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

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Blind Draw - An Absolute Tragedy


Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, 77Jimmie said:

Well.   My turn.

I would be in for lengthening the season to 10 games, then qualify the top 32 teams in each class.    Best of all worlds.

Some of us remember the Cluster System, and the Points System before that.  Both were perceived as flawed.   The Cluster was only planned for a two year cycle because the All In was coming down the track.  The problem people had with the Cluster System was that if you lost to a cluster team in the regular season, that could keep you out of the tournament.   In my opinion, what a better way to put importance on regular season games.  No taking it easy there.   

Now the Points System was another matter.   We can thank South Bend St. Joe for the demise of that.  They went undefeated like two years in a row and didn't make the playoffs because their opponents "points" didn't add up to enough for them to beat out some other teams in their "district.'   The first year Jimtown made the tournament they wouldn't have went unless Wes-Del lost a game.  If both teams went undefeated, Wed-Del would have acquired more points.  First go-around for Indiana, and it wasn't the greatest, but it did create the tournament.

Now.   If this happens, this thread will morph from "Who is best playing who is second best in the first round," to "That's not fair how the qualifiers were chosen."   We will have gone a full circle back to the early '70's.  🙂   Albeit with better technology so we will probably do a better job.   But it won't be perfect.  There will still be a lot of complaints, and that's what this forum is about.   Discussion.

Now.   Pull out your wallets and become a BOOSTER!   🙂

 

The fatal flaw in both systems was that they did not have enough teams in the playoffs. This led to the inequities you pointed out. A "top 50%" qualification system fixes those flaws and, I agree with you, would be optimal in terms of both "fairness" and making the regular season much, much more meaningful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TrojanDad said:

in you opinion.

I struggle with your comments because I lived under both today's current system and back under the qualifying system.  Football in Indiana is significantly improved today than it was back then under qualifying.  

I have no problem with seeding teams and actually think we should....but you need to convince me for example how a 6A football tournament will be better reducing it down from 32 teams.  

In high school, regular season injuries to one or 2 key players can wreck a team.  I would rather see a team with its stars back playing in the playoffs, then those stars watching games on TV or in the stands.  Has nothing to do any "welfare" mentality, and everything to do with quality.

There's a huge gap between the old cluster system and today's all-in. The old cluster system only included a small percentage of schools and you had to win your cluster to get in and it left out many good and/or deserving teams. It would be like saying only the winner of the MIC made it to the playoffs even though in any given year there's 6 or 7 MIC teams that deserve to get in.

If the IHSAA were to move to a qualifier today you would have to think inclusion would have to be at least 50% of an entire class and the qualification system would use a rating system, not W-L record. 

The IHSAA compounded and already bad system to an even worse system by going to the all-in, they went to the complete opposite end of the spectrum to appease the masses. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

The IHSAA compounded and already bad system to an even worse system by going to the all-in, they went to the complete opposite end of the spectrum to appease the masses. 

From what I've heard of the cluster system I'm not sure it's better than the all-in system we have today. But they are in on the same end of the spectrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JustRules said:

From what I've heard of the cluster system I'm not sure it's better than the all-in system we have today. But they are in on the same end of the spectrum.

I wasn't around for it, but from my father and uncles who all played in that era, many deserving teams were left out. It ultimately crowned a champion just like the all-in but because good teams were left out it became a pretty watered down tournament similar to the blind draw where some of the best teams knock each other out in the first few rounds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

I wasn't around for it, but from my father and uncles who all played in that era, many deserving teams were left out. It ultimately crowned a champion just like the all-in but because good teams were left out it became a pretty watered down tournament similar to the blind draw where some of the best teams knock each other out in the first few rounds. 

I believe the clusters were only 4 teams so you made the playoffs based on 3 games of the 10 you played. If you went 9-1 but your 1 loss was to another 2-1 cluster team that finished 6-4 overall you were out and they were in. That's too small of a sample size compared to the overall length of the schedule and too small of a group qualifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

that is a huge assumption....huge and perhaps giving the IHSAA too much credit.

Again, how does it improve football by reducing 6A down from 32 teams?  I want injured stars to be given the chance to heal and a team player closer to full strength.  How would reducing teams vs. seeding teams improve quality?

I just think it makes for a much stronger and more competitive tournament, especially in 6A. It's no secret that in most years the best teams in 6A are in Indy and because of the current format, you see de-facto state titles in the early rounds. Here is what 6A would like like under my proposed qualifier system if the tournament were to start tomorrow. (Using Calpreps to factor in out of state competition) 

Avon

Brownsburg

Fishers (*)

Homestead (*)

Lafayette Jeff (*)

Westfield (*)

North Central

Carmel (*)

HSE (*)

Warren

Ben Davis

Center Grove

Franklin Central

Merrillville (*)

Southport

Snider (*)

The 8 most Northern teams would make up the top half of the bracket  (*). Matchup's would be

North

#8 Snider @ # 1Fishers

#5 Carmel @ #4 Westfield

#6 HSE @ #3 Lafayette Jefferson

#7 Merrillville @ #2 Homestead

South

#8 Southport @ #1 Avon

#5 Ben Davis @ #4 Warren

#6 Center Grove @ #3 North Central

#7 Franklin Central @ #2 Brownsburg

I don't see how anyone could argue with those match-ups and the competitiveness throughout the entire tournament.  

Edited by Footballking16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TrojanDad said:

I didn't look at this in detail, but this eliminates Columbus East and Columbus North.  Beating those teams is not a given.  CG opens up sectional play at CE and history would tell us those games are barnburners.  Eliminating those 2 teams to me does not improve quality for the tournament.  

That's if the tournament started today.

Remember under my proposal the regular season would be extended an additional week. Currently East and North sit 17th and 18th respectively in Calpreps. Very really chance they could still play their way in or move up if some teams lost in front of them. This is what I mean by adding real value to the regular season. These last 2 weeks for schools like East and North and then schools like Snider and Southport who are clinging on life support would be like playoff atmospheres. It enhances the regular season tenfold. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

that is a huge assumption....huge and perhaps giving the IHSAA too much credit.

Again, how does it improve football by reducing 6A down from 32 teams?  I want injured stars to be given the chance to heal and a team player closer to full strength.  How would reducing teams vs. seeding teams improve quality?

I suppose the fact that CG has had a star injured all season who might make it back for the playoffs has nothing to do with your thoughts. This is what I mean when I say that everyone is looking out for their own team, and no one is looking out for the sport in general.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Right now, using Sagarin ratings as an example, the #16 team in 6A is Merrillville. The #17 team is FW Carroll. However, Carroll is playing 4A Wayne, who is 0-8, this Friday. Should be an easy win for them. Merrillville, on the other hand, plays Chesterton who is 6-2. In a top 16 format (for 6A), since Merrillville can readily assume Carroll will win their game Friday, the Pirates' game with Chesterton could very well determine whether they make the playoffs or not. So they would pull out all the stops to win that one. Instead, they know the game means essentially nothing to them. So they will play conservatively, not wanting to show their first round playoff opponent anything, and hoping that no one will get hurt. The Merrillville fans are not particularly excited about the game since even with a win, Merrillville can't enhance their playoff position (no seeding, the draw is already done), and can't win their conference championship. So it becomes a ho-hum game where, if playoff qualification was hanging in the balance, it would be anything but. Multiply that scenario times games like that all over the state all during the last half of the season, and you have a much, much more exciting high school football scene. Simply put, a qualification scenario turns many, many regular season games into playoff-type atmosphere games. And that is good for Indiana football.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bobref said:

I suppose the fact that CG has had a star injured all season who might make it back for the playoffs has nothing to do with your thoughts. This is what I mean when I say that everyone is looking out for their own team, and no one is looking out for the sport in general.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Right now, using Sagarin ratings as an example, the #16 team in 6A is Merrillville. The #17 team is FW Carroll. However, Carroll is playing 4A Wayne, who is 0-8, this Friday. Should be an easy win for them. Merrillville, on the other hand, plays Chesterton who is 6-2. In a top 16 format (for 6A), since Merrillville can readily assume Carroll will win their game Friday, the Pirates' game with Chesterton could very well determine whether they make the playoffs or not. So they would pull out all the stops to win that one. Instead, they know the game means essentially nothing to them. So they will play conservatively, not wanting to show their first round playoff opponent anything, and hoping that no one will get hurt. The Merrillville fans are not particularly excited about the game since even with a win, Merrillville can't enhance their playoff position (no seeding, the draw is already done), and can't win their conference championship. So it becomes a ho-hum game where, if playoff qualification was hanging in the balance, it would be anything but. Multiply that scenario times games like that all over the state all during the last half of the season, and you have a much, much more exciting high school football scene. Simply put, a qualification scenario turns many, many regular season games into playoff-type atmosphere games. And that is good for Indiana football.

 

Exactly.

I'm a frequent reader of Yappi over in Ohio and their site is like this the last 4 or 5 weeks. It just a much more exciting product because there is much more on the line when talking about the regular season. They think I'm nuts whenever I bring up the fact that Indiana has an all-in. Then I half have the heart to tell them it's not only an all-in, it's a blind draw. They can't get over it.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

No...but I can sure think of a Roncalli team a few years back that lost some key people. started out the season 0-4 and ended up winning the state title.  I bet they are hardly alone when it comes to teams that have been absolutely competitive in the tournament after getting key players back healthy.

I can't speak to the exact year but would have to imagine that Roncalli would have been rated in the top half of 4A in any kind of analytic or advanced rating system even starting 0-4. That's why W-L record would never exclusively be the deciding or mitigating factor. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is nothing more than deja vu all over again.  This is the annual, let's discriminate against "unworthy" teams.  How about we just leave things alone and let things play out.  A seeding wouldn't be a bad idea but it's not totally necessary.  You're going to have to play the best somewhere along the line.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6a scenario strengthens my belief that we should keep the all-in format. Just seed it and deal with the early round blowouts or just seed the Top 2. Eliminating Carroll or Snider in would cause anarchy in Fort Wayne. Snider has the potential to beat anyone in the field. Their 8th seed is justified due to losses to Homestead and Dwenger, but they are dangerous team. For all I know, Dwenger and Homestead could be two of the top 5 teams in the state............we will find out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

Perhaps. Debatable. 2002 Season. Started off with losses to CG, Franklin Central, Chatard and Cincy Elder (hammered). Victories over Elkhart Central, Whiteland, Columbus OH St Charles and Indpls Manual. Would that be enough?  

Started 0-4...went 10-4 and beat FW Dwenger in state championship 

 

In a rating system that accounted for SOS, opponent SOS, W-L record, and opponent W-L most definitely. I’ve seen Cathedral start 0-4, 1-3 on many occasions and they’re always still in the top 10 of Sagarin or Calpreps.

Center Grove went 8-1 and reached SS

Franklin Central went undefeated during the regular season and lost in the sectional finals.

Chatard was an undefeated state champion

And Elder was one of the best teams in the entire country and went 14-1 and won the D1 title in Ohio. In fact, the following year Elder was #1 in the country and got blown out by Warren and Desmond Tardy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

Big maybe....their 3 state regular season wins were over 5-7 Whiteland, 4-7 Manual, 4-7 Elkhart Central. 

They still played by far and away the toughest schedule in 4A. Cathedral was 4-5 going into the postseason last year and still was a top 5 Sagarin rated team the entire year.

I would bet any amount of money that a 5-4 Roncalli team in 2002 that played CG, Franklin Central, Chatard, and Cincy Elder was rated in the top half in 4A in Sagarinand would even go so far to say they were top 10.  

Heck this years Roncalli team who started 0-4 (currently 3-5) is ranked 17th in 4A Sagarin and hasn’t played near the schedule the 02 team played.

Edited by Footballking16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

John Harrell’s site had them 4-4 regular season, and 10-4 overall with 6 playoff wins. Not sure why only 8 regular season games. 

You and I don’t align they would have had such a high ranking with in-state wins over non-ranked teams with a combined 13-21 record. 

Look at comparable scenarios? It’s all about SOS and opponent SOS. Cathedral is ALWAYS a top 5-10 Sagarin rated team because of their schedule. They were 4-5 heading into the postseason last year and still a top 5 Sagarin rated team.

This years 3-5 Roncalli team is rated 17th in Sagarin and they’re nowhere near as good as the 02 team and haven’t played a tenth of the schedule the 02 team played. 

Luers at 2-6 is rated 15th in 2A and it’s all because they play teams outside their class.

Edited by Footballking16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/13/2019 at 8:25 PM, slice60 said:

IHSAA will always do Blind Draw.  In every sport.

And every team will always be included in the postseason tournament. In every sport.

If they seeded or decreased the tournament field based on whatever criteria, the exact same people would be bitching about the seeds anyway.

END OF DISCUSSION.

 

Except for wrestling. And don't say that affects only individuals, as team results are a direct reflection of how each individual performs in a seeded format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TrojanDad said:

So looking at Roncalli's 2002 team....they won games their 3 in-state games over unranked teams with a combined 13-21 record, but lost to some pretty good teams in the regular season....and that's good enough for a playoff qualifier?  And that is helping the quality of football how??

Would be interesting to see under your format who would actually be eliminated......

Again, I think the state could improve the quality of the playoffs with seeding teams....you believe elimination of teams is warranted prior to the playoffs.  Guessing we are simply not going to align.  I just know with many excellent teams....they can be on a roll at the end of a season....and also hate that injuries be the reason a high school kid doesn't experience that stage.

My format for a qualification system:

-add tenth regular season game

-eliminate half the field using a rating system that calculates W-L, opp W-L, SOS (including out of state), Opp SOS (including out of state) adding a caveat that a team must win 40% of their regular season games to qualify

I will submit brackets after the conclusion of Friday's game using Calpreps as the rating system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TrojanDad said:

Again, I think the state could improve the quality of the playoffs with seeding teams....you believe elimination of teams is warranted prior to the playoffs.  Guessing we are simply not going to align.  I just know with many excellent teams....they can be on a roll at the end of a season....and also hate that injuries be the reason a high school kid doesn't experience that stage.

I agree with you there, but seeding is a by-product of a qualifier. If teams were seeded accordingly, you would see 100+ blowouts the opening round of sectionals and you’d have to ask yourself, “why do we include these teams”.

If you seed the sectionals to preserve the better games for later rounds, it’s going to be a charade.

Edited by Footballking16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching dudes from CHATARD and CATHEDRAL battling back and forth and drawing up proposals to make the tournament system more "fair" is the ultimate sign of irony.

Keep up the good work fellas...🙄

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...