Roncalli vs Shortridge and other clearly lopsided sectional games

[scarab527]

17 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Please identify the multiple state champs who would not have qualified for post season play under a format that includes 50% of the teams in each class, determined by a formula that recognizes a combination of W-L record and strength of schedule.

05 Lowell + NorthWood, '21 WeBo. Multiple teams that have played for a state title (Zionsville, Leurs, CG, Northridge, Kokomo, LaPorte most recently). That's just off the top of my head. You can't guarantee any of these teams would've made it 100%. 

[Bobref]

2 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

05 Lowell + NorthWood, '21 WeBo. Multiple teams that have played for a state title (Zionsville, Leurs, CG, Northridge, Kokomo, LaPorte most recently). That's just off the top of my head. You can't guarantee any of these teams would've made it 100%. 

If you use a formula like Sagarin’s, yes you can. Not even close.

[scarab527]

Just now, Bobref said:

If you use a formula like Sagarin’s, yes you can. Not even close.

Yeah, because everyone agrees with Sagarin and the ratings are 100% infallible, right? 

[Bobref]

2 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

Yeah, because everyone agrees with Sagarin and the ratings are 100% infallible, right? 

Pick any formula you want that combines both W-L record and strength of schedule. Harbin, Massey, whatever. And if “infallibility” was a pre-condition to any attempt at improvement, we’d still be living in caves.

[scarab527]

1 minute ago, Bobref said:

Pick any formula you want that combines both W-L record and strength of schedule. Harbin, Massey, whatever. And if “infallibility” was a pre-condition to any attempt at improvement, we’d still be living in caves.

The existence of one team that has made a deep postseason run that would not have otherwise made it outside of an all-in formula is enough to justify the all-in formula. End of story. 

[Bobref]

Just now, scarab527 said:

The existence of one team that has made a deep postseason run that would not have otherwise made it outside of an all-in formula is enough to justify the all-in formula. End of story. 

No, it’s not. Beginning of a better story.

[Footballking16]

10 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

05 Lowell + NorthWood, '21 WeBo. Multiple teams that have played for a state title (Zionsville, Leurs, CG, Northridge, Kokomo, LaPorte most recently). That's just off the top of my head. You can't guarantee any of these teams would've made it 100%. 

If you used any kind of rating system that factored in W-L record, Opp W-L record, SOS, and Opp SOS to cut the field in half at the end of the regular season all those teams are in with relative ease. All 4-5 teams aren't built equally. Northwood was a top 15 Sagarin rated team in 3A the year they won heading into the playoff at 3-6.

[foxbat]

26 minutes ago, Bonecrusher said:

Wow, I'm reading things like 10 game season, qualifying for playoffs, seeded playoffs.....  Thought for a minute I had accidentally logged in to my Texas football forum! 😂

Some of those 10-team districts in Texas can have your season over before you even get to the halfway point.  6-4 could mean staying at home come playoffs ... even 7-3.

8 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Pick any formula you want that combines both W-L record and strength of schedule. Harbin, Massey, whatever. And if “infallibility” was a pre-condition to any attempt at improvement, we’d still be living in caves.

Are you discouraging Mishawaka? 😁

[Footballking16]

2 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

The existence of one team that has made a deep postseason run that would not have otherwise made it outside of an all-in formula is enough to justify the all-in formula. End of story. 

Provide an example of a team rated outside the top half of the field that has made a deep postseason run. I've done this exercise for almost 10 years running. Cinderella in Indiana High School football is a myth, it doesn't exists. Teams rated outside the top half of a rating system such as Sagarin that advance under the current climate do so by virtue of drawing another team rated outside the top half of the field. There has to be a winner in this instance. Instances where a team from outside the top half upsets a top half team is extremely rare, as in you only need one hand to count the number of times its happened. I've yet to come across a team rated outside the top half of the field in all the years I've been tracking this data that has gone on a "deep tournament run". 

[scarab527]

8 minutes ago, Bobref said:

No, it’s not. Beginning of a better story.

It is though. If you're really ok with the thought that a former state champ might not have qualified you don't actually want the best football. It's ok Bob, you don't always have to be the smartest guy in the room. Guys who feel the need to be never are anyway...

 

8 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

If you used any kind of rating system that factored in W-L record, Opp W-L record, SOS, and Opp SOS to cut the field in half at the end of the regular season all those teams are in with relative ease. All 4-5 teams aren't built equally. Northwood was a top 15 Sagarin rated team in 3A the year they won heading into the playoff at 3-6.

Is that actually true, or is it just the benefit of hindsight that these teams definitely would've been in? Of course every 5-4, 4-5 team etc isn't built the same. Thankfully we have the all-in playoff to determine that. 

 

1 minute ago, Footballking16 said:

Provide an example of a team rated outside the top half of the field that has made a deep postseason run. I've done this exercise for almost 10 years running. Cinderella in Indiana High School football is a myth, it doesn't exists. Teams rated outside the top half of a rating system such as Sagarin that advance under the current climate do so by virtue of drawing another team rated outside the top half of the field. There has to be a winner in this instance. Instances where a team from outside the top half upsets a top half team is extremely rare, as in you only need one hand to count the number of times its happened. I've yet to come across a team rated outside the top half of the field in all the years I've been tracking this data that has gone on a "deep tournament run". 

I never claimed anything about the "top half of the field". That was you. If we are only cutting the tournament field in half what's the point of qualification anyway? And either way, you just claimed teams from the bottom half HAVE upset teams from the top half. So there goes your own argument. 

[EaglesFan1964]

4 hours ago, oldtimeqb said:

The older I get, the more I realize all-in necessitates the blind draw.  Seeded sectionals with all-in would result in dozens of first round games like this one.  At least in a blind draw, Pike Central can draw Washington rather than both of those teams getting blown out by Vincennes and Gibson Southern. (sectional 30)

So instead, Gibson Southern, Vincennes, or Owen Valley will play West Vigo for a sectional championship. All 3 of which would beat WV by 50. In a title game. 

[Piratefan101]

Merrillville has a easy sectional too. 
 

 Should be a blowout no matter who we play. 
 

muster: 59 point advantage 

hammond Morton: 62 point advantage 

hammond central: 40 point advantage 

[Bobref]

12 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

It is though. If you're really ok with the thought that a former state champ might not have qualified you don't actually want the best football. It's ok Bob, you don't always have to be the smartest guy in the room. Guys who feel the need to be never are anyway.

Aahh… Resort to ad hominem. Probably the surest indicator of the loser in any debate.

[Footballking16]

4 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

Is that actually true, or is it just the benefit of hindsight that these teams definitely would've been in? Of course every 5-4, 4-5 team etc isn't built the same. Thankfully we have the all-in playoff to determine that. 

Northwood was a top 15 Sagarin team in 3A the year they went 3-6 and won the state title. They would have qualified for any postseason format that effectively cut the field in half at the conclusion of the regular season, and been comfortably in. Beating Chatard was definitely an upset, no dispute there, but they weren't some longshot team that had no business being in the state tournament. They were a smaller enrollment school playing in a predominantly larger class conference who played a bunch of teams close.

 

8 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

I never claimed anything about the "top half of the field". That was you. If we are only cutting the tournament field in half what's the point of qualification anyway? And either way, you just claimed teams from the bottom half HAVE upset teams from the top half. So there goes your own argument. 

All the teams you listed in the above mentioned post would have qualified for a postseason format that effectively cut the field in half using a rating system that factored in W-L record, Opp W-L record, SOS, and Opp SOS despite finishing the regular season with losing records. My argument was never that bottom half teams haven't upset top half rated teams, other than it was extremely rare. You made the unfounded argument that any bottom half team that makes a "deep tournament run" justifies the all-in. I'm asking for an example of a bottom half rated team that has gone on a "deep tournament run". I've yet to come across a single case of this in the nearly decade I've been tracking such data. Cinderella's don't exist in high school football. 

[FastpacedO]

13 hours ago, roaringthunderdlr said:

I get it. Enrollment, geography, randomization... I get it. I am still wondering though how Roncalli and Shortridge are going to be allowed on the same playing field in two weeks.

The predictor has Roncalli as a 78.5 point favorite without homefield advantage (game is at Shortridge).

I have always been fascinated by blowouts, especially in high school football, and I am sure many of you are too. I would love to hear feedback on this topic.

Back in @PHJIrishday a Roncalli (formerly Sacred Heart) and Shortridge game would have been a decent matchup!

[scarab527]

Just now, Footballking16 said:

Northwood was a top 15 Sagarin team in 3A the year they went 3-6 and won the state title. They would have qualified for any postseason format that effectively cut the field in half at the conclusion of the regular season, and been comfortably in. Beating Chatard was definitely an upset, no dispute there, but they weren't some longshot team that had no business being in the state tournament. They were a smaller enrollment school playing in a predominantly larger class conference who played a bunch of teams close.

 

All the teams you listed in the above mentioned post would have qualified for a postseason format that effectively cut the field in half using a rating system that factored in W-L record, Opp W-L record, SOS, and Opp SOS despite finishing the regular season with losing records. My argument was never that bottom half teams haven't upset top half rated teams, other than it was extremely rare. You made the unfounded argument that any bottom half team that makes a "deep tournament run" justifies the all-in. I'm asking for an example of a bottom half rated team that has gone on a "deep tournament run". I've yet to come across a single case of this in the nearly decade I've been tracking such data. Cinderella's don't exist in high school football. 

I never brought up "bottom half rated" at all. That is your wording and I have not once used it. Again though, you said yourself it has happened.  

 

1 minute ago, Bobref said:

Aahh… Resort to ad hominem. Probably the surest indicator of the loser in any debate.

It's hard not to when you're such a complete blowhard about everything lmao. And it was just a piece of friendly advice, but if the shoe fits...

5 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Aahh… Resort to ad hominem. Probably the surest indicator of the loser in any debate.

And the IHSAA seems to agree with me, so take your imaginary online forum victory, while I'll take my real life victory. 

[Bobref]

3 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

And the IHSAA seems to agree with me, so take your imaginary online forum victory, while I'll take my real life victory. 

And here I thought we were talking about what’s best, not what’s expedient.

[scarab527]

1 minute ago, Bobref said:

And here I thought we were talking about what’s best, not what’s expedient.

Being the best and being the most expedient are not mutually exclusive.  

[Footballking16]

8 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

I never brought up "bottom half rated" at all. That is your wording and I have not once used it. Again though, you said yourself it has happened.

I know it's not your wording. You questioned whether or not 05 Lowell or Northwood, 21 WeBo and State runner-ups such Zionsville, Luers, CG, Northridge, Kokomo, and LaPorte would have made qualified for the postseason. I'm telling you that unequivocally yes, all those teams would have qualified for a postseason format that effectively cut the field in half at the conclusion of the regular season using a rating system that factored in W-L record, Opp W-L record, SOS, and Opp SOS.

You also said, "the existence of one team that has made a deep postseason run that would not have otherwise made it outside of an all-in formula is enough to justify the all-in formula. End of story."

I'll ask again, please provide an example of a team that has gone on a deep postseason run that wouldn't have made the postseason under a qualifying format?

[scarab527]

1 minute ago, Footballking16 said:

I know it's not your wording. You questioned whether or not 05 Lowell or Northwood, 21 WeBo and State runner-ups such Zionsville, Luers, CG, Northridge, Kokomo, and LaPorte would have made qualified for the postseason. I'm telling you that unequivocally yes, all those teams would have qualified for a postseason format that effectively cut the field in half at the conclusion of the regular season using a rating system that factored in W-L record, Opp W-L record, SOS, and Opp SOS.

You also said, "the existence of one team that has made a deep postseason run that would not have otherwise made it outside of an all-in formula is enough to justify the all-in formula. End of story."

I'll ask again, please provide an example of a team that has gone on a deep postseason run that wouldn't have made the postseason under a qualifying format?

Do we know those are the criteria for an all-in formula? Just because you make up a criteria in hindsight where you claim they all would have qualified does not mean they would've at the time. The truth is you CAN'T guarantee all these teams would've made it. And I ask again, what is really the point of cutting the field just in half? Why not in quarters, etc? The truth is the all-in sorts everything out anyway. The cream always rises. 

[Muda69]

1 hour ago, foxbat said:

The uproar in most situations where there's tends to come not from the 0-9 and 1-8 teams, but from 5-4 teams that miss the cut.  

That is what happened during my high school playing days under the dreaded cluster system.

 

[WWFan]

All of this fighting so we can celebrate who comes in 2nd for sectional is weird. Just my opinion. Has it ever mattered come Thanksgiving? 

[Footballking16]

Just now, scarab527 said:

Do we know those are the criteria for an all-in formula? Just because you make up a criteria in hindsight where you claim they all would have qualified does not mean they would've at the time. The truth is you CAN'T guarantee all these teams would've made it. And I ask again, what is really the point of cutting the field just in half? Why not in quarters, etc? The truth is the all-in sorts everything out anyway. The cream always rises. 

For years I have advocated for a playoff qualifying format that effectively cuts the field in half at the conclusion of the regular season. This is done regularly in other states. To implement this format:

-add tenth regular season game

-at conclusion of regular season; use ranking system that accounts for W-L record, Opp W-L record, SOS, and Opp SOS that eliminates the field in half 1-32 1A-4A and 1-16 5A and 6A

-Once the field is cut in half, Send the 16 Northern-most teams to one half of the bracket and the 16 Southern-most teams to the other half. Seed 1-16 accordingly where 1 plays 16, 2 plays 15 on the opposite ends of the bracket etc with highest remaining seed hosting until you get to semi-state where games will be hosted at neutral locations

 

I've used Sagarin (as it is readily available) for the last decade to create a mock qualifying tournament with subsequent seeding. In my qualifying format using Sagarin, the above mentioned teams have made it into the field rather easily. I imagine they would make the field in just about every other rating system that uses similar factors. 

[Tippy]

1 hour ago, EaglesFan1964 said:

So instead, Gibson Southern, Vincennes, or Owen Valley will play West Vigo for a sectional championship. All 3 of which would beat WV by 50. In a title game. 

So what!  Here is some of what has happened in state championship games.

2017 - Ben Davis 63 Penn 14

2016 - Pioneer 60 North Vermillion 0

2011 - Carmel 54 Penn 0

2009 - LCC 52 Fountain Central 0

1997 - Jimtown 63 Clarksville 0

Not all games are going to be close games.

[oldtimeqb]

6 hours ago, Footballking16 said:

Correct.

The all-in format is the only way to justify current week 1 blowouts. The second the sectionals are seeded and there's 100+ non-competitive first round games will only open the door to a qualifier which isn't what the IHSAA wants. So instead, teams like Shortridge are the sacrificial lambs. 

Thanks for completing my thoughts. 

Yes. The IHSAA wants an all-in tournament and no teams left out. Notice they intentionally call it the ‘IHSAA tournament’ and not playoffs. 

And I am not advocating their position - I would like to see some sort of qualifier and seeding. I’m just noting that all-in and blind draw are joined. You can’t have one without the other.

Edited October 10, 2022 by oldtimeqb