IHSAA: Decision Makers or Money Takers?

[BlameIt]

IHSAA = COWARDS!!

They were presented many different things to accomplish this year, and they seem to have focused on an issue that should be disregarded.

1) The IHSAA decided to go to 32 teams per class in each class to make more money for itself. There can be no other reason. 16 or 24 teams makes far more sense.

2) "we want to eliminate game for concern of player safety" - Players from 20-30 years ago went through 2-a-day practices for a full week and they are now living productive lifestyles. Give me a flipping break with this "safety concerns". Players can be hurt in the other 8 games or at any time during practice, also.

3) If the IHSAA wants to eliminate week 9, then have the teams play in week 0. Begin the season at the same time. Schools would still have 13-16 legal football practices.

4) "The largest 64 schools were consulted" - And why is that? Small schools are getting the shaft in this whole thing anyway.

5) Playoffs will now be on a round by round geographical basis. For example, Regina and West Branch could be ranked #1 and #2 (playing in different districts, which very well MAY happen tomorrow morning) and might be paired in round 2 of the playoffs because of geographical closeness? Yet another brain dead decision by the IHSAA.

In the end, nothing was decided and that is a good thing.

The current playoff system is a sham. 32 teams out of 56 make the 'playoffs' every year? I could care less if West Branch is left out with a 6-3 or 5-4 record unless all of their wins are in district play. I really do not even count it as a playoff game until you get to the round of 16 anyway.

I would love to sit down with IHSAA and tell them what I think.
Coach Butch Pedersen would love to be sitting next to me when I do. And, to be honest, I am quite certain I could convince 15-20 more coaches to join us.

The present line of thinking by the IHSAA leads me to believe one thing and one thing only:

Those people are the fastest one to the bank on Fridays to cash their checks.

This post was edited on 1/22 1:45 PM by BlameIt

 

[DarkThunder#61]

Originally posted by BlameIt:
IHSAA = COWARDS!!

They were presented many different things to accomplish this year, and they seem to have focused on an issue that should be disregarded.

1) The IHSAA decided to go to 32 teams per class in each class to make more money for itself. There can be no other reason. 16 or 24 teams makes far more sense. For 4A, yes. Maybe 3A. The rest are fine. Period.

2) "we want to eliminate game for concern of player safety" - Players from 20-30 years ago went through 2-a-day practices for a full week and they are now living productive lifestyles. That seems like a very broad and generalized statement, don't you think?......Give me a flipping break with this "safety concerns". Players can be hurt in the other 8 games or at any time during practice, also. I agree, but I don't think you can just say the Association wasn't thinking about the players when they made these specific rule changes. How has it negatively impacted teams? Answer that question first? If you can't, then you can't really comment until you do.

3) If the IHSAA wants to eliminate week 9, then have the teams play in week 0. Begin the season at the same time. Schools would still have 13-16 legal football practices. There are states who start their season around the time Iowa plays the handful of week zero games. This would satisfy those who still want the 9-game schedule and shorten the season calendar-wise by a week.

4) "The largest 64 schools were consulted" - And why is that? Small schools are getting the shaft in this whole thing anyway. They're trying to convince us that 32 teams from 4A in the playoffs is not and never has been ludicrous. They're not winning.....

5) Playoffs will now be on a round by round geographical basis. For example, Regina and West Branch could be ranked #1 and #2 (playing in different districts, which very well MAY happen tomorrow morning) and might be paired in round 2 of the playoffs because of geographical closeness? Yet another brain dead decision by the IHSAA. I wouldn't read THAT much into it. I do think there will still be some semblance of seeding/better records meeting later in the playoffs. If they actually did talk to these schools, I'm pretty certain Valley and Dowling said, "Oh you want us to play in the 1st-2nd round because we're close? Thanks but no thanks."

In the end, nothing was decided and that is a good thing.

The current playoff system is a sham. 32 teams out of 56 make the 'playoffs' every year? I could care less if West Branch is left out with a 6-3 or 5-4 record unless all of their wins are in district play. I really do not even count it as a playoff game until you get to the round of 16 anyway. I actually didn't mind the whole "sub-state" title they had for the 1st rd when the new format started. It's still a playoff game, just not a STATE playoff game.

I would love to sit down with IHSAA and tell them what I think. I'm guessing you could if you put your mind to it and tried hard enough.............There are ways to talk to anyone, really. Especially through the internet. Such a terrific invention. Have you tried it?

Coach Butch Pedersen would love to be sitting next to me when I do. And, to be honest, I am quite certain I could convince 15-20 more coaches to join us.

The present line of thinking by the IHSAA leads me to believe one thing and one thing only:

Those people are the fastest one to the bank on Fridays to cash their checks. If that's the case, then you could also speculate about what they do with that money they're hauling in for themselves, since you'd believe they'd have to be pulling in some big-time figures, right?..............................................

 

[rkhemp]

Not surprised by any of the decisions made. The only sham I could see coming from the IHSAA would be putting West Branch and Regina in seperate districts if it is true that both schools petitioned the state to be in seperate districts. I mean, who is running the show. For one, there is no gurantee West Branch would meet up with Regina in the playoffs. For two, what does it matter if they lose to Regina in round 1, 2, or 3? Should Wilton have a say in if tehy are in Regina's district or not, or anyone else for that matter.

 

[PNation]

Yes they are looking a geography, but I also see it as by pairing them up for each round you may see Regina vs. West Branch in the semis if they are viewed as 2 of the top 4.

 

[BlameIt]

Screw hibernation, I am back.

DarkThunder#61 you are going to catch 5 months of ire here.

You really think that 32 out of 56 teams making the playoffs in FB is acceptable?

The traditionalists of the game think that is a freaking joke, bro. A joke. It takes away from what football is all about when a 4-5 team makes "the playoffs".

Sorry but you and I are definitely going to agree to disagree here.

RKemp I can tell you from first hand knowledge from WB and Regina that they both did not petition to be in different districts. I also have a pretty reliable source that tells me the IHSAA asked Regina as early as 2 weeks ago if they would like to play 2A football. As for Wilton, they should have a say too. I was not slighting them with my example. I was just using the geographical example and those two teams make a lot of sense for an example in my world.

 

[BlameIt]

Originally posted by DarkThunder#61:

Originally posted by BlameIt:


2) "we want to eliminate game for concern of player safety" - Players from 20-30 years ago went through 2-a-day practices for a full week and they are now living productive lifestyles. That seems like a very broad and generalized statement, don't you think?




If I were to ask to ask 100 former West Branch players what they thought of 2-a-days being taken away, my wager is that 95 or more of them would laugh and call it a stupid or weak decision.

Safety, my arrs

 

[cidhawkeye]

Go Blame Go. To spin this any other way than keeping this revenue neutral at a minimum is difficult to believe. 32 out of 56 for the playoffs is to many and you saying "fine. Period" doesn't really change it. If I played on a team with a losing record and I made the playoffs I wouldn't be real excited to hang that banner. Player safety? Perhaps but I am not seeing it. The current playoff schedule in my opinion is not conducive to player safety or a high quality of play. Now I will grab some popcorn and read. Blame has been biting his tongue for a long time.

 

[BlameIt]

To think that 32 teams out of 56 (or 57 percent) of the teams making the "playoffs" is good.

You are teaching kids that losing is OK because, hey, they made the playoffs and finished the season with a 4-6 record. Hold your heads up high!

Give me a flippin break, Thunder.

 

[Anonymous2002]

Why not cut the qualifying teams to 24 teams and give all the District Winners a 1st round bye for that Wednesday game... since essentially they are taking away the home field (seed) advantage by not bracketing for the next 2 years... this way, all of the necessary teams WILL make the playoffs and will cut out the 3-6 to 5-4 teams...

 

[Zeek86]

I believe that Butch was one of the chief advocates for expanding the postseason after he missed the playoffs with an 8-1 team a few years back....'06 or '07 maybe.

The playoff schedule is what it is. Many teams deal with it each year. I would like to see the evidence how it has led to increased injuries. It is stacked up....but doable so long as coaches are taking it easy in practice in between.

We should be rejoicing today.....common sense prevailed in terms of the schedule staying at 9 games.

 

[BlameIt]

Originally posted by Zeek86:
I believe that Butch was one of the chief advocates for expanding the postseason after he missed the playoffs with an 8-1 team a few years back....'06 or '07 maybe.

You wanna bet on that one?

I can speak confidently on this issue. Trust me.
Butch, and all of the WBFB program, was upset because the 13 point rule - which was put in to be the tiebreaker if needed - was used for the District champ but not for the district runner-up. Faulted system if you create something and then do not use it when it would have been the ideal scenario......because TWO teams were in the same boat. WB in 1A, Monticello in 2A.

Again, why have this "rule" if you do not use it when it was clearly created for the scenario that arose?

When a team goes 8-1, they should be in the playoffs.
Then again, WB was used to that having gone 8-1 two times while Marv Cook was in HS. Losing to Mt Vernon both times. Who, ironically, was not even in the same class for playoffs. DOH!

Having spoken with Coach Pedersen about the expansion issue many times in the past few weeks, his position has never wavered. I feel that I can speak on his behalf here and tell you he is definitely not a proponent of the 32 team system.

 

[Zeek86]

You very well may be correct as you seem to know Butch well. I just remembered him being upset at missing the playoffs at 8-1 and calling the association on it. Regardless, the system that allows for 8-1 teams in the post season as opposed to staying home is okay in my book. Had west branch made it that year, i believe it was montezuma who would have been left out and they finished as state runner up??? We can agree to disagree but i will take a system that allows all worthy teams in even if a few "unworthy" teams get in. There is so much that is great about football in iowa that i have a hard time getting upset over the little things. Overall we have a great system. People like to complain about the playoff schedule and money the association makes. I will take it as opposed to an inferior system. Maybe there are better options and you mentioned some good ones but i am just happy that common sense won out in regards to the 8/9 game regular season today. All in all a good day for high school football in iowa today

 

[cidhawkeye]

I would be hard pressed to call the system great. The playoff schedule is bad, having a 1-8 team make the playoffs is bad, having two state associations is bad. They do many good things but to call it great is a stretch.

 

[BlameIt]

Originally posted by Zeek86:
Had west branch made it that year, i believe it was montezuma who would have been left out and they finished as state runner up???

Gee, I wonder who beat Montezuma that year AT Montezuma?

WB's lone loss was a double OT thriller at Regina.

 

[Zeek86]

That was my point.....there were three teams in that district with one district loss that year....they were all worthy of playing post season

 

[rkhemp]

I believe you have been telling us for the last 2 years how West Branch would be dangerous in the playoffs, been there, have experience, clicking at the right time, etc etc. The fact of the matter West Branch would not have been in the playoffs without the 32 team format. Did they not deserve to be there? Did they not win one on the road in 2012? Did you go to those games? What you don't like about the system has benefited your team.

There also have been several 4 seeds upsets over 1 seeds. I believe Pella made it to the dome a few years back as a lower seed.

And I know CID would be disgraced if he was on a 5-4 team that was forced to play in the playoffs, but you would be hard to find a starter on any 5-4, especially a senior, who wouldn't want one more game. There are young teams who get better each week, teams that have players return from injuries and academic suspensions, and just the team that catches fire at the right time. It isn't horrible for this teams to be in the playoffs.

The main issue that needs to be fixed is the playoff schedule. There are already teams playing Week 0, it wouldn't be hard for them to move every body up to week 0 and play playoff games on Friday nights. That is my opinion.
This post was edited on 1/23 9:32 AM by rkhemp

 

[se xc1]

What most people on here don't realize is the )(*&()*)(* of this whole situation. The men in Boone obviously have the BEDS information, why not post that on the IAHSSA site? Also, why not release it so coaches in other sports can get a feel for what class they may be in? Why the heck is this always some big freakin secret? I realize fball is somewhat different for scheduling officials. With that said, there is no reason they shouldn't post the BEDS on the site and give everyone access to that info. St. Edmond is on the bubble for 1A or 2A in a couple different sports, xc included. I, like the fball crowd, would like to know where we stand next fall too.

 

[Sev393]

The main issue that needs to be fixed is the playoff schedule. There are already teams playing Week 0, it wouldn't be hard for them to move every body up to week 0 and play playoff games on Friday nights. That is my opinion.




DING DING DING. Winner.

 

[BlameIt]

Originally posted by rkhemp:

I believe you have been telling us for the last 2 years how West Branch would be dangerous in the playoffs, been there, have experience, clicking at the right time, etc etc.

Actually, I didn't say a single word about the WB team in 2013. Not one - given I did not post during the 2013 football season (CID would attest to that)

As for 2012, I would have made that statement because WB had a very good team. They were arguably the second best team in the state that year behind Regina. It would be a safe assumption to mention the Regina coaches would probably agree with me on the whole.

RE: would not have been in the playoffs in the 32 team format. I am not a hypocrite. Meaning, again, you will not find any post saying I was pumped WB got into the 32 team "playoffs".

At 4th place in a district, no team should ever be in the postseason in football. Not now, not ever.

 

[rkhemp]

If you don't have 4, why have 3? In that case West Branch would not have been in the playoffs the last 2 years. That means the second best team in the state in 2012 according to you and the Regina coaches would have been turning in their equipment the Monday after the final regular season game.

Having the expanded playoffs have made many late season games important for many teams, including the West Branch Bears. So next time you speak with Butch, ask him his opinion if he feels West Branch should have been in the playoffs the last 2 years.

 

[cidhawkeye]

I believe I used 4-5 rather than 5-4 as my criteria. Either way I would love to have played another game, however at 4-5 my teammates and I hadn't done enough to earn another game. Heck each week of the playoffs I would have loved to play another game. And yes if my team had a losing record and we made the playoffs I wouldn't want our banner hung in the gym.

 

[rkhemp]

Is a 5-4 team that much better than a 4-5 team? That's the difference of having quality opponents in non-district play. Maybe we should just make a BCS formula to choose what teams make the playoffs. Are you mad that some 4-5 teams make post season now and you didn't when you played?

Maybe a 4-5 Sigourney-Keota is in a super tough district with Regina, Wilton, and West Branch. Maybe a 4-5 Sigourney-Keota would be 6-3 or even 7-2 in another district. Sigouney-Keota is forced to play in the playoffs when I'm sure the majority of the kids feel like CID and don't feel they deserve in and don't want to play anymore, but somehow they would travel to Delhi and compete with Maq Valley and give them all they want. Is that the worst thing in the world?

Again, I wouldn't be opposed to having just 2 teams from each district make it, but having 4 teams in isn't the biggest crime to get all up in arms about.

 

[BlameIt]

Originally posted by rkhemp:

If you don't have 4, why have 3? In that case West Branch would not have been in the playoffs the last 2 years. That means the second best team in the state in 2012 according to you and the Regina coaches would have been turning in their equipment the Monday after the final regular season game.

Having the expanded playoffs have made many late season games important for many teams, including the West Branch Bears. So next time you speak with Butch, ask him his opinion if he feels West Branch should have been in the playoffs the last 2 years.

West Branch deserved to be in the 2012 playoffs. Period.
West Branch did not deserve to be in the 2013 playoffs. Period.

I am in favor of a 24 team system (or 16, but the IAHSAA would not want to lose that much money).

The top 2 from each district are in.
The next 8 are in by the 13 point rule.

1st round would be the DRU hosting one of the other 8 teams. Geography doesn't matter to the IAHSAA. They made Eddyville travel 200 miles for a Wednesday night game this year, so what do they care as long as they make their 90% of the gate?

 

[rkhemp]

I am pretty sure geography is the reason they did away with sister districts and brackets. But, if West Branch makes it to round 2 and they don't get matched up against Regina that would be highly questionable.

 

[BlameIt]

Originally posted by rkhemp:

I am pretty sure geography is the reason they did away with sister districts and brackets. But, if West Branch makes it to round 2 and they don't get matched up against Regina that would be highly questionable.

Ya, it would make sense to have two teams that could 'possibly' be undefeated and ranked in the top 5 in the state play in the 2nd round.

now THAT would be ridiculous

 

[rkhemp]

Even though they are 8 miles a part I don't think they should meet up until the State Championship. They have to be the best 2 teams in the state.

So a lot of birdies said that West Branch and Regina spoke to the state about not playing each other in districts, you said in another thread that you would not be surprised if they were not in the same districts, and now we have the proof finally from the state. You also don't believe a good West Branch team should be forced to play a good Regina team in the second round. West Branch ia a great program with a great coaching staff. Maybe we will see Regina vs West Branch in the "cross-over" game.

It sure looks like special treatment, but you probably have better info and could convince me other wise.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Yes 5-4 is much better than 4-5. If you think over half the teams making the playoffs is a good thing than that is your opinion. I am not mad at the system at all. I think the playoff schedule is horrible and I think the number of teams in the playoffs is excessive. Waaaay back when I played we went 6-3 and didn't make the playoffs, would have loved to have gone, we lost to what today would be the equivilent of the #1 4A school a 3A school and the 2A state champions and we were a 1A school, it happens, we lost a game we shouldn't have and we didn't make it, it is life. Should a 1,2,3 or 4 win team make the playoffs? In my opinion no, yours says it is ok.

 

[cidhawkeye]

The release of these districts puts some evidence to the money taking part.

 

[rkhemp]

What's the evidence?

 

[BlameIt]

Originally posted by rkhemp:

Even though they are 8 miles a part I don't think they should meet up until the State Championship. They have to be the best 2 teams in the state.

So a lot of birdies said that West Branch and Regina spoke to the state about not playing each other in districts, you said in another thread that you would not be surprised if they were not in the same districts, and now we have the proof finally from the state. You also don't believe a good West Branch team should be forced to play a good Regina team in the second round. West Branch ia a great program with a great coaching staff. Maybe we will see Regina vs West Branch in the "cross-over" game.

It sure looks like special treatment, but you probably have better info and could convince me other wise.

Woodward Academy and Woodward-Granger are about 4 blocks apart. They are in separate districts.
That is far more pressing than WB vs Regina.

 

[rkhemp]

Sure, both are stupid. The state couldn't make any changes this year because they were only given a month to think about the suggestions. It would take me about 2 hours to come up with better districts. Heck, I am sure Pax's make more sense

 

[cidhawkeye]

They had a month? Not hardly. As far as the evidence of money taking, West Branch and Regina in seperate districts and the state gets to make the playoff pairings and they get to keep the gate from the playoff games, Wilton and Regina in different districts, what will sell more tickets two 10-0 teams meeting in the playoffs or a 10-0 team and a 9-1 team with a solid loss to the 10-0 team. Let's also make the travel distances longer in the districts so there is pressure put on budgets and then when they come back in 2 years with their next proposal and it can "save the money" on travel(that they created) that proposal will stand a far better chance of passing. I appreciate generating revenue but to pass it off as "for the kids" gets a little old and it's not true. If you think otherwise you are entitled to that opinion, we will just agree to disagree.

 

[DarkThunder#61]

Originally posted by BlameIt:
Screw hibernation, I am back.

DarkThunder#61 you are going to catch 5 months of ire here. Don't care.

You really think that 32 out of 56 teams making the playoffs in FB is acceptable? Yes, that's what I said. 3 teams from each 3A-1A district don't make it and roughly 4 from A-8man don't. Both basketball and baseball/softball take everyone. Everyone in wrestling has a shot, both as a team and individually. Football is only different because it's a physically demanding sport that apparently requires more than 3 days of rest to be at optimal functioning capability.....or whatever the f*** other issue you have with it other than the boring "everyone gets a participation trophy" bullsh** argument you people throw out there like it's the root of all evil, or something...................

(and don't bother commenting on the participation trophy comment either, I really don't care about people's opinions on that anymore because it's gotten beyond ridiculous how much that label gets flung at stuff these days, whether it's true or not.)

The traditionalists of the game think that is a freaking joke, bro. A joke. Cool story?.... It takes away from what football is all about (no it doesn't) when a 4-5 team makes "the playoffs". That's why I said it should've stayed the sub-state round.

Sorry but you and I are definitely going to agree to disagree here. That's fine.

RKemp I can tell you from first hand knowledge from WB and Regina that they both did not petition to be in different districts. I also have a pretty reliable source that tells me the IHSAA asked Regina as early as 2 weeks ago if they would like to play 2A football. What was Regina's reason for declining, if that was really the case?........ As for Wilton, they should have a say too. I was not slighting them with my example. I was just using the geographical example and those two teams make a lot of sense for an example in my world.

Before I go any further, this whole talk about the Association pandering to West Branch and Regina to be in separate districts (if true) was like the Big Ten deciding that Ohio State and Michigan in separate divisions was the smart thing to do.....and just look how many times they faced in the title game.

Food for thought.

 

[DarkThunder#61]

Originally posted by BlameIt:

Originally posted by DarkThunder#61:

Originally posted by BlameIt:


2) "we want to eliminate game for concern of player safety" - Players from 20-30 years ago went through 2-a-day practices for a full week and they are now living productive lifestyles. That seems like a very broad and generalized statement, don't you think?




If I were to ask to ask 100 former West Branch players what they thought of 2-a-days being taken away, my wager is that 95 or more of them would laugh and call it a stupid or weak decision. Hey that's what I said!

Safety, my arrs

That wasn't my point though, was it Blame.......

My point was questioning your assumption that players from 20-30 years ago are still living productive lifestyles. How do you know some of them didn't....well, die? After all you didn't say anything about how football affected their health over that time period, you just said they're still living productive lifestyles, so my question was how do you know?......

And yeah we can all probably assume the majority of these groups of people are healthy, productive members of society. But it's still an assumption.

 

[DarkThunder#61]

Originally posted by cidhawkeye:
Go Blame Go. To spin this any other way than keeping this revenue neutral at a minimum is difficult to believe. Sounds like you know more about what the Association does with it's money than you're letting on. Please do something about it............I'm not going to. 32 out of 56 for the playoffs is too many and you saying "fine. Period" doesn't really change it. Yes it does. If I played on a team with a losing record and I made the playoffs I wouldn't be real excited to hang that banner. Sounds like a personal problem. Player safety? Perhaps but I am not seeing it. I'm not sure anyone has ever made the argument that the playoff expansion was for player safety. Maybe you were referring to a different point and just didn't elaborate. The current playoff schedule in my opinion is not conducive to player safety or a high quality of play. Says the fan of the team that's won 56 games in a row...........I'd be afraid to see what Regina could really do, then, if they were actually put in a better position for higher (or the highest) quality of play. I can only imagine how rough it must be for them right now, since the system is currently not conducive to the highest quality of play.

Now I will grab some popcorn and read. Blame has been biting his tongue for a long time.

 

[BlameIt]

Originally posted by DarkThunder#61:
That wasn't my point though, was it Blame.......

My point was questioning your assumption that players from 20-30 years ago are still living productive lifestyles. How do you know some of them didn't....well, die? After all you didn't say anything about how football affected their health over that time period, you just said they're still living productive lifestyles, so my question was how do you know?......

And yeah we can all probably assume the majority of these groups of people are healthy, productive members of society. But it's still an assumption.

My point being that why is the IAHSAA all of the sudden worried about safety?

They didn't say a word back in the 80's or 90's or 2000's when kids were in 2-a-days for a week. Now, all of the sudden, all of these people are talking about concussions like they are a new thing.

Football is a tough game that is played by tough people. That is what my football coach told me. Of course you are going to feel effects of it later. Wrestling is just as trying on the body, for those that continue in college. I am guessing a lot of those guys are feeling more than are the football guys. Just ask Dan Gable.

i still do not think you get the gist of my point here. But that is OK.

Where are you from, by the way? Just curious. Not judging.

 

[rkhemp]

My point was that the state tables several suggestions from the coaches meetings because they said they only had a month to collect info. Maybe it was a little more, maybe it was a little less, who cares. My point was once all the BEDS data is collected, it shouldn't take that long to make the districts. I am sure it didn't take Pax that long to make his mock districts.


I also question why you think a West Branch vs Regina rematch would hurt gate sales in the playoffs. If my team is in the playoffs, I am attending that game. If they are not I am attending another game, either way the gates are about the same. The high school football fanatic will attend a game, whether it's one game or another. Now, if Regina and West Branch want regular season gate sales, I am sure they will request to the state to play a non-district game. The ball is really in West Branch and Regina's court if they really want to meet up.
This post was edited on 1/23 7:25 PM by rkhemp

 

[cidhawkeye]

Well you told me. I guess I will keep my opinions to myself. You are right, I was wrong, if 32 in the playoffs is good 48 would be better but then we would have worry about the 8 that didn't make it. Take em all, the other sports do it. I will wait to read what you type next so I can know what to think.

 

[rkhemp]

Not sure what you are all mad about. I guess if anyone has an opinion different than yours you throw a fit and take your ball home. Thought we were just having an honest grown up debate. I guess only the boys in Boone really know.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Grown up debate? "Sounds like a personal problem" . There are many different opinions on this. Don't worry, not taking my ball and going home.