberty will never forget scoring a TD on the last play of the game over a 3 seed and going for 2 and winning, even if they lose this week. Kids want and deserve the opportunity to have these experiences and memories.

High school is about preparing kids for life thru learning experiences, and post season play provides great opportunities for that, which is why every sport has inclusive post-season tournaments. Sometimes you are better, sometimes you have to take a beating, and in rare occasions you can pull out a result the public said was improbable. And sometimes you have to argue with misanthropes who think it's better for these kids to be sent back to their basement to play video games, because they foolishly think that lesson is more important than any of the ones they would get from actually playing.
 
MahoningFan said:
Cute. But the ultimate reason and genesis is/was to determine a champion. Not for kids to enjoy the experience of some extra games.
Click to expand...
And that ultimate reason still gets realized. So why do you hate more kids being able to play more to get that result?
 
Talk some sense said:
Seriously? I'm a basketball guy but aren't 8/9 meant to be 50/50. So statistically speaking these results aren't crazy.
Click to expand...
In theory 8/9 should be 50/50.

They are crazy because 50/50 implies half a chance for each. The fact that 67% of the 9 seeds won is well, I'm no basketball guy, a lil crazy.
 
ElDuderino said:
Last week's games already made that argument for me. Ten teams seeded 13-16 won games (13-15 if you want to be precise). We had things like R2 and R7 where half the games in the region were won by teams seeded 9 and higher. Kids dont need to win a championship to have a memorable experience.

The kids from 14 seed Olentangy Liberty will never forget scoring a TD on the last play of the game over a 3 seed and going for 2 and winning, even if they lose this week. Kids want and deserve the opportunity to have these experiences and memories.

High school is about preparing kids for life thru learning experiences, and post season play provides great opportunities for that, which is why every sport has inclusive post-season tournaments. Sometimes you are better, sometimes you have to take a beating, and in rare occasions you can pull out a result the public said was improbable. And sometimes you have to argue with misanthropes who think it's better for these kids to be sent back to their basement to play video games, because they foolishly think that lesson is more important than any of the ones they would get from actually playing.
Click to expand...
Man, well done. The Dude abides.
 
TA79 said:
And that ultimate reason still gets realized. So why do you hate more kids being able to play more to get that result?
Click to expand...
That's an unfair characterization, and an emotional response.
Some of us just believe that 2 scrimmages + 16 games played over 4+ months (plus practices) is not in the players' best interest regarding their health. These kids play more games than a college football team. Maybe adding another round to the tournament and lining the OHSAA's pockets isn't very motivating to some of us. Maybe a 1-9 team who can barely produce a first down going up against a 10-0 team isn't good for either side. Maybe asking kids to spend another week away from their winter sport isn't ideal. Just a few things to chew on that have nothing to do with "hate."
 
MahoningFan said:
That's an unfair characterization, and an emotional response.
Some of us just believe that 2 scrimmages + 16 games played over 4+ months (plus practices) is not in the players' best interest regarding their health. These kids play more games than a college football team. Maybe adding another round to the tournament and lining the OHSAA's pockets isn't very motivating to some of us. Maybe a 1-9 team who can barely produce a first down going up against a 10-0 team isn't good for either side. Maybe asking kids to spend another week away from their winter sport isn't ideal. Just a few things to chew on that have nothing to do with "hate."
Click to expand...
When I was sophomore in high school, by the end of the season, I had improved a lot since the start of the summer workouts, even though I rarely played on varsity. Extra games at the end of the season would have helped even more. I went straight from football to wrestling so any comment about protecting my health is NOT applicable. If one did 3 sports like I did in high school, there was no off season and summer workouts for football started as soon as school ended. I do not remember this as affecting my health and my parents thought it was great for me as it allowed me very little time to get in trouble.
 
MahoningFan said:
That's an unfair characterization, and an emotional response.
Some of us just believe that 2 scrimmages + 16 games played over 4+ months (plus practices) is not in the players' best interest regarding their health. These kids play more games than a college football team. Maybe adding another round to the tournament and lining the OHSAA's pockets isn't very motivating to some of us. Maybe a 1-9 team who can barely produce a first down going up against a 10-0 team isn't good for either side. Maybe asking kids to spend another week away from their winter sport isn't ideal. Just a few things to chew on that have nothing to do with "hate."
Click to expand...
TBH, practices are not like there were in my day. They seldom hit anymore in practice. It's all walk through or drills.
 
MahoningFan said:
That's an unfair characterization, and an emotional response.
Some of us just believe that 2 scrimmages + 16 games played over 4+ months (plus practices) is not in the players' best interest regarding their health. These kids play more games than a college football team. Maybe adding another round to the tournament and lining the OHSAA's pockets isn't very motivating to some of us. Maybe a 1-9 team who can barely produce a first down going up against a 10-0 team isn't good for either side. Maybe asking kids to spend another week away from their winter sport isn't ideal. Just a few things to chew on that have nothing to do with "hate."
Click to expand...

It's emotional, and rational. I'm not bashing your opinion. I'm speaking from the kids' point of view, not an adult's. From an adult's point of view, your opinion has merit. I'm saying it isn't about the adults, and it shouldn't be about the adults.
Playing an 11th game does not infringe upon a winter sport.
The kids don't think or care about the money. So many adults get mad at OHSAA for the "money grab"...that's an adult issue.
High school kids SHOULD play more than college kids. IMO, you learn more about life from sports than you do in the classroom.
You're worried about 16 games. Only 14 out of 700+ teams have to worry about that, and I'm 100% sure none of the kids on the 14 teams mind playing a 16th game.
Those blowouts in the first round aren't terrible for all. Lots of kids that don't normally get to play, get to play in a blowout.
45 teams - about 20% won in an upset this past week. That's a high number and worth playing the games. The ONLY seed that didn't have an upset is 16. That's not a bad thing.

Is it 100% all positive to have these "extra" games? No, of course not.
But there's way more good that comes out of playing more than not.
 
TA79 said:
It's emotional, and rational. I'm not bashing your opinion. I'm speaking from the kids' point of view, not an adult's. From an adult's point of view, your opinion has merit. I'm saying it isn't about the adults, and it shouldn't be about the adults.
Playing an 11th game does not infringe upon a winter sport.
The kids don't think or care about the money. So many adults get mad at OHSAA for the "money grab"...that's an adult issue.
High school kids SHOULD play more than college kids. IMO, you learn more about life from sports than you do in the classroom.
You're worried about 16 games. Only 14 out of 700+ teams have to worry about that, and I'm 100% sure none of the kids on the 14 teams mind playing a 16th game.
Those blowouts in the first round aren't terrible for all. Lots of kids that don't normally get to play, get to play in a blowout.
45 teams - about 20% won in an upset this past week. That's a high number and worth playing the games. The ONLY seed that didn't have an upset is 16. That's not a bad thing.

Is it 100% all positive to have these "extra" games? No, of course not.
But there's way more good that comes out of playing more than not.
Click to expand...
Here's perhaps a more appropriate stat: when you add a week to the playoffs, 448 teams are playing an extra game.
Teenagers should play more football games than 19-24 year-olds? I must admit, that is a unique take.
As a top seed, I would hate playing some garbage team in week 11, 12, who's probably the worst team we've played all year, at a time we're trying to be peaking for a title run. As a coach in that situation, I'd be praying we didn't lose a starter to injury playing said garbage team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top