Footballking16

5 minutes ago, DT said:

If you seeded sectionals top to bottom, you would have a plethora of first round blowouts.  Attendance would be down statewide as the outcome is predetermined.  The blind draw keeps the first round interesting.  A few early tournament blowouts could lull a very good team to sleep, setting one up for a sectional championship round letdown.

There are very few upsets in high school football.  Many comparisons are made to professional sport seeding, but pro sports are controlled by salary caps that limit the gap between the very best and the very worst.  The gap between the best and the worst in Indiana class sports is massive.  Upsets simply do not happen.

The blind draw gives you the best of both worlds.  It limits the amount of first round blowouts, and provides for some very compelling matchups at the same time.

I would like to see conference champions rewarded with an automatic home berth in the opening round in recognition of their regular season success.  

 

 

You know what limits first round blowouts? A qualifying format. Seeding the sectionals appropriately would justify the means to eliminate half the field after the conclusion of the regular season. It's perhaps the only reason why the IHSAA has implemented a blind draw. It's not right. The blind draw waters down the entire postseason and renders the regular season meaningless. 

1 minute ago, tango said:

And the school gets it share of the revenue from all Sectional games.  This is one of the factors the "qualifier proponents" can't adequately address.  

Add a tenth regular season game and there's that problem solved. Whose to say schools that haven't qualified for the playoffs can't play a "bowl game" the week the playoff's start and split that revenue 50-50 instead of 4 to 8 different ways? Not implementing a qualifier at the sake of schools not receiving a quarter of gate revenue (for an already watered down system) isn't a good reason to stick with the all-in, blind draw.

Just now, DT said:

Isn't it logical that a team is fresher and healthier in Week 10 than in Week 12, and likely playing its best football at that point in the regular season?  If its inevitable that the top two teams will determine who is eventually sectional champ, why not get it out of the way in Week 10 when both teams are fully playoff ready?

Sure. Let's have de-facto state championships in round 1 and then try and enjoy a watered down postseason as it extends. Seems fun. I enjoy 50 point blowouts in the state finals as much as the next guy.

2 minutes ago, gahoosierfan said:

I haven't researched this, but I doubt there are few other states that use a blind draw in the football playoffs. Georgia certainly doesn't and I don't think any neighboring states here do. No NCAA football playoffs use a blind draw. Indiana is always way behind the rest of the country in most things and this is another example of that. 

Try zero states. Nobody but Indiana uses an all-in, blind draw format. I believe Minnesota is the only other state with an all-in format, but it's seeded.

3 minutes ago, Trojanmp52 said:

Lets say you have a lot of injury's the start of the year and have to play some young kids and lose a the first 3  or 4 games  but by the end of the regular session you are one of the best team in the state and  you get some key guys back and the younger kids take off but you  do not make the playoffs due to the fact you had kids hurt in the regular season.

That's called life. Every other state in the country has that part figured out.

2 minutes ago, Coach Nowlin said:

I have coached in this system we currently have my entire career (since 2003, or 1999 if you count Film Engineer) and not one time have I had a sense that the 9 games we played/coached in were "meaningless"   

I have had teams that you preach and preach stay patient, we will get healthier, we are playing tough teams now, but come week 10 it will pay off like in 2006, we finished regular season 3-6.

 

2006 SEASON (6-7)
Coach: Chris Meeks
Aug. 18		North Newton	W	61	0
Aug. 25	at	Kankakee Valley	L	12	24
Sep. 1		North Judson	L	0	3
Sep. 8	at	Tipton	L	7	28
Sep. 15	at	Twin Lakes	L	9	41
Sep. 22		West Lafayette	W	16	14
Sep. 29	at	Delphi	L	6	14
Oct. 6		Sheridan	L	17	34
Oct. 13		Benton Central	W	33	6
Oct. 20	at	Knox	W	23	0		sect
Oct. 27		North Judson	W	16	7		sect
Nov. 3	at	Hammond Noll	W	20	7		sect
Nov. 10		Jimtown	L	9	13		regn

 

 

or 2008 finishing 4-5 on the year: 

2008 SEASON (7-6)
Coach: Chris Meeks
Aug. 22	at	Kankakee Valley	W	35	14
Aug. 29		North Newton	W	53	0
Sep. 5		North Judson	L	14	28
Sep. 12	at	Tipton	L	7	26
Sep. 19	at	Twin Lakes	W	32	24
Sep. 26		West Lafayette	L	25	35
Oct. 3	at	Delphi	W	45	7
Oct. 10		Sheridan	L	7	42
Oct. 17		Benton Central	L	0	35
Oct. 24	at	Hammond Noll	W	54	24		sect
Oct. 31		Winamac	W	55	27		sect
Nov. 7	at	North Judson	W	9	0		sect
Nov. 14		Lewis Cass	L	14	30		regn

Meaningless in the sense that nothing you do in the regular season impacts your chances in the postseason. Go undefeated and you can play another undefeated team in your opening game. Go winless and there's a chance you can play a 1 win team the opening weekend. That ain't right. The postseason draw should impacted by the regular season. It isn't. It's a glorified 9 week exhibition. 

1 minute ago, Gipper said:

As I have always maintained, no one gets all the cards.  Sometimes the football gods are on your side, sometimes not so much...

That's only because we continue to allow it to happen lol. If this were any other state in the country, Avon gets a protected seed or bye and they aren't playing the second best in the state the opening weekend. Avon/Brownsburg is only allowed to happen because we continue to allow it to happen. That's why I'm advocating change, to make the regular season actually mean something. 

8 minutes ago, Gipper said:

Exactly.  If your team is so tough, prove it.

It's not about proving how tough your team is, it's about making the regular season mean something. What value is there in a conference title that doesn't get you a protected seed or a bye in the first round and at the very worst doesn't even guarantee you a home game in the first round? Avon is a game away from going undefeated in one of the toughest conferences in the state. Their reward? Drawing an away game against the second best team in the state the opening weekend. It's maddening. It's wrong. Show me another sport at any level where a conference championship doesn't impact your postseason draw. You can't.

2 minutes ago, Bobref said:

It’s like you’re right there in my head. 😀

-add tenth regular season game

-formulate a rating system that effectively cuts ~half the field in half at the conclusion of the regular season (32 teams 1A-4A; 16 in 5A-6A)

-Once the field is established; split the top half into a "Northern Bracket" and the remaining half into a "Southern Bracket" and seed accordingly (1-16 1A-4A; 1-8 in 5A-6A North and South)

-neutral site semi-state games played as double headers 

-State finals Thanksgiving weekend at Lucas Oil Stadium stays the same

This not only enhances high school football in the state of Indiana, but gives the regular season actual meaning.   

9 hours ago, vicvinegar said:

I could careless if the sectionals were seeded, but because of what footballtalking said is why I don't support it. Why do you want to take another week of football away from kids? Especially in 5A and 6A? So that way only 16 teams make it per class? That sounds real fun! 

Add a tenth regular season game and your problem is solved. Not that hard of a concept really.

2 minutes ago, jets said:

That’s the problem with trying to gain any traction with the seeding discussion- you “qualification” nuts (ie Bobref) always try and make it about that. 

Lets start with making what we have better- and that’s seeding the sectionals. And it’s really pretty simple 

Avon/Brownsburg is a game that a minimum should be played at the regional level, if not SS or the finals. Only Indiana does the #1 team in the state who went undefeated and won their conference get to play on the on the road in the first round of the postseason, against the 2nd best team in the state no less. That’s unfathomable. It’s wrong.

I fully support the IHSAA seeding the sectionals because it’s the first step to a qualification format which I fully endorse. The number of blowouts in round 1 if the sectionals were seeded properly would only further the case for a qualification system. In fact I believe that is the ONLY reason why the sectionals aren’t seeded, because the IHSAA would then have to justify the current all-in format.

4 minutes ago, BCstate said:

Why? Big games will draw big crowds whether it’s game one or sectional championship. 

Not if every team is playing at the same time thanks to the all-in format.

2 minutes ago, wrcsage said:

The blind draw is what it is.  You really have to just take what you get and go with it.  I’m not sure how you fix it?  You can’t use sagarin ratings to seed it in my opinion...too many variables there.  You have to beat the teams in front of you to win in the tournament...not sure what else you can do?

There’s plenty you can do, seeding the sectionals is a start. Every single state in the Union has figured out a rating system that determines qualification to the postseason with the exception of Indiana. It ain’t rocket science.

Seeding the sectionals would be the starting domino to a qualification system that eliminates half the field after the conclusion of the regular season.

3 minutes ago, BCstate said:

Have to beat ‘em sometime. 

That’s irrelevant. The current format renders the regular season meaningless.

13 hours ago, DT said:

Carmel does not travel particularly well either.  Ive seen some sparse Copper Kettle crowds at Center Grove on the CA side over the years.

I think Carmel would travel better in The HCC.  More natural geographic rivals 

Wait a second...wasn’t the entire premise of this thread for Carmel and CG to leave the MIC because their other conference foes don’t travel well (ie pull their weight like CG and Carmel)????

Now Carmel doesn’t travel particularly well either? 

Geez you’re all over the place.

This did get to 7 pages, congrats I guess?

15 minutes ago, DT said:

Looks like we have a lot of massively overbuilt high school football facilities at a huge an unnecessary cost to state taxpayers

 

Really hurts your "MIC fans don't travel narrative" doesn't it?

2 minutes ago, cg_holmeaid said:

Don’t be surprised if an HCC team takes state this year or next

Wouldn't be shocked in the least. Still doesn't override the nearly three decade long run of dominance the MIC is on.

14 minutes ago, Temptation said:

Let's settle on this:

MIC = HISTORICAL dominance

HCC = CURRENT dominance.

 

Win a few state titles, heck make it to the state finals and we can start to about the HCC closing the gap. A few regular season wins over Pike, North Central, and Lawrence Central does signal current dominance. You still don't know what the word means. 

7 minutes ago, Temptation said:

How about CURRENTLY dominant?  Does that work for you?

How dare I use data points from the last 7 weeks to fit a "narrative?"

They have been better this year as in terms of record. That in no way, shape, or form speaks to the dominance that the MIC currently has over the HCC. It's not comparable, you cannot use a small sample space such as 7 games to offset the significant gap between the two conferences. 

Just now, Temptation said:

Based on current resumes, I'd say 5-2 (2 points away from 6-1) is how I begin to define "dominant."

That's recency bias, that is not the definition of dominant by any stretch of means. I don't think you know what the word dominant means. You're picking a select (and small sample at that) to push a narrative that doesn't exist. 

3 minutes ago, Temptation said:

Just using the most recent data, that's all.  The argument is how far the gap is based on current resumes, no?  Or are you going to change it after the state finals (should an HCC team win) stating that they now need to win 6 in a row to unseat the mighty MIC?

A conference/team is only as good as the current data shows it is.  One year does not make a pattern but you cannot deny that the gap has closed and its not that far fetched to state that its even or even leaning in the other direction.

Once again, we just seem to have differing definitions of the word "dominant."  I use current data while you want to bring the past decade into it.  

Let's talk RIGHT NOW.  The results speak for themselves.

 

How else do you define "dominant"?

16/19 titles in football is dominant. It's actually more than dominant.

The last 2 basketball finals have been all-MIC and the MIC has won 6/10 titles including the last 3 and are huge favorites to 4peat. That's dominant.

What is your definition of dominant?

1 minute ago, Temptation said:

A long way huh?  So on field results don't matter?  

Avon beat BD handily. (1-0)

Brownsburg controlled the game against BD and held on.  (2-0)

Fishers crushed North Central.  (3-0)

Zionsville beat Pike.  (4-0)

HSE beat Lawrence Central.  (5-0)

NC beat HSE by ONE.  (5-1)

Carmel crushed Noblesville.  (5-2)

 

I understand still being skeptical but a "LONG way?"  Come on.  Stop living in fantasy land over at Cathedral....

 

One season does not define a conference LOL. You're extrapolating data from 7 games in a single year that in no way defines that gap between the HCC and the MIC. The two conference's in terms of success really aren't comparable at this juncture. If this pattern keeps up for another 3-5 years, then yes you can make a legitimate argument. Until then....stop.

1 minute ago, Temptation said:

Just curious if Avon or Brownsburg wins the state title next month if you will still claim the MIC is dominant?  Or will you simply down play it and claim it was a "down year" in the MIC?

I agree we need to see more but the writing is on the wall.  It's a matter of WHEN and not IF...

If Avon or Brownsburg win the state title this year I will congratulate either one on a great season while still acknowledging the that the HCC has a LONG way to go before catching up to the MIC. Basketball there's an even wider gap. The ACC won the CFB playoff last year but is still light years behind the SEC. 

4 minutes ago, DT said:

I think there is a perception that CG needs BD and WC to push them to compete at the highest possible level.  I believe that was the case when Coach Moore arrived in Greenwood.  There was such a huge gap between the mega schools and everyone else that the BD/WC measuring stick applied to any school that wanted to reach the pinnacle of the big school classification.

Times have changed, as has the competitive landscape.  The gap between the megas and the next tier has evaporated.  CG has reached the level of both BD and WC, some might say surpassed them, and no longer needs both as the measuring stick for success .  CG now "is" the measuring stick, to some degree.

The HCC will bring great competition, as good or better overall then The MIC, and significantly higher football gate revenues, as well as much better competition in nearly all other sports.  

 

Are perceptions not realities too? Ever think Center Grove is now the "measuring stick" because they compete and beat the remaining top competition by playing in the TOUGHEST conference? 

11 minutes ago, DT said:

Look 5 to 10 years out, even 20 to 30 years out.  That is what schools do when evaluating conference alignment.  Its not about today or 5 years ago or 10 years ago.  The HCC is a conference that is filling up quickly with 3000 plus student schools.  Thats already 600 students larger than CG.  I believe that we will start to see some decay in the big township schools over this same period, with enrollments declining and athletic performance slipping.  You will also likely see better coaching emerge in The HCC as coaches see the conference as the better and more competitive long term choice.  

And I've been hearing that for years. These HCC school enrollments have been rapidly increasing for over a decade, not just now, and the needle is hardly being pushed. Yes, Avon and Brownsburg have made some headway, but the MIC continues to dominate both basketball and football. Warren Central and Ben Davis aren't going anywhere unless the split high schools (which they won't). If anything, these donut county schools are going to have to split eventually to accommodate the growing populations and it's going to hurt their athletic prowess more than it helps. There's already talk of a third Fishers high school opening, Westfield could very well split into two high schools 10-15 years down the road, and so on and so on. I think it's more than likely you see Lawrence township consolidate to one high school down the road which from an athletic standpoint probably helps that district and North Central has come out of nowhere under the right guidance to show they can potentially become a major player in the MIC.