Preferred Playoff Format

Which format do you think your coach would prefer?

  • 12 Team Format with pre determined seed locations on Bracket

    Votes: 19 25.0%

  • 12 Team Format with Highest seeded team choosing their location on Bracket(Then #2, #3 and so on)

    Votes: 16 21.1%

  • 8 Team Format like previous layout

    Votes: 31 40.8%

  • 16 Team Format like Currently used

    Votes: 10 13.2%
  • Total voters
    76
D

davis5305

Member
Given the infatuation with the ever changing playoff climate in Ohio. Which format do you think COACHES would rather see?

I know that some coaches might like the 16 team format because it allows a middle of the road program to make it more often. I also know that some coaches would prefer not to have a bye week if they earn a top 4 seed.
 
 
The best thing to do would be to go back in time and allow 4 teams from each region to qualify. Having 14-18 year old kids play 16 games in consecutive weeks is sick. It is going to create perennial contenders to start scheduling less games in order to be fresh and healthy for playoff time. If the OHSAA continues with this money grab I think we’ll start seeing many teams scheduling 8 games with mid and late season bye weeks. At 4 teams making the playoffs is truly a reward for a great season. Otherwise let everyone in after an 8 game schedule and still deal with early round bloodbaths.
 
Crimson and Black said:
The best thing to do would be to go back in time and allow 4 teams from each region to qualify. Having 14-18 year old kids play 16 games in consecutive weeks is sick. It is going to create perennial contenders to start scheduling less games in order to be fresh and healthy for playoff time. If the OHSAA continues with this money grab I think we’ll start seeing many teams scheduling 8 games with mid and late season bye weeks. At 4 teams making the playoffs is truly a reward for a great season. Otherwise let everyone in after an 8 game schedule and still deal with early round bloodbaths.
Click to expand...

Amazing how so many 5-8 seeds not only won games but STATE TITLES and people still think 4 per region is perfect.

The 80s called. They said it's OK to move on into the 21st century. I can guarantee you NO ONE, players, coaches, etc. would be in favor of 4 per region. 8, 12, 16 ok, maybe there's a question.
 
8 was perfect. You didn't exclude any state title contenders and you still had to earn your way in by beefing up your schedule and winning football games. Banners in the gyms are irrelevant to me after 2019, unless they say Regional or State Champions.
 
dhsdog06 said:
Amazing how so many 5-8 seeds not only won games but STATE TITLES and people still think 4 per region is perfect.

The 80s called. They said it's OK to move on into the 21st century. I can guarantee you NO ONE, players, coaches, etc. would be in favor of 4 per region. 8, 12, 16 ok, maybe there's a question.
Click to expand...
Who were they and were they seeded by the Harbin rating system?
 
I feel 8 was enough. The playoffs took place of winning league titles to many programs. Now the playoffs are watered down.
4 was terrible and 2 was just unfair. 8 was right on the money.
 
BDBW said:
Who were they and were they seeded by the Harbin rating system?
Click to expand...
Two immediately come to mind.

2001 D1 state champion St. Ignatius finished 7th (6-4) in region 1.
2016 D1 state champion St. Xavier finished 5th (5-5) in region 4.
 
#1 seed given the option to pick an opponent or take 1 of 4 available bye weeks then down the list until everyone has a bye week or an opponent.
 
EHS 2001 said:
Two immediately come to mind.

2001 D1 state champion St. Ignatius finished 7th (6-4) in region 1.
2016 D1 state champion St. Xavier finished 5th (5-5) in region 4.
Click to expand...
In 2019 D3 champion Trotwood Madison finished 7th, D4 champion Clyde finished 8th, and D6 champion Anna finished 5th in their regions harding standings. Of note, D2 Winton Woods that year 2019 finished 9th in their region despite beating the D2 and D3 state champions in the regular season.
 
Id like to see them eliminate 2 regions per division.....Eliminates regional disparity. For Example D3 Region 10 vs Region 11 or D2 Region 5 vs Region 7. Wishful thinking, I'm also in favor of going back to 6 Divisions
 
8 teams is good... but 12 would still allow teams to play a beefed up schedule without worrying about missing the playoffs.

But, what I would like to see is everyone has 12 weeks to play games (if they wish), regardless of how they finished the regular season.

Example : if a team doesn’t make the playoffs, they would be able to play one more game of their choosing (a “bowl game” with another team of their same caliber). Or even a “bowl tournament” with 4 teams (each play on week 11, and then winners play each other and losers play each other on week 12).
 
BDBW said:
Who were they and were they seeded by the Harbin rating system?
Click to expand...

Full list 1999-2019:
2001 D1 St. Ignatius, 7 seed in R1
2001 D3 Lake Catholic, 5 seed in R9
2004 D5 St. Henry, 8 seed in R20
2005 D6 Delphos St. John's, 5 seed in R24
2006 D2 Piqua, 7 seed in R6
2006 D6 Marion Local, 6 seed in R24
2007 D4 Coldwater, 5 seed in R16
2008 D4 Alter, 6 seed in R16
2010 D2 Maple Heights, 5 seed in R6
2012 D3 St. Vincent-St. Mary, 6 seed in R9
2013 D5 Coldwater, 5 seed in R16 (this was when D1 had 2 regions, so R15-18 were in D5)
2016 D1 St. Xavier, 5 seed in R4
2016 D4 Hartley, 5 seed in R14
2018 D1 St. Edward, 7 seed in R1
2019 D3 Trotwood-Madison, 7 seed in R12
2019 D6 Anna, 5 seed in R23
2019 D4 Clyde, 8 seed in R14

And I for one am in agreement with several of you: 6 divisions, 4 regions each, 8 per region was PERFECT.
 
I feel 16 teams per region "encourages" or "allows" teams to schedule tougher opponents as reliance on Harbin rating is reduced.
Personally, I am thrilled to play the Bombers, Crusaders and Lancers. I hope Louisville Trinity is able to get with Elder too!
 
I would guess if you asked most coaches they would rather not have a bye after week 10. So that would lend itself to 8 or 16.

That being said, there would certainly be some coaches playing dodgeball with their potential second and third round opponents if it were a pick-em situation in a 12 team bracket. Potential for some first round games that are GREAT. Just seems like a fun twist.
 
My perfect scenario:
6 divisions
Top 32 teams w/no regions; 1 plays 32, etc.
Top seed hosts every game except neutral site for state championship

Love this addition from WishYouWereHere that I haven't read before:
Example : if a team doesn’t make the playoffs, they would be able to play one more game of their choosing (a “bowl game” with another team of their same caliber). Or even a “bowl tournament” with 4 teams (each play on week 11, and then winners play each other and losers play each other on week 12).
 
Based on the pure numbers, the 5 division era was the most competitive era in terms of the state championship games.

Six divisions was the second closest MOV in the finals.
 
reganaustinjames said:
Full list 1999-2019:
2001 D1 St. Ignatius, 7 seed in R1
2001 D3 Lake Catholic, 5 seed in R9
2004 D5 St. Henry, 8 seed in R20
2005 D6 Delphos St. John's, 5 seed in R24
2006 D2 Piqua, 7 seed in R6
2006 D6 Marion Local, 6 seed in R24
2007 D4 Coldwater, 5 seed in R16
2008 D4 Alter, 6 seed in R16
2010 D2 Maple Heights, 5 seed in R6
2012 D3 St. Vincent-St. Mary, 6 seed in R9
2013 D5 Coldwater, 5 seed in R16 (this was when D1 had 2 regions, so R15-18 were in D5)
2016 D1 St. Xavier, 5 seed in R4
2016 D4 Hartley, 5 seed in R14
2018 D1 St. Edward, 7 seed in R1
2019 D3 Trotwood-Madison, 7 seed in R12
2019 D6 Anna, 5 seed in R23
2019 D4 Clyde, 8 seed in R14

And I for one am in agreement with several of you: 6 divisions, 4 regions each, 8 per region was PERFECT.
Click to expand...
So, of the 133 state champions from 1999 through 2019, seventeen (13%) were 5-8 seeds. That means 116 (87%) were 1-4 seeds. I think 13% is enough to justify eight playoff qualifiers for each region.
 
GoingCoastal said:
So, of the 133 state champions from 1999 through 2019, seventeen (13%) were 5-8 seeds. That means 116 (87%) were 1-4 seeds. I think 13% is enough to justify eight playoff qualifiers for each region.
Click to expand...
It’s close. You could also flip that thought and say 87% of the time 1-4 seeds win the title. 87% can also justify only 4 qualifiers
 
I think eight teams per region is the right number, but I'm not opposed to 12. If you go to 12, I like the idea of seeding and placing yourself on the bracket. That gives the 1-4 seeds the OPTION to take the bye or continue to play every week. I do not like the idea of forcing the top four seeds to automatically take a bye.
 
I had no problem with 8 but I was excited about 12. gave the top 4 teams in the region an incentive for finishing that high. a week of rest can go a long way for some teams in November. I also feel like any team 7-3 or better should make the playoffs, and 12 seems to be the number for most, if not all those teams to get in.
 
GoingCoastal said:
So, of the 133 state champions from 1999 through 2019, seventeen (13%) were 5-8 seeds. That means 116 (87%) were 1-4 seeds. I think 13% is enough to justify eight playoff qualifiers for each region.
Click to expand...

I'm with thavoice and GoingCoastal, among others, on here, as prior to 1999, there were plenty of state-championship-caliber teams left out of the playoffs. A particular example I can think of is Aurora in 1993, who went 10-0, but still finished 6th in D4R13.

Additionally, I'll throw this stat out there. First round results from 1999-2019:
8 vs. 1: 75-445 (14.4%)
7 vs 2: 123-397 (23.7%)
6 vs 3: 160-360 (30.8%)
5 vs 4: 225-295 (43.3%)

The stat above shows that the Harbin system was pretty much working as intended, and that 5-8 seeds were more than capable of contending in the playoffs. 4 per region was too few.
 
IF the playoffs just HAS to be at 16 teams, because I think the OHSAA is gonna keep it at 16 (they've made their bed with this and are gonna stick to it despite it being a terrible idea), they need to cut the number of regions into two. (Combine Regions 1 and 2, 3 and 4, etc.) Even though travel will potentially increase depending on the matchups (especially for the lower divisions), IMO it's worth it to get better quality teams in the postseason.

I just finished doing the math (at least for D1-R1, D2 R5/6, etc.), and in this scenario, the worst teams that make it are 6-4 (four teams from D1-R1/2 total) and 5-4 (one team in R25). I even have a 9-1 team missing out with combined regions! That should at least be the barrier of entry to get into the postseason, regardless of how tough the schedule is.

IMO, this is the ONLY way this can work. Having 16 teams in Region 1 make it out of 17 isn't right.
 
wls_color said:
8 was perfect. You didn't exclude any state title contenders and you still had to earn your way in by beefing up your schedule and winning football games. Banners in the gyms are irrelevant to me after 2019, unless they say Regional or State Champions.
Click to expand...
What a minute here, some schools actually hang banners for less than state champ or runner up ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top