How many games do 9-16 teams need to win to validate 16 teams?

It kind of changes your perspective when one of the teams you follow wins as a lower seed. Going to 16 teams was brilliant!
Yas Yes GIF by AIDS-Fondet
 
4GX said:
The coaches seem to want to play every week-- they do not seem to endorse having "bye weeks" for their top teams.
Click to expand...
The coaches actually voted for 12 teams and were ignored by the ohsaa so I’m not sure how you came to this conclusion…
 
NLLBEST said:
The coaches actually voted for 12 teams and were ignored by the ohsaa so I’m not sure how you came to this conclusion…
Click to expand...
They ALSO have made clear (in numerous individual interviews) that they would rather not have any bye weeks. I know that every coach I've seen interviewed (either on radio, television, or newspaper) has said that he would rather not take a week off, at that point in the season-- THAT's how I came to that conclusion.
 
4GX said:
They ALSO have made clear (in numerous individual interviews) that they would rather not have any bye weeks. I know that every coach I've seen interviewed (either on radio, television, or newspaper) has said that he would rather not take a week off, at that point in the season-- THAT's how I came to that conclusion.
Click to expand...
I heard well over a dozen interviews on the subject and yes, they pretty much all did not like the idea of a bye.
HOWEVER, most of their reasoning they gave was 'we've never had a bye before, and I dont know what we would do'. I think it was more against the idea because of the unknown other than actual concrete reasons.

I am pretty certain though they would have figured it out, and if given the chance would have EMBRACED the bye.
 
Since bye has been brought up again, I think I'll post here what I did on the other thread to get opinions.

In the past I think there have been enough teams left out because of the schedule they could arrange, they beat that schedule but didn't have the Harbins. I also think the Harbins cow needs to be put to rest and more teams in play-offs mitigates the need. The arguments for 12 teams provides enough lee-way for strong teams to schedule strong without a serious risk to their play-off opportunities.

I would like to see that coupled with a policy that all other teams and even the bye teams can schedule another game (not counted towards play-off) if they choose. Then all teams have an opportunity to end on a competitive game with little risk an AD is going for a payday scheduling a blow-out from some team trying to get Harbins.
 
eastisbest said:
Since bye has been brought up again, I think I'll post here what I did on the other thread to get opinions.

In the past I think there have been enough teams left out because of the schedule they could arrange, they beat that schedule but didn't have the Harbins. I also think the Harbins cow needs to be put to rest and more teams in play-offs mitigates the need. The arguments for 12 teams provides enough lee-way for strong teams to schedule strong without a serious risk to their play-off opportunities.

I would like to see that coupled with a policy that all other teams and even the bye teams can schedule another game (not counted towards play-off) if they choose. Then all teams have an opportunity to end on a competitive game with little risk an AD is going for a payday scheduling a blow-out from some team trying to get Harbins.
Click to expand...
I would venture to say, even though coaches say they dont like a bye, that not many teams would line up to want to schedule a game during that week off.

Most coaches would take a look and realize a week off would do them more good than playing another game.
 
thavoice said:
I would venture to say, even though coaches say they dont like a bye, that not many teams would line up to want to schedule a game during that week off.

Most coaches would take a look and realize a week off would do them more good than playing another game.
Click to expand...

I would suspect the same. I don't see any objecting to having the option open though. Some would maybe make up a missed covid game, a rivalry, something for charity.... Or rest and prepare.
 
Since the playoffs began in 1972, 94% of Division I (and AAA) champions were seeded 1 (55%), 2 (27%) or 3 (12%). Since seeds 4 through 8 have won it all only 6% of the time, it would seem that 9-16 seeds chances for a championship are very slim. On the other hand, going with sixteen teams per region does give the 9-16 seeded teams a reasonable chance to extend their season by at least a week. In fact, 14% of the lower half seeds across all seven divisions did just that last weekend.
 
Struthersfan said:
Being an oldtimer, when I was in high school, practically most schools started Labor Day week. (Ours was Monday off, Tuesday- Teacher's Day, Wednesday first day of school, Friday was the first game, at Alliance) You could count on this every year.

Next season starts 18-20 August, which to me seems awfully early. Still haven't adjusted to playing games in the extreme heat of August. No wonder teams play like ?? the beginning of the season.
Click to expand...
struthers ........u nailed it .........being an old timer from benedictine .........
 
Regardless of who wins, an expanded playoffs doesn't "validate" anything. It simply illustrates a point that most of us already assumed, which is that the best teams don't always make the postseason. Making the playoffs used to be a privilege that was earned, which made the regular season a lot more exciting. Now, there's far more BS'ing during the regular season with teams being too comfortable knowing that they'll probably make the playoffs regardless if they drop a game or two. At least from where I stand it is, but that mentality only hurts teams in the long run.

We've all seen teams who were good enough make it, but didn't because of their schedule. For example... In 2012, Youngstown Cardinal Mooney finished 19th in Division III-Region 11 with a record of 3-6. One of those wins was a 41-15 thrashing of Akron St. Vincent-St. Mary, who eventually cruised to the Division III state championship. Heck, look at this year. 85% of the participants in the Yappi Challenge picked #11 Anna who finished .500, to knock of #6 Springfield Northeastern and most of us picked a 3-7 Fort Recovery, who is seeded #14, to beat #3 Arcanum. We all know why that was the case. Without checking, I'm sure that the majority of us picked #7 New Bremen to top #2 Tri-Village for the same reason.

I used to buy the national high school football preview magazine that Sporting News used to make (not sure if they still do or not). It had Ohio's playoff system ranked #1 in the country. Even a year or two ago, MaxPreps had Ohio's Division I & II playoffs both ranked inside the top 5 in the country for the toughest to win. Now, the accomplishment of making the postseason is watered down. 8 teams per region in six divisions was perfect, but the OHSAA been doing "money grabs" for years with this being the first one that they were called out for it.
 
Worm02 said:
Regardless of who wins, an expanded playoffs doesn't "validate" anything. It simply illustrates a point that most of us already assumed, which is that the best teams don't always make the postseason. Making the playoffs used to be a privilege that was earned, which made the regular season a lot more exciting. Now, there's far more BS'ing during the regular season with teams being too comfortable knowing that they'll probably make the playoffs regardless if they drop a game or two. At least from where I stand it is, but that mentality only hurts teams in the long run.
Click to expand...

Scheduling stronger competition hurts mentality how? Teams can now schedule to their competitive capabilities instead of easy wins and Harbin cows. The overall level of competition across state should go up, not down.
 
Worm02 said:
Regardless of who wins, an expanded playoffs doesn't "validate" anything. It simply illustrates a point that most of us already assumed, which is that the best teams don't always make the postseason. Making the playoffs used to be a privilege that was earned, which made the regular season a lot more exciting. Now, there's far more BS'ing during the regular season with teams being too comfortable knowing that they'll probably make the playoffs regardless if they drop a game or two. At least from where I stand it is, but that mentality only hurts teams in the long run.

We've all seen teams who were good enough make it, but didn't because of their schedule. For example... In 2012, Youngstown Cardinal Mooney finished 19th in Division III-Region 11 with a record of 3-6. One of those wins was a 41-15 thrashing of Akron St. Vincent-St. Mary, who eventually cruised to the Division III state championship. Heck, look at this year. 85% of the participants in the Yappi Challenge picked #11 Anna who finished .500, to knock of #6 Springfield Northeastern and most of us picked a 3-7 Fort Recovery, who is seeded #14, to beat #3 Arcanum. We all know why that was the case. Without checking, I'm sure that the majority of us picked #7 New Bremen to top #2 Tri-Village for the same reason.

I used to buy the national high school football preview magazine that Sporting News used to make (not sure if they still do or not). It had Ohio's playoff system ranked #1 in the country. Even a year or two ago, MaxPreps had Ohio's Division I & II playoffs both ranked inside the top 5 in the country for the toughest to win. Now, the accomplishment of making the postseason is watered down. 8 teams per region in six divisions was perfect, but the OHSAA been doing "money grabs" for years with this being the first one that they were called out for it.
Click to expand...
Adding another round doesn't make it easier to win. Making the playoffs is less of an accomplishment, winning the whole thing is not. It actually will be harder to win a championship, can't dodge a good team who gets healthy and hot at the right time but ended up out of the top 8.
 
Ben Cartwright said:
Adding another round doesn't make it easier to win. Making the playoffs is less of an accomplishment, winning the whole thing is not. It actually will be harder to win a championship, can't dodge a good team who gets healthy and hot at the right time but ended up out of the top 8.
Click to expand...
Likely right.
It likely does make it tougher to win, BUUUUT i suspect we will see the usual suspects battling for the title.

As we saw with the number of wins from 9-16 it means they were better, at least that first weekend, and in theory the better the teams, the more difficult it will be to win.

Also we cannot dismiss the injury factor. It could hurt, OR HELP, a teams chance of winning.
 
eastisbest said:
Scheduling stronger competition hurts mentality how? Teams can now schedule to their competitive capabilities instead of easy wins and Harbin cows. The overall level of competition across state should go up, not down.
Click to expand...
Worm can speak for himself, but I interpreted what he is saying as: having the mentality that it's OK if we drop a game or two hurts a team in the long run. It's similar to the AAU mentality in basketball of: there's always another game whether we win this one or not.
 
Mr. Slippery said:
Worm can speak for himself, but I interpreted what he is saying as: having the mentality that it's OK if we drop a game or two hurts a team in the long run. It's similar to the AAU mentality in basketball of: there's always another game whether we win this one or not.
Click to expand...

I don't think that mentality will happen. The teams will schedule tougher competition to try and beat it. The mentality of scheduling cows as if play-off was more important than getting the competition for your players is the one that hurt. If they continue to do 16 games, we can run numbers in a few years but my risk-reward says OOC score differentials will narrow.
 
Mr. Slippery said:
Worm can speak for himself, but I interpreted what he is saying as: having the mentality that it's OK if we drop a game or two hurts a team in the long run. It's similar to the AAU mentality in basketball of: there's always another game whether we win this one or not.
Click to expand...
I will do a 180 on those thoughts.

Another way of looking at things is this keeps MORE kids and teams interested instead of by week 5 knowing they do not have a shot at the playoffs.
 
hsfan60 said:
Yes and no, they need a schedule or league that gives them a good shot at top 8 with 5-6 wins
Click to expand...
They’re league is tough, that’s the issue. They had one complete head scratcher in losing to 1-9 Norwalk. Otherwise 2 of their losses are still playing and 2 came by a combined 21 points. One of which being avenged last week vs #1 Bellevue. Paired with the fact that they are a perennial playoff team, whether we agree or not (not that OHSAA has ever shown the care) I think it’s all the ammunition OHSAA will need to keep the format.
 
After 2 weeks in D1-4 only 2 teams remain that wouldn’t have made the old (8 team) playoff system. 14 seed Wooster in region 7 has survived from seeds 13-16. While 9 seed Perkins stays alive after beating Edison, the only 16 seed to win last week.
 
To put this another way, there were 112 double-digit seeds in the large school divisions, and only one made it to the regional semifinals.

Even though that one is my kids' school, I still think this playoff expansion involves too many teams and too long a season.
 
fantastic50 said:
To put this another way, there were 112 double-digit seeds in the large school divisions, and only one made it to the regional semifinals.

Even though that one is my kids' school, I still think this playoff expansion involves too many teams and too long a season.
Click to expand...
Agreed, 12 was the right number for expansion. I could live with 14 and 2 byes because it would add intrigue to getting a top 2 seed. I’m sure some year a 13-16 seed will win their region but it won’t make an extra 112 games a year worth it. I also think the excitement of making the playoffs will wear off quickly for most communities and those extra games won’t equate to much revenue for the ohsaa…in fact I could see it lowering attendance for 2nd round and possibly 3rd round games, making the added revenue negligible.
 
fantastic50 said:
To put this another way, there were 112 double-digit seeds in the large school divisions, and only one made it to the regional semifinals.

Even though that one is my kids' school, I still think this playoff expansion involves too many teams and too long a season.
Click to expand...
Only two teams seeded 9 an above won last night. Sandusky Perkins #9 beat Edison the 16th seed. Wooster as a 14 seed won. You would have to say Wooster had a very good draw in an overall weak region. Happy to see Wooster get a couple of extra games against comparable competition. Still agree with fantastic50. Expansion involves too many teams and makes for too long of a season.
 
NLLBEST said:
After 2 weeks in D1-4 only 2 teams remain that wouldn’t have made the old (8 team) playoff system. 14 seed Wooster in region 7 has survived from seeds 13-16. While 9 seed Perkins stays alive after beating Edison, the only 16 seed to win last week.
Click to expand...
D5-7 only 11 seed Anna remains of schools 9 or lower, they beat 14 seed Ft Recovery this week.

So only 1 team of 112 seeded 13-16 remains this year in the entire state. 3 of the 224 9-16 seeds have made the regional semis. 2 of the 3 remaining were favored this week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top