Jump to content
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $3,162.05 of $3,600 target

Cinderella is a myth


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Sign me up for the travel mug.

I don’t find the analogy of a single weekend event to a multi-month long football season particularly apt.

Perhaps not, but it points to potential mindset in competition.  Might be nothing, but could also end up falling in that unintended consequences arena.  May be nothing at all, but also might also be in the same vein that teams facing 0-4 in a qualifier are impacted negatively in the rest of the season.  Anecdotally, and perhaps statistically, there seems to be a fairly decent correlation between fans that leave games early and fans that stop buying tickets later on in the season if the team has no chances of post season play or, in college environments, getting a bowl berth.  That's a single event propensity vs. an over-time propensity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, foxbat said:

I haven't seen this argument put forth by anyone ... at least not on GID.

Maybe prefaced that wrong. There have been several inclinations, many on this thread alone, that suggests teams would start mailing it in after starting 0-4, as if the all-in is the single motivating factor for keeping teams intact. Would you disagree with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, oldtimeqb said:

Close. 

For a school with ONE winning season in its 49 year history, a qualification format would be a once-in-two-generation pipe dream.  Prior to this year, they had a collective 1-37 tournament record.

http://www.almanacsports.com/football/team.php?team=PIKEC

 

T shirt.jpg

Where can I buy one of those shirts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bash Riprock said:

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. 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

Maybe prefaced that wrong. There have been several inclinations, many on this thread alone, that suggests teams would start mailing it in after starting 0-4, as if the all-in is the single motivating factor for keeping teams intact. Would you disagree with that?

I would not disagree with that idea that a 0-4 start with a qualifier could provide a persistent damper to a season.  I've seen it play out in a qualifier state.  It's not everyone, but there are are some.  If there's the idea that a qualifier makes teams "fight like mad" during the season and "makes the season more meaningful," then I'm not sure why some would feel that the opposite is also not a possibility as well ... that is, that a team gets deflated when the season is essentially over ... even if it happens midway through the season.  I'm not saying that the all-in keeps teams playing at peak, but, coming out of Texas where qualifiers are life, I certainly have seen evidence of a qualifier putting out fires in a team's season earlier in a season.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, foxbat said:

I would not disagree with that idea that a 0-4 start with a qualifier could provide a persistent damper to a season.  I've seen it play out in a qualifier state.  It's not everyone, but there are are some.  If there's the idea that a qualifier makes teams "fight like mad" during the season and "makes the season more meaningful," then I'm not sure why some would feel that the opposite is also not a possibility as well ... that is, that a team gets deflated when the season is essentially over ... even if it happens midway through the season.  I'm not saying that the all-in keeps teams playing at peak, but, coming out of Texas where qualifiers are life, I certainly have seen evidence of a qualifier putting out fires in a team's season earlier in a season.

 

And why I will continue to maintain that if you need an entitled postseason game to bring yourself to show up 100% every week, you’re part of a bigger problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Bash Riprock said:

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.

There are many ways you could implement a seeded system. One suggestion I would make is have each team's schedule based on the sectional you are assigned to (5A/6A would probably play a regional schedule rather than a sectional schedule). This would give you 6-7 sectional games. You then have 3-4 non-sectional games (assuming 10 game regular season) to continue traditional rivals. That way qualifying and seeding is based entirely on your regular season results. You could have the top 4 teams from each sectional/region qualify (6 if you want to have more teams participate and the top 2 teams have byes) play with #4 at #1 and #3 at #2. If you don't want to start with teams you played during the regular season you could have #1 from one sectional play #4 from the next sectional and so forth. The higher seeded team in regional and semi-state host and have some kind of tie-breaker or top/bottom bracket to determine home team.

I played multiple sports in a very similar system. The excitement it creates is the 3-4 weeks of the season and you are playing for a playoff spot and seeding. The same excitement you see around games like Owen Valley-Gibson Southern, Brownsburg Ben Davis, etc. you'll see in those late season games. Today they are playing for the win so they aren't meaningless. But you extend the excitement around tournament games into the regular season. The other big benefit is you are rewarded in the tournament for your success during the season. There are instaces of highly ranked teams traveling to 0/1/2 win teams in the first round. This week Fishers in hosting HSE. Granted it's a short drive and the environment will be heavy with fans from both teams, but HSE has earned the right to host that game. Same with Whiteland at Franklin and New Prairie at Hobart. It's also crazy that Center Grove has to travel to Columbus North, Brownsburg at Avon, and Sheridan at Hagerstown. The visiting team probably still wins those games, but they have definitely earned the right to host the sectional final game over their opponents due to their regular season schedule. Granted there is a very good chance they wouldn't be facing those opponents if it was a qualifier with seeding.

Under the current system the main thing an 0-4 team is playing for is the HOPE they get to draw the other 0-4 or 1-3 team in the first round. If they have that record because of injuries and have players coming back they will have the same hope under either system. It's pretty rare for a team to start 0-4 and make a tournament run. It does happen but it's not enough to base your post season tournament on it. The MAIN reason the IFCA won't support a change is a large number of coaches want to have hope they will draw other poor teams if they have a bad season. No other competition anywhere outside of Indiana has a tournament like this at any level of any competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.  

Edited by Bash Riprock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2022 at 8:39 AM, Bash Riprock said:

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.  

Theoretically if half the teams qualify most of the teams on the bubble would be 5-5. If you had super competitive sectional it's possible someone with a 6-4 doesn't get in. But if you put in a system like I suggested, that takes Sagarin out of it and you are basing your qualifier on sectional record only. It essentially makes the entire season (at least the sectional regular season games) an all-in format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have the Greatest most Democratic playoff system in the Country..... Why would we ever want to change it? I as a Coach Love it! Of course there are rarely Cinderella's, but once in a great while there are. I have actually coached on two teams that were 5-4, 6-3 and made it to the State Championship..... Soooo there is that. 

Leave it alone and let the kids play. Let the ball bounce where it may and lets go compete........

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bobref said:

What does democracy have to do with football? 

We have the Greatest most Democratic playoff system in the Country..... Why would we ever want to change it? I as a Coach Love it! Of course there are rarely Cinderella's, but once in a great while there are. I have actually coached on two teams that were 5-4, 6-3 and made it to the State Championship..... Soooo there is that. 

Leave it alone and let the kids play. Let the ball bounce where it may and lets go compete........

 

You are always that guy.....   Let the players and coaches decide who the champion is..... All in is good....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Coach P said:

You are always that guy.....   Let the players and coaches decide who the champion is..... All in is good....

Way to duck the question. And I guess I didn’t realize I’m not allowed to have an opinion … after 45 yrs. of continuous involvement with high school football.

Consider the possibility that coaches and players have too great an interest in the status quo to look at the issue objectively.

Edited by Bobref
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bobref said:

Way to duck the question. And I guess I didn’t realize I’m not allowed to have an opinion … after 45 yrs. of continuous involvement with high school football.

Consider the possibility that coaches and players have too great an interest in the status quo to look at the issue objectively.

Perhaps you missed my post earlier, but these are the very people you’re going to have to change their minds, the coaches. Personally I’d rather be pissing in the ocean, so long as it’s from a nice warm beach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Impartial_Observer said:

Perhaps you missed my post earlier, but these are the very people you’re going to have to change their minds, the coaches. Personally I’d rather be pissing in the ocean, so long as it’s from a nice warm beach. 

I have no illusions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bobref said:

Consider the possibility that coaches and players have too great an interest in the status quo to look at the issue objectively.

That's one way to attempt to discredit a view that differs than yours.  Attempt to place motive.....

So let's just eliminate anyone that is currently involved with state high school football.....because you have no driving interest, right??  I know, I know...its all about the "pride factor" you desire for the kids.....

Not sure whether to belly laugh or just shake my head.  Maybe both!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dazed and confused said:

Monrovia keeps on winning against top half teams... in fact, Danville is/was top quarter. Would never had happened with Fbk16's proposal !!!

Monrovia literally played the worst team in 3A in their first round matchup which unequivocally wouldn’t have happened in a format the appropriately seeded the sectionals, let alone implemented a qualifier.

But congrats to Monrovia nonetheless.

Edited by Footballking16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

Monrovia literally played the worst team in 3A in their first round matchup which unequivocally wouldn’t have happened in a format the appropriately seeded the sectionals, let alone implemented a qualifier.

But congrats to Monrovia nonetheless.

Whats your point ? Monrovia is a myth ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dazed and confused said:

Whats your point ? Monrovia is a myth ?

If you can’t understand how Monrovia benefitted from a system that doesn’t recognize regular season success to the tune of drawing not only the worst team the sectional, but the worse team in 3A, on top of being on the opposite side of the bracket as the three best teams in that sectional, well I can’t help you.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Footballking16 said:

If you can’t understand how Monrovia benefitted from a system that doesn’t recognize regular season success to the tune of drawing not only the worst team the sectional, but the worse team in 3A, on top of being on the opposite side of the bracket as the three best teams in that sectional, well I can’t help you.

 

Sure they benefitted but they still have to play the game and they defeated Danville who defeated the other top teams, which, according to you should have never happened regardless of the rformat. What do you not understand about that !

  • Like 1
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...