Intriguing postseason idea

[DarkThunder#61]

Read on another site that some states are contemplating the idea of having "bowl games" of sorts for their postseason. Those in the know seemed to be unclear as to whether this was wholesale or if it was more or less for those teams that fail to make a state's playoff tournament (which was more of the consensus opinion).

It was met with mixed reviews in the thread. I think it's at least worth debating about if nothing else. Say for example, even with the current set-up now, you take the teams that didn't make the playoffs and have them play another game, just for that extra week of getting to play.

A lot of things would need to be considered for something like that to work, but I don't think teams would turn down an opportunity to get one more crack at a win (say you have a team that's 4-5 and one of their goals was to get to .500 or better on the season, this would give them another chance; or if you have a team that's 0-9, and they take on another team with a similar record it would give them a chance to end their season on a high note and break into the win column).

I'd say the way it'd work for Iowa would just be to match up districts just like in the playoffs and have each of the respective place-winners face off. To use 1A as an example, there'd be 12 games to cover the 24 non-qualifying teams.

Maybe to add to it, have the teams play in a geographically reasonable/neutral site, or even a predetermined site or sites based on the region the districts are in to host the games (which would be subject to change depending on availability).

 

[ghost80]

I'm not sure there would be a lot interest in this.

Back when there were 2 teams (or less) per district there may have been interest from some of the top teams who failed to reach the playoffs.

Where you will lose interest is that often among the lower teams the kids are ready for the season to be over. If the season has been a disappointment many would just as soon get a head start on wrestling, basketball, or even just take a quick mini break.

 

[SASF]

Originally posted by DarkThunder#61:
Read on another site that some states are contemplating the idea of having "bowl games" of sorts for their postseason.

It was met with mixed reviews in the thread. I think it's at least worth debating about if nothing else.

A lot of things would need to be considered for something like that to work, but I don't think teams would turn down an opportunity to get one more crack at a win (say you have a team that's 4-5 and one of their goals was to get to .500 or better on the season, this would give them another chance; or if you have a team that's 0-9, and they take on another team with a similar record it would give them a chance to end their season on a high note and break into the win column).

This is an interesting idea, I don't see anything wrong with it nor do I see a huge benefit to it. I have been on both sides of this coin. I agree that for some teams it could have a positive impact on their season, and for others it could be looked at as "Salt in the wound." I guess the only way to fine tune it would be to make it optional as to weather your team wants to add one more game. But then that creates a whole new set of problems.

 

[bcmoore87]

1937:

Shenandoah 0 @ Miami Tech FL 26

Source: Shenandoah Yearbook

 

[SASF]

I was at that game!

 

[brewcrewman1]

A columnist in the Omaha World Herald had an article regarding this in late October or early November. I think 2 of their classes C-1 and C-2 are going down from 32 teams to 16 teams for playoffs next year. He was suggesting the idea of perhaps some of those teams not making playoffs doing a bowl thing if the travel could be minimized. Hey I think it is a great idea.

 

[KidSilverhair]

The IAHSAA is mulling over a change whereby playoff qualifiers would be determined by outcomes of the first 8 games, basically turning the schedule into an 8-game season.

Everybody would still get nine games, though. While the first round of the playoffs would take place during Week 9, teams that didn't make the playoffs would be matched with a team having a similar record in another district for their ninth game. Kind of like a bowl game, since you wouldn't know for certain who your opponent would be until Week 8 was finished (just like the playoff teams don't know for certain).

This plan is mainly designed to stretch out the playoffs so there can be a full week off between every game, but it's an interesting twist for the teams that miss the playoffs as well.

 

[cidhawkeye]

I believe that was done in the mid to late 80's

 

[KidSilverhair]

Hmmm. I certainly don't recall that, but it's not like I was paying much attention to high school football then. The playoff field expanded to 16 in 1984, so there were four rounds of playoffs instead of the five we have now. Did the season start a week later then? When I was playing high school football (1978-81), I do seem to remember our first game was a week or so after school started. Of course, back then only 8 teams made the playoffs anyway.

 

[cyard31]

i believe in 1988 or 1989 IC West 9th game opponent made the playoffs & ICR 9th game opponent made the playoffs. So ICW & ICR played each other in game nine --- think it was called "The Toilet Bowl"

 

[cidhawkeye]

Was that a year where West beat City and Regina beat West?