80 teams didn't even get listed by other teams. There are several teams that maybe got listed by one other team. That means.....these teams will get assigned to play teams who didn't list them. Team A....only found one team (team B) that would even put them in the top 7. Team A then will get assigned to Team B....and also Teams C, D, and E....even though teams C, D, and E have no interest in playing team A.
2020 Schedules
- Thread starter Break the Rock
- Start date
That is the reality of our current playoff structure. The kicker is that almost half of the games a team plays could be against teams in classes other than the class they are trying to be a playoff qualifier for and those games will be used to determine if a team is "good enough" to make the playoffs.
I don't know how this situation was not clearly seen as a certain issue when they rolled this system out. There are so many better ways to do this. It is just ridiculous that this is the system we are working with.
Yeah, when the state comes up with a system that on the surface benefits you when you schedule good teams - but then forgets to tell you you’ll basically lose that benefit when the good team hands you a loss - coaches and ADs will quickly figure out they just want to schedule teams they can beat. Makes it tough for the stronger teams that nobody wants to volunteer to lose to ... you don’t really earn anything RPI-wise by scheduling a good team if you lose to them.
On the other hand, how do you make it better? If you put more weight on strength of schedule, you’re de-emphasizing a team’s own W-L record. If you give a smaller team extra credit for playing up, then the bigger schools end up getting penalized by playing down, and it will never happen.
On the other hand, how do you make it better? If you put more weight on strength of schedule, you’re de-emphasizing a team’s own W-L record. If you give a smaller team extra credit for playing up, then the bigger schools end up getting penalized by playing down, and it will never happen.
to me the simple answer is the state should have went to 6 districts of 9 teams. Then every team in your district has 8 opponents of their class already scheduled. Everyone would have had 4 home and 4 away. Let a school find one non-district rival that does not impact your RPI.
Top two from the districts and then a wild card situation for the final 4 spots (under current playoff system. If it was 24 take the top 4 from each district and if it was 32 it would be top 4-5 with some wildcards.
Asking teams to find 4 non-district games is very tough. So just make the districts bigger so everyone's record is compared against teams from their own classification.
Top two from the districts and then a wild card situation for the final 4 spots (under current playoff system. If it was 24 take the top 4 from each district and if it was 32 it would be top 4-5 with some wildcards.
Asking teams to find 4 non-district games is very tough. So just make the districts bigger so everyone's record is compared against teams from their own classification.
not a bad idea. Would have to be a few tweaks for classes that have more than 54 teams though
I like this, there’s an old adage, keep it simple...stupid
54 teams with 9 team districts makes the RPI useless. How would you determine wild cards, or byes if you went that route? Also, point differential would have to be back in play.
Every system would have flaws. Go back to even districts (8 districts of 7 teams) and top two make it and people will complain about the 3rd or 4th best team in a district being better than the 2nd best team in another. Or the 3 meaningless non-district games. Or the point-differential or even alphabet tie-breakers.
Go back to 32 teams in and people complain about it being too watered down. Or too many games, etc.
Every system would have flaws. Go back to even districts (8 districts of 7 teams) and top two make it and people will complain about the 3rd or 4th best team in a district being better than the 2nd best team in another. Or the 3 meaningless non-district games. Or the point-differential or even alphabet tie-breakers.
Go back to 32 teams in and people complain about it being too watered down. Or too many games, etc.
The RPI is useless.... meant to get best teams in and unfortunately doesn't do the job... Probably see even more discrepancy this cycle as coaches have seen how the RPI works and how to "game" the system.
I'm going to go with zero. They will use the virus and spring sports delay/cancellation as an excuse.
They have to come out sooner than later as oficals need to be hired for not only varsity games but also JV games on different nights. Plus some teams that you may have on your schedules may not have JV so then you need to start finding games. A lot to do once schedules are finally released.
I need it like a fat kid needs that snickers. Schedule release is easily a top 25 day of the year
They were leaked. Were not supposed to be out this early. They did release a statement saying these were not official and it was a "working document" but there won't be many if any changes at this late a date.
Didn't see the leak and don't know if it is official. But, as I just said in another thread, it would continue the tradition of Regina 'playing up' in the non-district schedule, and West Branch's tradition of 'playing down' a class.
We’ll see when things become official but would make for some good conversation leading into September.
Maybe. But, after that playoff loss this fall, the vocal WB posters just disappeared. A few threats from a crazy fan, otherwise, just crickets.
I was told that we weren’t supposed to talk about those games. That there was too much talk cluttering the board. I was glad the board returned to its level of activity.
Did anyone see Sidney and see who they were playing, 11 man or 8 man? I never thought to look at them until they took it down.
First game showed them hosting West Monona on 8/28. So 11 man it seems.
I remember Wapsie playing Columbus, which I'm sure would intrigue you
Yes that does. Thanks for the fill in. Can not say I’m super excited about getting a 2a playoff qualifier who was 8-1 last year. I don’t think Wapsie put them as a team to play lol. Did you happen to see what week that may have been?
Keokuk was listed with a very tough slate. The Chiefs are coming off a 6-3 year and return a decent amount of talent. They were listed as opening at home with North Scott and then playing at Pella Week 3.
I don’t remember for sure, but I’m 98% sure that I saw it. Columbus will be one of the biggest 1A schools and if the 2A champ wasn’t dropping down also would be seen as more of a contender. They do have some pieces to replace but seem to have it going there again.
If true, then my concerns about the tier 1 east side teams traveling distances would be real...at least for Bett.
Last edited:
Yeah you are correct. Wapsie does have Columbus. So one the biggest class 1a teams against one the smallest class a teams lol. I mean is what it is, Wapsie Being a traditional power this happens but think they could have did without this one coming off a 5-4 year from us
Interestingly enough Columbus isn't one of the bigger 1A schools, they come in at 186 which is 50 kids or so from the 2A cutoff, which is kind of amazing when you think about how they were a 3A in the early 2000s and a big 3A school back in the 80s and 90s. Wapsie comes in at 143 which is sort of an average A school. Both teams bring back pieces, but neither seems to have a ton of depth.
Similar threads
