Mercy rule in playoffs this year - good idea or bad idea?

There's a sweet spot to be struck in terms of top teams going game-game vs. taking their bye. For the D2 and D1 boys programs in NE Ohio if you take a bye, you're likely going at least a week without playing (last regular season match day is Saturday, post-season sectional final the following Saturday. Some teams do stash a scrimmage and do one against another team in the same boat in the middle of the week. On the other hand going bye-game gives the team extra rest and the chance to recoup after the grind of a season, and not having to experience the doldrums of a first round playoff game, plus the risk of injury that is associated with a match.

Especially with the pods, super districts, or whatever you wish to call them across the state ... I'm not sure how you would do it without picking lines. I think that picking lines does compensate for the imperfection associated with the seeding process -- if a team is mis-seeded (too high), they'll just get "jumped on".
 
Glancing through D2 first round games (most were last night), it looks like there were like 9 or 10 mercy rule games, including an 11-0 and a 12-0 as well. On the flip side, it looked like there were a few 1-0 games and even an OT and a PK shootout, so a fair amount of close games (between, I can only assume, not very good teams).
There have been 15-20 9+ to 0 games yesterday or today. Did this all happen in the first half or are the refs clueless about the rule change?
 
Just to answer your question I was at one of those games and it was 8-0 after 12 minutes . The winning team had subbed and quit trying to score for the last 10 to 15 minutes. From what I saw everyone in the stands was aware what was happening and glad it was over at half ending up 10-0. The referees also were aware and for some reason there was only 2 referees at the game.
 
There have been 15-20 9+ to 0 games yesterday or today. Did this all happen in the first half or are the refs clueless about the rule change?
They have to play the complete first half. Thus you end up with a game like last night - Wooster 15, Cleveland Max Hayes 0
 
I think you will see an uptick of games that end in 8+ to 0 score lines with the new mercy rule. There’s value in the better team ending the game ASAP. Traditionally you see better coached teams just pass the ball around the pitch for half the game. Now, I think teams will just try and end games by halftime. Save the legs. Avoid injury.
 
Troy Christian hit 16 last night in what I assume was first half only.

The referees also were aware and for some reason there was only 2 referees at the game.

Typically in the first round you only see 2 referees. Sometimes even in the second round. There are just too many games going on in one night to have 3-man systems.
 
Troy Christian hit 16 last night in what I assume was first half only.



Typically in the first round you only see 2 referees. Sometimes even in the second round. There are just too many games going on in one night to have 3-man systems.
kinda missed the mark on the whole purpose of the MERCY rule, huh?
 
Just to answer your question I was at one of those games and it was 8-0 after 12 minutes . The winning team had subbed and quit trying to score for the last 10 to 15 minutes. From what I saw everyone in the stands was aware what was happening and glad it was over at half ending up 10-0. The referees also were aware and for some reason there was only 2 referees at the game.
Maybe because the state won't assign just 1?
 
I think our coach does it just to avoid a long layoff but to your point is the game situation any better than scrimmaging the JV? My biggest fear is an injury to a key player. I have seen a few of these early blowouts where the losing team gets a little dirty. Coach starts yanking players as fast as he can if that happens but sometimes hard to do in soccer

My son's team played last Monday, had their last regular season game cancelled (other team forfeited), first round bye, first playoff game is tomorrow. That's a long layoff before starting back up.
The flip side is their bench is very thin and an injury in a scrimmage or made up game could've been devastating. So playing after a long layoff made sense I suppose.
 
That's just unnecessary. I know there's some bad teams out there, but there's never a need to drop 15 or 16 goals on a team in one half of soccer.
To be fair to TC they pulled their starters at about 28-30 minutes left in the game. It was 6-0 inside 6 minutes I think. Some of these goals were barely kicks that hardly rolled across the line and the keeper just didn't make an effort to stop some of them.

It's a game that no matter what TC does they look bad. No win situation.
 
It would be nice if the top 16 in a super sectional or another number in a smaller setup got automatic byes. Let those bottom 16 teams play each other. Fewer of these mercy rule games and more competitive games both good things for the players,teams,fans and tournament.
 
Teams should just be required to fill all the bye slots (or x% of the bye slots if we want to be really technical) before anyone can start jumping to the play-ins. In what world does this bracket make any sense?

1697737818631.png
1697737923353.png
 
So let's play this out ... Let's say there's 24 teams in the Southwest District. That means there would be 8 byes. The Southwest District would then seed teams #1 through #24. Why should the #6, 7 and 8 seeds be pigeon holed into a bye that creates an unfavorable future matchup? Then, you basically give free rein to the #9 seed to go anywhere on the board to try and find a favorable future matchup? This is sports and we live in a meritocracy. Teams earn the right to pick their path based on their performance throughout the year. There are so many reasons teams may want to play an early game and it has nothing to do with stat padding:

#1. Getting young players into a playoff routine between practice and game schedules.
#2. Getting bench guys minutes they may not otherwise have had to see if they can help in the playoffs.
#3. Getting kids that are coming off of significant injury mins to build fitness or gel with their team because they missed most of the regular season.
#4. The coach has a young team and wants them to have early success in the tournament to build confidence.
#5. Soccer players need to play to keep their fitness

Conversely, a coach may value the bye for exactly the opposite reasons ... They have a senior led team, they are banged up, need the rest, want to avoid injuries. To each their own ... it's up to the coach, who should know their team the best, to decide.

For all the talk abut only taking the top half teams of peoples conferences - just stop. That means Elder, who was state ranked during the year wouldn't be in the playoffs. Lasalle, who finished DFL in the GCL would probably win the Southwest Ohio Conference. Oak Hills, who just finished 7th in the GMC took undefeated Harrison to pens in the tourney Tuesday night.

The best thing about sports is the outcome is decided on the field. It's the best reality show there is. If you don't want to be the 24th seed, play better ... it's that simple.
 
Why should the #6, 7 and 8 seeds be pigeon holed into a bye that creates an unfavorable future matchup?
This is the exact argument I figured someone would try to make, which is why I said:
x% of the bye slots if we want to be really technical
It's a little hypocritical to say "If you don't want to be the 24th seed, play better" and then simultaneously complain "Why should the #6, 7 and 8 seeds be pigeon holed into a bye that creates an unfavorable future matchup?" Regardless, having the requirement be x% of the byes be filled first would allow these mid-seed teams the option of taking one of the remaining bye slots or try for a more favorable matchup. You could even add the extra option that a team can take a play-in slot at any time so long as the bye for that play-in slot is already taken. The point is there are multiple solutions to this problem with plenty of room to compromise, but right now I'm staring at a 37th-seeded Whetstone and a 46th-seeded Harding having to travel to get stomped by a 2nd-seeded Liberty in completely pointless matches. With the mercy rule, these kids are going to be on the bus longer than they're actually playing soccer.

I will agree that using the top half of conferences is a bad idea purely because conferences are not even in strength.

Just trying to think about the little guy here. I highly doubt making these state-ranked teams wait 2 more days to play their first tournament game is going to break them.
 
Well, in a perfectly drawn up bracket, we would have 16 teams, 32 teams, 64 teams or 128 teams and everyone would be slotted and play a 1st round game. In that scenario, #1 is playing #16, #32, #64 or #128 right out of the gates. So yeah, in that instance, they likely will be spending more time on the bus than on the field (which was a very funny comment by the way ... I'm still laughing about that one).

If you go the NCAA selection committee route and you just seed how many ever teams you have and place them in the bracket ... that certainly will make for an interesting coaches room to go through the vote/seeding process. Get your popcorn ready for that meeting!
 
The bottom line is simple…there are a whole bunch of teams that have no business playing in the tournament…what is better? Dropping 20 goals on a team or…dribbling/passing around for 60 minutes trying not to score? Both are embarrassing and benefit nobody…no team.. no players. I won’t attend these “contests “….ridiculous waste of time and money.
 
The fairest way to determine a champion is on the field. That means every team plays and we endure first round blowouts. I don’t blame anyone for not wanting to spend money to watch it … so don’t. Save your money for district, regional or state games.

Every David gets its shot at Goliath. It’s why we have such great stories like Hoosiers, Rudy or real life cinderellas in the NCAA basketball tourney. It’s part of what makes sport so good.

Sure the likelihood of upsets are few and far between but it’s still a story untold until the games are played.
 
The bottom line is simple…there are a whole bunch of teams that have no business playing in the tournament…what is better? Dropping 20 goals on a team or…dribbling/passing around for 60 minutes trying not to score? Both are embarrassing and benefit nobody…no team.. no players. I won’t attend these “contests “….ridiculous waste of time and money.
Unless you have a player on one of the teams, I wouldn't imagine you'd want to be in attendance for most first round games.

I went to my younger son's former team's first round game (he graduated this past May), just because I knew it would be their last home game and I wanted to see some of his old teammates families. It's not a game I would choose to go see otherwise, as I knew it would be a blowout (it was one of the 8-0 games).
 
Winless Greenville forfeits the 2nd round game to heavily favored Tipp instead of enduring the new Mercy Rule.

I can't believe I am saying this, but that was probably the correct call.

Greenville has only a dozen players on the team so the official reason might be lack of players due to injury.
 
Winless Greenville forfeits the 2nd round game to heavily favored Tipp instead of enduring the new Mercy Rule.

I can't believe I am saying this, but that was probably the correct call.

Greenville has only a dozen players on the team so the official reason might be lack of players due to injury.
I saw that and wondered what was going on. Makes sense.

Fwiw...their turf field is very nice. No track so it's very wide. Have they evered hosted playoff games?
 
.
Top