Bash Riprock

8 hours ago, JustRules said:

There are many ways you could implement a seeded system.

I've always supported seeding....just not an arbitrary slice of 50% of a field that is already pretty darn small, especially at the 6A level, just to make some fans feel better.  Season losses of 4 games and sometimes even 2 games (lets say to some key injuries or lack of experience) will absolutely eliminate teams in a qualifier with 50% cut of the field.  (I have illustrated this year with teams using Sagarin)  

I don't buy the one reason I have heard why kids would value a qualifier based on "their pride".  Those were my comments that you chose to comment upon.  

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

As I have said in a previous post, to approximately 25% of the schools, a top 50% playoff format adds only a little to the regular season, and this because of seeding, not qualification. These schools are perennial qualifiers, and are not worried about just getting into the playoffs. 

It’ll likely mean little to another 25% of the schools, the perennial cellar dwellers for whom winning a game in today’s tournament happens only by the grace of the ping pong balls.

But for the “middle” 50% or so, teams who ordinarily can’t win a sectional or conference championship, they now have something to strive for as a marker of success and achievement. More importantly, many of their regular season games takie on enormous significance as they flirt with the 50% qualification cutoff point. That’s the chief benefit of a qualification system. To bring playoff like atmosphere into the regular season.

My issue with your statement was "pride".  Perhaps to a few that losing in an opening playoff game there is "pride" because they made the tournament?  I would say it is negligible.  Bottom line, they are going home with no success in the tournament.  You may feel its a "consolation" prize to have made the tournament....but very few fall back on that as a measure of success.  And if they try to claim "pride" or some measure of success for making the playoffs and losing the opener as they tell the story to others, no one buys it.  No one.  

For those that have success in the playoffs, there is zero impact of pride for just making it in to the tournament.  NONE.  

The middle 50%....question.  How many people fill up college stadiums because their team may land at .500 and become bowl eligible?  Motivator?  Really?

53 minutes ago, Bobref said:

For a significant number of schools in Indiana, winning a conference or sectional championship is a once-in-a-generation pipe dream. A top 50% qualification format gives many of these kids a chance at an achievement that they can rightly point to with pride. It is all about the kids, remember.

What would a comparable level of achievement be now? I’m envisioning t-shirts in the school colors and the legend “Won a game in sectionals because the ping-pong balls matched us up with the Little Sisters of the Poor.”

My son was fortunate enough to play on a state championship and final four teams.  He competed his butt off in the MIC conference playing against stellar competition.  I assure you he has much pride in his team's accomplishments, and even more pride competing side by side with his teammates, learning critical life lessons that he's taken with him and applied to his life.  Playing in a tournament with a 50% team elimination from the start has ZERO impact on his level of pride.  ZERO. 

13 hours ago, Footballking16 said:

Never said it was a given that if a team starts 0-4 they will make it, but it doesn’t it doesn’t automatically end their season right there. 

 

Just because you played in a terrible qualifying format decades ago doesn’t mean a functioning and competitive format can’t exist today. Nobody is advocating for the old points or cluster system to return. Eliminating half the field at the conclusion of the regular isn’t a stretch by any means.

I understand it doesn't automatically end it for all schools, but going 0-4 will absolutely end it with SOME schools given their inability to have the same strength of schedule as teams in large metro areas.  I just showed you that with some teams this season and your response was for those teams to go play a tougher schedule.  As if its that easy for teams outside of large metro areas tp find more challenging opponents.  Your proposal absolutely  is a bias in the favor of schools in large metro areas that have an easier time scheduling more difficult opponents.  

You are ignoring the question I have asked you over and over.  How does your proposal make it a better experience for kids?  Tell me about your experience because I assume that if you played, your days had to fall under all-in.  How did that experience make it such a bad experience that you would want it changed.  Did you play?  Or is this solely from a "fan in the stands" perspective?

If you played under current system, and it was a less than desirable experience, sharing that view provides some additional credibility.

12 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

An added tenth regular season game gives teams more flexibility. Again, if all but 2 states in the Union can figure it out so can Indiana. 

 

Mailing it in is a choice. That’s a program/culture issue, not a postseason format issue. If you need an “entitled” postseason game to bring yourself to strap it up every Friday night you need to be taking a long hard look in the mirror.

I just challenged your comment about 0-4 teams making it in the tournament. It’s nowhere close to being a given they will always have a shot. 
 

I played in a qualifier system, my son did not. There is no way I can claim my experience was better than his. I’m curious, what is your experience playing in a qualifier system? Did it deepen your overall high school experience?  If so, why? 

4 hours ago, Footballking16 said:

Under my proposal, the field is cut in half AFTER the conclusion of the regular season. In a system that uses a computer ranking formulating W-L record, opp W-L record, SOS, and opponent SOS, no team is mathematically eliminated until the conclusion of the regular season. 
 

This kills the argument so many use about teams mailing it in after they start the year 0-3 or 0-4.

Based on regional location, not every team has the chance for the same SOS. It is a bias toward large metro area teams with easier scheduling opportunities. I showed you teams, some in large areas with 4 losses this season were eliminated using Sagarin. In less populated areas, teams with 2 losses were eliminated. Your answer…get a tougher schedule. That’s not is easy as it sounds for teams not located in larger metro areas. 
 

So yes, certain teams starting off seasons 0-4 can certainly mail it in. 

3 hours ago, Donnie Baker said:

Biggest win in school history and some guy with a man buns is bitching about the refs on Facebooks. 

1 hour ago, BTF said:

Not sure anyone is a good fit to be honest. I struggled coming up with Whiteland and Decatur Central.

Perhaps Whiteland may someday be in a conference with CG.....

3 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

Nobody is forcing Warsaw to play in the NLC. Warsaw isn’t alone either in that regard. As conferences are always changing and evolving, I think it makes a great deal of sense for schools like Warsaw, Penn, and Elkhart to branch out and start a new conference and do what they can to try and entice Carroll and Homestead. That becomes the premier northern conference almost instantly. And if we’re being honest, if Warsaw doesn’t get blown out by 4A Northwood or 5A Mishawaka, they’re likely in the top half of the field.
 

My playoff proposal includes an added 10th regular season which would greatly benefit a school like Warsaw if they were to stick it out in their current conference.

Both those teams would have qualified in a postseason format that effectively cuts the field in half at the conclusion of the regular season.

Understand the latter....while again, someone is telling a 7-2 team located in a different region of the state outside of the populated Indy metro area they are staying at home.

I don't think it is as easy as you claim changing conferences and traveling all over the northern part of the state.  That impacts all sports and middle schools as well.

You are absolutely entitled to your thoughts and there's some merit.  I think seeding (and that would be controversial to an extent) would at least allow teams to decide it on the field vs. an imperfect computer algorithm.  I completely agree with you that teams like Brownsburg and Ben Davis should not be meeting in the first game of the sectionals.

On 10/23/2022 at 11:26 AM, foxbat said:

Zionsville is a two-time runner-up for 5A to Cathedral before bumping up to 6A along with Cathedral.  In 2021 and 2020, they were 4-5 in the regular season before finishing 9-6 and 7-6, respectively, and a pair of red rings.

You are correct sir about the 4-5 and the trip to LOS, except that they got the red ring ... at least in 2021 and 2020.

Roncalli was 5-4 in 2002 (started season 0-4) and won the state championship.

Center Grove was 4-5 in 2019, and won red rings as the state runner up, losing in the finals to Carmel 20-17.

23 hours ago, Footballking16 said:

Warsaw and Elkhart played the second and third easiest schedules in 6A. Neither school has beat a 6A opponent the entire year and Warsaw got pumped by the their two toughest opponents. Both schools would be 1 or 2 win teams if they played an HCC or MIC schedule.

...and that's a big problem with your proposal.  Warsaw and Elkhart are not in Central Indiana, so they being a conference member of the MIC or HCC is not an option.  So why should a program be eliminated because of their regional location?  Of course they have a weaker schedule....they do not have the options to play stronger teams given their locations.

Maybe you are right in that they would have less wins in the MIC or HCC....but shouldn't that be proven on the field vs. a computer program that doesn't take into account their options for scheduling?  Especially, if the cut is an arbitrary 50% of an already small field of 32 teams to begin?

How would you feel if your son played for Warsaw and he was on the outside looking in, solely because of where the school is located and his team's scheduling options?

I took your arbitrary cut of 50% for 6A, to see that that would mean using Sagarin.  

Team eliminated (falling in the bottom 16)with their 2022 record include

• Warsaw 7-2
• Elkhart 7-2
• Homestead 5-4
• Zionsville 4-5
• Lake Central 4-5
• Columbus North 4-5

3 teams over .500 and 3 more teams on the cusp.  Eliminating them, what is the true benefit? I am not talking about your personal satisfaction....how does it benefit those kids, coaching staffs and communities?

Are you saying these teams cannot be competitive in the playoffs?

15 hours ago, Footballking16 said:

Unless you've been coaching Indiana High school football for nearly 30 years, no, you don't have any kind of experience or coaching in the regular season with playoff implications on the line. The all-in has been around for nearly 30 years, players and coaches today don't know any better or any other way because the all-in is all they know.

So no coaches on any staff in this state have any experience coaching in another state?? 

I know that isn’t the case for the head coaches at Brownsburg and CG. Guessing they aren’t alone. 
 

Bet many coaches have a better perspective on this issue than what you think. 

4 hours ago, BTF said:

Maybe I'm thinking of a different game. Wasn't it still undecided in the fourth quarter. You Indy guys crack me up. I mention one competitive game and you get all bent out of shape. 

Don’t believe Penn led in that game, but if you want to call a competitive game as a “near-win”, whatever…

Don’t mistake chuckling as one being bent out of shape….

3 hours ago, BTF said:

You've got a point there. Now we just need Penn to step up this year and take state............or at least make a good impression at Lucas. Indy has dominated 6A since it's inception with the exception of Penn's near win over Center Grove in 2015. Temp pisses me off when he says "show me." But he's right. 

Near win?  😆   I was LOS and must have saw a completely different game.  Wow..first time I have ever heard the game described as a near Penn win.

CG was undefeated that year....now Avon and CG in the semi-state playing a double OT game....now that was a near win for the Orioles.

20 hours ago, Footballking16 said:

I would feel as a player or coach, playing in potentially 4,5,6+ games with "playoff" implications sounds a hell of a lot better than being given an "entitled" playoff game. But that's just me. Players and coaches don't know any better because it's the way it's been for 30 years. 

I don't fathom a playoff scenario that cuts the field in half would ever exclude a team that goes 10-0. 

It's purely a money grab. That's not going to be the case for high school sports. When ESPN,Turner Sports, Fox, etc start paying to broadcast Indiana High School football we can talk. 

 

 

Again, I understand and appreciate how YOU feel.  Players and coaches don't know any better?  That was a joke right?  Especially directed toward the coaches......Not sure you can dismiss their input, at least so with credibility.

My team wasn't 10-0...but it was a 7-2 team and conference champion....and it didn't qualify.

Money grab...perhaps.  But the reason why revenue increases is because more people are invested with their teams involved, thus demand for in-person and TV escalates.  I can say with certainty that high school revenues for the playoffs have absolutely increased with the all-in vs a portion with the qualifier.  More $$ to both schools and the IHSAA.

4 hours ago, Bobref said:

Taking a big picture view … conferences form, break up, re-form. Old rivalries change with changing demographics and new rivalries emerge. It has always been that way.

You are ignoring a the reality that many schools in portions of this state have limited options for opponents, and traveling long distances is not a highly valued.

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

As well as all other professional and amateur sports leagues. You know, at some point when you insist that you’re right when everyone else in the world has looked at an issue and come out on the other side, you’ve got to look in the mirror.

And anyone who thinks that Indiana came up with the all in format because they made a careful evaluation and decided that was what was best for Indiana football, knows nothing of the history of the tournament.

Other than "other people do it".....what is the true benefit for the kids?  the Coaches?  I have asked this several time and get nothing in return.  I get how you feel as a fan.  But if we polled the players and coaches, how do you think they would respond?

I experienced the old playoff qualifying system.  It was really, really bad.  I get that a new qualifier would be an improvement over that system.  (I hope)

It is true professional and college sports have qualifiers for the post-season....but ever notice how over the years, they keep expanding the playoff field??  Obviously, they continue to see the need to improvement and inclusion.

BTW, Maryland is also now heavily considering an all-in football playoff system....maybe they benchmarked and like what the Indiana and Missouri systems offered their kids and coaches.....

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

Knock yourself out. But I’m skeptical about any conclusions you might draw, since they will be based on the schools’ schedules as they presently exist. Implementation of a qualification format will result in many scheduling changes.

I can see that...and that did happen under the old qualifying format many years ago.  But changing schedules isn't easy for some....certain regions are currently limited to playing options.  Travelling large distances may not be an option.  And if they can find different opponents, it may be to the detriment of local rivalries.  The latter is something I personally experienced.  

Temp,

You lost me with this statement.....

Carmel - The 'Hounds slipped up late against Warren before dominating a good LC team on senior night to regain momentum heading into the tournament.  They will get a hungry Westfield team in round 1 that is hungry to prove they belong in the 6A conversation after two consecutive semi-state crowns at the 5A level.

Westfield won consecutive 6A semi-state crowns, playing CG in the 6A state finals the last 2 years........not 5A

7 hours ago, Coach Nowlin said:

I have seen that track resume,  my guess is folks just focused on weight vs production and attributes and scared off of the 170-180 pound frame he carried at the time.   His quick twitch is very useful 

I guess Coach...just shows recruiting is hardly an exact science.  Guessing the experts hit more than they miss...but sometimes they are really off the mark.

Diamonds in the rough are what make good teams, great.  The Boilers sure got a diamond right out of southern Indiana.

2 hours ago, Bobref said:

Looked like pretty much of a clean whiff to me.

Shocking....man, did not see that one coming......

53 minutes ago, DumfriesYMCA said:

Simple idea 

 

1) KEEP all in format 

2) coaches of a sectional are in charge of seeding. 

3) coaches determine who the top 50% of the sectional is and seed only those 2-4 teams

4) the other 2-4 teams are random draw for who they play 

everyone is happy 

I vote we go with coin tosses....worked for Odessa Permian and Midland Lee.......

Congrats Cathedral!  Shake hands....move on!!  See ya next year if not sooner.

Time for the playoffs!!

12 hours ago, Coach Nowlin said:

check out his PU bio, wonder if our Titan Friends around these parts had some nightmares about him, I bet Brady Allen gave the staff a solid vouch for him as well, I believe Allen would of been a JR when he was SR at Booneville.   

https://purduesports.com/sports/football/roster/devin-mockobee/11411

 

419 yds against GS on 28 carries??  Wow!

Did you see his track accomplishments?  Ist in state long jump....2nd in high hurdles.

How did so many miss out on this tremendous athlete????  (recruiting world and colleges)