Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Explain to me again ???


Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, NorthKnox94 said:

I have seen a lot of wrestling coaches walk away from a seeding meeting not happy!

As have I - but at least it was accomplished and they have their say and explanation/criteria. I can promise you a wrestling sectional was never seeded with the 2 best wrestling 1st round (barring some exceptions like limited matches, etc...) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, tango said:

It's pretty crazy to see it illustrated in this way.  

Send Vincennes to the PAC....SIAC has one non-conference game to schedule...should be easy with all the PAC schools having 2 at that point to play with.  There, fixed Sagarin!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a proponent of seeding the tournament.  I don't really think it's worth it just to prevent an early-round matchup of the favorites.  So one team may potentially play 1 or 2 fewer games.  Still doesn't change who gets the trophy.  Who makes the determination who is the top team and the 2nd best team in each sectional anyway?  Sure, sometimes it's obvious.  But sometimes it's not.  That's kind of why they play the tournament to begin with.  If you want to start by saying that Team X is already the best team in the sectional before you play it, then let's just cut to the chase and start at the regional round of the tournament with just those teams that were already deemed to be the best in their sectional.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, XStar said:

I'm not a proponent of seeding the tournament.  I don't really think it's worth it just to prevent an early-round matchup of the favorites.  So one team may potentially play 1 or 2 fewer games.  Still doesn't change who gets the trophy.  Who makes the determination who is the top team and the 2nd best team in each sectional anyway?  Sure, sometimes it's obvious.  But sometimes it's not.  That's kind of why they play the tournament to begin with.  If you want to start by saying that Team X is already the best team in the sectional before you play it, then let's just cut to the chase and start at the regional round of the tournament with just those teams that were already deemed to be the best in their sectional.  

 

I think those 1 or 2 games matter a lot.  Someone has to lose that early match up between number 1 and 2 and they have both earned the right to get that extra game or two, for many kids it's the last time they will ever play.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

I think those 1 or 2 games matter a lot.  Someone has to lose that early match up between number 1 and 2 and they have both earned the right to get that extra game or two, for many kids it's the last time they will ever play.  

.....I actually agree with something someone from GS said. Man, I didn't think that would happen all season! I almost feel dirty, like I need to go take a shower lol

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Titan32 said:

Send Vincennes to the PAC....SIAC has one non-conference game to schedule...should be easy with all the PAC schools having 2 at that point to play with.  There, fixed Sagarin!

I would love to have 1 non-conference game.  Not saying I want VL to be dropped from the SIAC, just that I'd like 1 spot to do something different.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Titan32 said:

I think those 1 or 2 games matter a lot.  Someone has to lose that early match up between number 1 and 2 and they have both earned the right to get that extra game or two, for many kids it's the last time they will ever play.  

Agreed.  Also, in more than a few cases the consensus top couple of teams in the state happen to be in the same Sectional.  It would be a criminal if kids from the losing team in that matchup don’t at least get a couple of postseason games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Titan32 said:

I think those 1 or 2 games matter a lot.  Someone has to lose that early match up between number 1 and 2 and they have both earned the right to get that extra game or two, for many kids it's the last time they will ever play.  

And if you seed it incorrectly you could be screwing another team out of an extra game they should've played.  Blind draw is impartial.  It doesn't determine anything based on preconceived notions of who the best team is. 

And for those that are arguing for seeding, why seed it at the sectional level?  If you're looking for fair, I'll tell you what's not fair.  Its for certain teams that might be one of the top 5 teams in their class to not have an opportunity to go to state, or even win a sectional, because they are always up against Chatard, or Cathedral or someone in their sectional.  Or for teams from one half of the state to get a much easier path to LOS because their class is loaded in the other half of the state.  

So if we're going for "fair", let's not do it half-way.  Ultimately, the bigger injustice is that Brebeuf and West Lafayette might be the top two teams in 3A this year but only one of them will win their sectional and possibly get denied 3-5 extra games.  Let's make sure that they can't play one another until at least regional or semistate.  

Edited by XStar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, XStar said:

And if you seed it incorrectly you could be screwing another team out of an extra game they should've played.  Blind draw is impartial.  It doesn't determine anything based on preconceived notions of who the best team is. 

And for those that are arguing for seeding, why seed it at the sectional level?  If you're looking for fair, I'll tell you what's not fair.  Its for certain teams that might be one of the top 5 teams in their class to not have an opportunity to go to state, or even win a sectional, because they are always up against Chatard, or Cathedral or someone in their sectional.  Or for teams from one half of the state to get a much easier path to LOS because their class is loaded in the other half of the state.  

So if we're going for "fair", let's not do it half-way.  Ultimately, the bigger injustice is that Brebeuf and West Lafayette might be the top two teams in 3A this year but only one of them will win their sectional and possibly get denied 3-5 extra games.  Let's make sure that they can't play one another until at least regional or semistate.  

People with this attitude are the reason why serious discussion can't EVER get off the ground about seeding.  Geography is going to play a factor in things obviously (heck, we had MD during the Schiff years in our sectional, we get it) - but that shouldn't have ANY bearing on why or why not we SHOULD seed the sectionals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, jets said:

People with this attitude are the reason why serious discussion can't EVER get off the ground about seeding.  Geography is going to play a factor in things obviously (heck, we had MD during the Schiff years in our sectional, we get it) - but that shouldn't have ANY bearing on why or why not we SHOULD seed the sectionals. 

I get that teams from other parts of the state want to keep the Indy area teams away as long as they can, but the unwillingness to seed past the sectional level pretty much blows the use of the "fairness" argument out of the water.

Let's look at the 2A rankings right now.  7 of the 9 top teams in the polls are in the North.  Eastbrook and Tipton are both in the top 5 and are in the same sectional.  Luers and Eastside are in the top 5 and in the same sectional.  Why should those four teams have half the opportunity as Linton-Stockton just because there aren't any other top teams in their area?  Do those extra game that mean so much stop meaning as much outside of a 25 mile radius?

As I said earlier, seeding sectionals doesn't usually ultimately change who gets a trophy .  Seeding an entire class absolutely would.  

Edited by XStar
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, XStar said:

And if you seed it incorrectly you could be screwing another team out of an extra game they should've played.  Blind draw is impartial.  It doesn't determine anything based on preconceived notions of who the best team is. 

And for those that are arguing for seeding, why seed it at the sectional level?  If you're looking for fair, I'll tell you what's not fair.  Its for certain teams that might be one of the top 5 teams in their class to not have an opportunity to go to state, or even win a sectional, because they are always up against Chatard, or Cathedral or someone in their sectional.  Or for teams from one half of the state to get a much easier path to LOS because their class is loaded in the other half of the state.  

So if we're going for "fair", let's not do it half-way.  Ultimately, the bigger injustice is that Brebeuf and West Lafayette might be the top two teams in 3A this year but only one of them will win their sectional and possibly get denied 3-5 extra games.  Let's make sure that they can't play one another until at least regional or semistate.  

I'm just coming at it from the perspective of how can we tweak the all in system we have with little difficulty.  It wouldn't be difficult to put the top two teams on opposite sides of the bracket, and perhaps even going the extra step of having 1 play 3, 2 play 4, 5 play 6, etc. so we have fewer blowouts.  I'm not looking to solve sectional geography here.  Let's tackle that one as phase 3 or 4.  Baby steps.

Edited by Titan32
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

I'm just coming at it from the perspective of how can we tweak the all in system we have with little difficulty.  It wouldn't be difficult to put the top two teams on opposite sides of the bracket, and perhaps even going the extra step of having 1 play 3, 2 play 4, 5 play 6, etc. so we have fewer blowouts.  I'm not looking to solve sectional geography here.  Let's tackle that one as phase 3 or 4.  Baby steps.

Thats one heck of a start there.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Gridiron_Junkie said:

I say this every year. Just leave it alone. Who cares whether the best match up comes in week 1 versus week 3 of sectionals.

Well public interest for one. The two best teams playing in week three instead of week one when there are still six other teams playing is going to draw a ton of more regional interest. But I thought that was a given.

Edited by Footballking16
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

Well public interest for one. The two best teams playing in week three instead of week one when there are still six other teams playing is going to draw a ton of more regional interest. But I thought that was a given.

People are going to gravitate towards the games that are expected to be good no matter when they are played.  Actually, having a great game in one sectional in the first week would allow me to go watch another good matchup in another area sectional in a subsequent week rather than having to choose between the two sectionals when they both have their best matchup in the championship week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, XStar said:

I get that teams from other parts of the state want to keep the Indy area teams away as long as they can, but the unwillingness to seed past the sectional level pretty much blows the use of the "fairness" argument out of the water.

Let's look at the 2A rankings right now.  7 of the 9 top teams in the polls are in the North.  Eastbrook and Tipton are both in the top 5 and are in the same sectional.  Luers and Eastside are in the top 5 and in the same sectional.  Why should those four teams have half the opportunity as Linton-Stockton just because there aren't any other top teams in their area?  Do those extra game that mean so much stop meaning as much outside of a 25 mile radius?

As I said earlier, seeding sectionals doesn't usually ultimately change who gets a trophy .  Seeding an entire class absolutely would.  

Madder Days is in the same sectional with Liptons 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, XStar said:

People are going to gravitate towards the games that are expected to be good no matter when they are played.

People are going to gravitate towards the teams they naturally follow despite their record before anything else. I'm going to go to a Cathedral first round sectional game regardless if their 9-0 or 0-9 and I'm watching them until their season is complete. I'm sure 95% of fans are in the same boat. Fans of two bad teams just aren't going to skip out on a playoff game and watch a better game cross town. 

Edited by Footballking16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

People are going to gravitate towards the teams they naturally follow despite their record before anything else. I'm going to go to a Cathedral first round sectional game regardless if their 9-0 or 0-9 and I'm watching them until their season is complete. I'm sure 95% of fans are in the same boat. Fans of two bad teams just aren't going to skip out on a playoff game and watch a better game cross town. 

Most people that only follow one team aren't going to keep going to games after their team is eliminated.  Otherwise, the state championship games would easily sell out LOS.  So I'm not concerned about the 95% of fans that only follow one team.  The real question is how many fans continue to follow the tournament after their team is eliminated and, of that number, how many don't go to a game due to lack of a quality subsequent matchup.  I know many people who look at the schedule and find a game to go to no matter what.  So those people are already going to be at a game.  The number of people who want to go to a game but aren't interested in any of the games on the schedule is likely very small.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, XStar said:

Most people that only follow one team aren't going to keep going to games after their team is eliminated.  Otherwise, the state championship games would easily sell out LOS.  So I'm not concerned about the 95% of fans that only follow one team.  The real question is how many fans continue to follow the tournament after their team is eliminated and, of that number, how many don't go to a game due to lack of a quality subsequent matchup.  I know many people who look at the schedule and find a game to go to no matter what.  So those people are already going to be at a game.  The number of people who want to go to a game but aren't interested in any of the games on the schedule is likely very small.  

You don’t think a heavyweight match-up is inclined to draw a bigger crowd when 2/3 of the field is eliminated as opposed to when everybody is theoretically still alive? I wish I could see some data that disproves that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

You don’t think a heavyweight match-up is inclined to draw a bigger crowd when 2/3 of the field is eliminated as opposed to when everybody is theoretically still alive? I wish I could see some data that disproves that.

One thing I used to love about sectional championships was when it worked out that two good teams were in the finals and you could see all the different schools’ letter jackets in attendance.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

One thing I used to love about sectional championships was when it worked out that two good teams were in the finals and you could see all the different schools’ letter jackets in attendance.

Yep.  I’ve seen similar in a Regional some years back.  It’s very cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Footballking16 said:

You don’t think a heavyweight match-up is inclined to draw a bigger crowd when 2/3 of the field is eliminated as opposed to when everybody is theoretically still alive? I wish I could see some data that disproves that.

I've been saying this for years.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

One thing I used to love about sectional championships was when it worked out that two good teams were in the finals and you could see all the different schools’ letter jackets in attendance.

You meet fans and players from different schools at the sectional championship. I met a quarterback from Carroll who was eliminated and came to watch Snider in the sectional championship. I met a couple of older gentlemen from Garrett during a sectional game between Snider and Homestead. When the sectional championship comprises of two teams with good records, big crowds are the result.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Footballking16 said:

You don’t think a heavyweight match-up is inclined to draw a bigger crowd when 2/3 of the field is eliminated as opposed to when everybody is theoretically still alive? I wish I could see some data that disproves that.

Bigger?  Probably.  Significantly bigger?  Doubtful.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...