Cinderella is a myth

[Bobref]

1 minute ago, temptation said:

I have no lane…live a life without lanes.

😂 “Lane” = expertise.

[Basementbias]

My problem with the qualifying format is the headache of scheduling. Schools get pickier on opponents to schedule. This is an issue Ohio teams have for non conference games. Also having conferences as the SOS,you could be hurt by your conference. Leave the all in format as is, and just seed the entire field or seed the top half of the field & random draw the bottom half. A 2A Luers could be beaten by good 5& 6A schools but be the best 2A team in the state and miss the playoffs in a qualifier. Qualifying just sounds like more headaches when seeding is the easier & better fix imo.

[Tippy]

Does anyone remember the Indiana saying, "Pumping up the basketballs".  That's what every football team said when they found out they weren't going to make the playoffs.  People would say "that team is going to be pumping up the basketballs next week.  "Its time for them to pump up the basketballs.

Maybe we should ask the Colts what we should do?  The Colts came to Indiana in 1984 during the night, and we went to the all in the next year.  Don't the Colts sponsor our high school teams?  Most states don't have an NFL team sponsoring them.  In 1985 everyone wanted to have a shot at playing in the Dome, and playing on the same field as the Colts.  Every team said they were going to play real hard in the playoffs so they could make it to the Dome.  I don't think the Ihsaa is ever going to change the all in format.  Wait, they did go to that crazy class basketball in 1997, so I guess you never know what they might do.

[temptation]

11 minutes ago, Bobref said:

😂 “Lane” = expertise.

You still evaluating unproven quarterbacks and anointing them while giving them nicknames such as “the chosen one?”

“Expertise.”

Edited October 18, 2022 by temptation

[BTF]

Can't punish Bishop Luers with a two win season when three of the teams they play are in 6A, three are in 5A, two are in 4A, and one is 3A. If you want to go by win/loss records, then the only wins that count are the ones in your class or above. In this example, Luers would be 2-0.

[FinePrint]

28 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

Define win. Like as in a single game, 2, 3, etc? From where I'm sitting both Luers and Pioneer won games. If you're asking if I believe teams need to win a minimum number of games to qualify I say no because schedules and conferences aren't created equal.

What would Luers record look like if they played Indiana Deaf's schedule? What would ID record look like if they played Luers schedule? This is why rating systems like Sagarin exist. Using raw W-L numbers is a terrible way to accurately rank teams given that schedules aren't created equal.

And using a rating system that factors in W-L record, opp W-L record, SOS, and Opp SOS is an effective ranking system to use to counter the detractors who simply say teams who start 0-3 and 0-4 will simply quit with no hope of making the postseason. 

Okay.  Thank you.  So in theory, you are okay with a team finishing 0-9 making your playoff.  That's all I wanted you to clarify.  

[foxbat]

24 minutes ago, Bobref said:

😂 “Lane” = expertise.

OK, that there was funny.  I don't care who you are.

[BTF]

4 minutes ago, FinePrint said:

Okay.  Thank you.  So in theory, you are okay with a team finishing 0-9 making your playoff.  That's all I wanted you to clarify.  

Why would that be a problem if every team you played was a class or several above you?

[Footballking16]

5 minutes ago, FinePrint said:

Okay.  Thank you.  So in theory, you are okay with a team finishing 0-9 making your playoff.  That's all I wanted you to clarify.  

In theory sure.

Have yet to come across a scenario where an 0-9 team has finished in the top half of Sagarin but do appreciate the effort to discredit a a competitive format with non-sequitur. 

[JQWL]

2 minutes ago, BTF said:

Why would that be a problem if every team you played was a class or several above you?

I think the issue is, as an earlier post mentioned, the reason would be to give some more value to regular season games. Well if a team can go 0-9, then what was the value?

[BTF]

2 minutes ago, JQWL said:

I think the issue is, as an earlier post mentioned, the reason would be to give some more value to regular season games. Well if a team can go 0-9, then what was the value?

In Luers case, the value is playing larger schools that get them battle tested for the tournament. Take this years team for instance. They sit at 4-5 but are probably one of the best 5 teams in 2a. 

[Footballking16]

1 minute ago, JQWL said:

I think the issue is, as an earlier post mentioned, the reason would be to give some more value to regular season games. Well if a team can go 0-9, then what was the value?

Again, I have yet to come across a scenario where an 0-9 team would have qualified for a hypothetical playoff that effectively cuts the field using Sagarin at the conclusion of the regular season. Not saying it hasn't happened once upon a time way back when or couldn't happen in the future, but understanding how Sagarin works, the only way that scenario is plausible would be if a 1A or 2A team played a predominantly 5A and 6A schedule (all quality competition) and kept the score reasonably close. 

If we know anything, the tougher your schedule is, the more likely you're to be rewarded by Sagarin. If anything, that would be an incentive in trying to qualify for a postseason berth. 

1 minute ago, BTF said:

In Luers case, the value is playing larger schools that get them battle tested for the tournament. Take this years team for instance. They sit at 4-5 but are probably one of the best 5 teams in 2a. 

You would be correct. Rated 8th in 2A by Sagarin.

[JQWL]

1 minute ago, Footballking16 said:

Again, I have yet to come across a scenario where an 0-9 team would have qualified for a hypothetical playoff that effectively cuts the field using Sagarin at the conclusion of the regular season. Not saying it hasn't happened once upon a time way back when or couldn't happen in the future, but understanding how Sagarin works, the only way that scenario is plausible would be if a 1A or 2A team played a predominantly 5A and 6A schedule (all quality competition) and kept the score reasonably close. 

If we know anything, the tougher your schedule is, the more likely you're to be rewarded by Sagarin. If anything, that would be an incentive in trying to qualify for a postseason berth. 

I was explaining why someone would have an issue. As mentioned, if the purpose is to give more importance to the regular season, a 0-9 team making the cut goes against that. Probably wouldn't happen, I get that. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone has a problem with high school kids playing games. Let them play. Absolutely zero reason for the state to limit who gets in post-season play in only football. I do feel like many on here have a private school attached to their name. Maybe it's because they live in a world where exclusion is more common. Public schools take them all. Maybe that's where the mind set stems from. Either way, I'd love to see the sectionals seeded after week 9 is complete using Sagarin ratings. Seems easy enough. 

[Footballking16]

21 minutes ago, JQWL said:

I was explaining why someone would have an issue. As mentioned, if the purpose is to give more importance to the regular season, a 0-9 team making the cut goes against that. Probably wouldn't happen, I get that. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone has a problem with high school kids playing games. Let them play. Absolutely zero reason for the state to limit who gets in post-season play in only football. I do feel like many on here have a private school attached to their name. Maybe it's because they live in a world where exclusion is more common. Public schools take them all. Maybe that's where the mind set stems from. Either way, I'd love to see the sectionals seeded after week 9 is complete using Sagarin ratings. Seems easy enough. 

Oh, this isn’t just limited to football, you should have to qualify for the postseason in every sport. Only harping on the football tournament here as this is a football forum. But make no mistake, same rule should apply to all sports.

[MonkeyButt]

2 hours ago, Bobref said:

Not if you include strength of schedule components into the formula.

Which in my opinion is pointless if the conference schedule is the deciding factor. In GA they call their conference regions and there are 6 teams to a region typically. An odd number the best record team will get the bye. But only the 4 of the 6 will make it to the playoffs, and they will be placed in 1st place thru 4th place. They lay out all the tie breaker rules too. Those four teams are seeded according to their place. They play each other, winner then meets up with the next region. Those games are seeded as well where the highest seed gets home field advantage. The financials are wrapped up in there too. It is pretty simple and straight forward.

[Footballking16]

24 minutes ago, JQWL said:

I do feel like many on here have a private school attached to their name. Maybe it's because they live in a world where exclusion is more common. Public schools take them all.

What a bizarre statement. Are public schools in the 48 other states who have qualifying formats not inclusive enough?

25 minutes ago, JQWL said:

Either way, I'd love to see the sectionals seeded after week 9 is complete using Sagarin ratings. Seems easy enough. 

If we get to that point, and that's a huge if, the next step would be a qualifying format. If the sectionals were seeded accordingly after the conclusion of the regular season, there would be second half running clocks in 85% of the first round games. The first round would then become unnecessary. This is precisely why the sectionals aren't currently seeded, the IHSAA would have no leg to stand on as to how to justify why 100+ games in their postseason had mercy rules enacted. It'd be a bigger laughing stock than the current all-in. 

[Footballking16]

Just now, MonkeyButt said:

Which in my opinion is pointless if the conference schedule is the deciding factor. In GA they call their conference regions and there are 6 teams to a region typically. An odd number the best record team will get the bye. But only the 4 of the 6 will make it to the playoffs, and they will be placed in 1st place thru 4th place. They lay out all the tie breaker rules too. Those four teams are seeded according to their place. They play each other, winner then meets up with the next region. Those games are seeded as well where the highest seed gets home field advantage. The financials are wrapped up in there too. It is pretty simple and straight forward.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe in GA all schools that make up their region play in the same classification. In Indiana we have several conferences comprised of teams that represent multiple classifications. It wouldn't make sense to do it that way under the current climate.

Now I could get on board with making current sectionals your de facto conference or region or district or whatever verbiage you want to use, but you'd still have a bunch of people butthurt over traditional rivalries getting discontinued. 

[Bobref]

32 minutes ago, JQWL said:

I do feel like many on here have a private school attached to their name. Maybe it's because they live in a world where exclusion is more common. Public schools take them all. Maybe that's where the mind set stems from.

I don’t know what you do for a living. But I think we can rule out “psychologist.” 😉🤣

[JQWL]

Just now, Footballking16 said:

What a bizarre statement. Are public schools in the 48 other states who have qualifying formats not inclusive enough?

If we get to that point, and that's a huge if, the next step would be a qualifying format. If the sectionals were seeded accordingly after the conclusion of the regular season, there would be second half running clocks in 85% of the first round games. The first round would then become unnecessary. This is precisely why the sectionals aren't currently seeded, the IHSAA would have no leg to stand on as to how to justify why 100+ games in their postseason had mercy rules enacted. It'd be a bigger laughing stock than the current all-in. 

85%???

If that's the case, just go the BCS route and pick two teams from each class to play at Lucas Oil and be done with it. 1 vs 8, probably a running clock. 2 vs 7, we could see a running clock. 3 vs 6 and 4 vs 5 wouldn't. Those would be competitive. And again, those 7 and 8 seeds have probably see a running clock before. The seniors on that team probably aren't going to ever play again. Let them play.

We play in sectional 40. If we seeded this sectional with sagarin ratings, Mater Dei and Crawford County would be a running clock for sure. North Posey and Mitchell might get to a running clock late. Perry Central and Forest Park I don't think would. Forest Park played North Posey really well during the regular season and I think that would be competitive for awhile. Paoli would play Tell City. I think that would also be competitive. 

[JQWL]

2 minutes ago, Bobref said:

I don’t know what you do for a living. But I think we can rule out “psychologist.” 😉🤣

Proctologist.

[JQWL]

12 minutes ago, Footballking16 said:

What a bizarre statement. Are public schools in the 48 other states who have qualifying formats not inclusive enough?

If we get to that point, and that's a huge if, the next step would be a qualifying format. If the sectionals were seeded accordingly after the conclusion of the regular season, there would be second half running clocks in 85% of the first round games. The first round would then become unnecessary. This is precisely why the sectionals aren't currently seeded, the IHSAA would have no leg to stand on as to how to justify why 100+ games in their postseason had mercy rules enacted. It'd be a bigger laughing stock than the current all-in. 

Would 6A and 5A be subject to qualifying also or are they absolved since they already eliminated the 1st round for those classes?

[Footballking16]

6 minutes ago, JQWL said:

Would 6A and 5A be subject to qualifying also or are they absolved since they already eliminated the 1st round for those classes?

5A and 6A would be cut in half as well under current alignment, although if I were in charge I'd make the 16 largest enrollment schools 6A and they'd all make it seeded 1-16 and the remaining schools divided up between 1A-5A and the top 32 schools would qualify to form 8 four team sectionals, 4 in the northern half and 4 in the southern half. 

[812FB]

A lot of talk about Sagarin to solve a complex problem.

Could someone please explain to me why a computer ranking system would be used over a committee of coaches when determining seeding and/or qualifiers?

[Footballking16]

13 minutes ago, 812FB said:

A lot of talk about Sagarin to solve a complex problem.

Could someone please explain to me why a computer ranking system would be used over a committee of coaches when determining seeding and/or qualifiers?

What percent of coaches have seen half the teams they are seeding/qualifying let alone the entire field? High school football coaches don't have that luxury. 

Also there's a ton less bias in computer rankings such as Sagarin as compared to the human element. 

[Bobref]

15 minutes ago, 812FB said:

A lot of talk about Sagarin to solve a complex problem.

Could someone please explain to me why a computer ranking system would be used over a committee of coaches when determining seeding and/or qualifiers?

I don’t know. Maybe selection bias?