Perhaps a normal Discussion RPI/ Playoffs.

[franky1967]

Everybody has such a wide Variety of Opinions on this topic and maybe it's getting blown out of proportion.

I'm trying to understand what the RPI is really here to accomplish. 1st they don't post the RPI rating on until week 6.

However most of you have figured out how to post it after week 1. So is the State using week 1 to week 5 to figure out week 6?

2nd, I think there is a myth out there that they reseed the playoffs after the QF round, that is false. They still use the end of the regular season RPI rating and reseeding really doesn't happening ..

They are still playing RPI #2 against RPI #8 and #3 against #6 as an example.

So yes there are parts of the RPI System that do work the way it was intended. So I am pretty much over one hurdle.

Now do not like the RPI system compared to Screwloose number cruncher, I really don't. He was accurate and was not influenced no matter who was in the playoffs.

I think maybe the problem itself is the posting of the RPI system itself. You really have a good idea who you might be playing versus the number cruncher where it was a good estimated guess and we really didn't know.

Now we find ourselves fighting amongst each other as to who should be playing who and in the end it is up to the discretion of the Association.

So last year Semifinals did they really get the 4 best teams in the state at 4a Level.
You had a good he 16th seed make and come close to making it to the finals.

I honestly think the Association does look at this board and looks at our theories and suggestions and has made changes accordingly.

I look at past post of what we talked about last year and seen the changes this year.

Again I do respect all your comments and may have gotten out of hand with mine. I have been alive since the playoffs were started since '72 and seen all the major changes.

The problem is not with change, the problem is most of us view the change in different aspects

 

[ISUChip]

I'm trying to understand what the RPI is really here to accomplish. 1st they don't post the RPI rating on until week 6. However most of you have figured out how to post it after week 1. So is the State using week 1 to week 5 to figure out week 6?

2nd, I think there is a myth out there that they reseed the playoffs after the QF round, that is false. They still use the end of the regular season RPI rating and reseeding really doesn't happening

There's not much point in publishing the RPI until after week 6 because earlier in the season there's still a lack of data to start separating teams. After week 6, things have started to sort themselves out.

The RPI has every team's entire schedule figured in from day 1. The week 6 RPI includes the data from teams you will play in weeks 7-9. That's why there aren't giant swings in the last few weeks of the season -- future opponent numbers are already baked in.

The semis are most certainly reseeded (if necessary). If they had left things alone after the quarters last year, the 4A semis would have been SE Polk (16) vs Bettendorf (5) and Cedar Falls (3) vs Dowling (7). Reseeding those into the RPI order of the remaining teams meant CF/SEP and BETT/Dowling.

In Class A, there would have been a #1 vs #4 semi and a #9 vs #13 semi. The reseed meant instead that 1 played 13 and 4 played 9.

The primary functions of the RPI are (1) to serve as a tiebreaker, (2) determine at-large qualifiers and (3) provide a baseline for bracketing.

 

[franky1967]

There's not much point in publishing the RPI until after week 6 because earlier in the season there's still a lack of data to start separating teams. After week 6, things have started to sort themselves out.

The RPI has every team's entire schedule figured in from day 1. The week 6 RPI includes the data from teams you will play in weeks 7-9. That's why there aren't giant swings in the last few weeks of the season -- future opponent numbers are already baked in.

The semis are most certainly reseeded (if necessary). If they had left things alone after the quarters last year, the 4A semis would have been SE Polk (16) vs Bettendorf (5) and Cedar Falls (3) vs Dowling (7). Reseeding those into the RPI order of the remaining teams meant CF/SEP and BETT/Dowling.

In Class A, there would have been a #1 vs #4 semi and a #9 vs #13 semi. The reseed meant instead that 1 played 13 and 4 played 9.

The primary functions of the RPI are (1) to serve as a tiebreaker, (2) determine at-large qualifiers and (3) provide a baseline for bracketing.

Actually what I meant by reseeding, is they just take the 4 highest seeds remaining and assign according. The teams RPI does not change after week 9. They do not actually recalculate the RPI after each playoff round.

It's my opinion that the winner out of each bracket whatever seed they are, is no different then how they are playing the seeds in R1 and the QFs. They are still following the highest seeds is the home team and plays the lowest seed. The 2nd Highest seed remaining plays the 2nd worse seed remaining.

 

[franky1967]

Actually what I meant by reseeding, is they just take the 4 highest seeds remaining and assign according. The teams RPI does not change after week 9. They do not actually recalculate the RPI after each playoff round.

It's my opinion that the winner out of each bracket whatever seed they are, is no different then how they are playing the seeds in R1 and the QFs. They are still following the highest seeds is the home team and plays the lowest seed. The 2nd Highest seed remaining plays the 2nd worse seed remaining.

I'm not sure I follow the SE Polk/ Valley & CF/Bett. Scenario. As it played out the seeds actually played out #2 vs #16 and #5 vs #7.

Not arguing, but how did you figure what you said, because before the Semis, that is what I had Figured and since the games were in the Dome. I am missing something for the scenario which you described.

 

[franky1967]

Now I can see if they had Bracket "A" & "B" for example in one region and the other two Brackets in the other region. Then I can see your point of perhaps CF/Dow and SEP/Bett.

In just trying to figure out how you came up with that Scenario, nothing more

 

[ISUChip]

Now I can see if they had Bracket "A" & "B" for example in one region and the other two Brackets in the other region. Then I can see your point of perhaps CF/Dow and SEP/Bett.

In just trying to figure out how you came up with that Scenario, nothing more

Each pod has a top-4 seed. In a full bracket, the winner of #1's pod would play the winner of #4's pod, and the same for 2/3.

Had the IHSAA not added the reseeding step, you would have had SEP (winner of #1 Centennial pod) playing Bett (winner of #4 IC West pod), and Dowling (winner of #2 Valley pod) playing Cedar Falls (winner of their own #3 pod).

In RPI terms: 16 vs 5 and 3 vs 7.

With the reseed (or reorder, or reset, if you prefer) the semifinal matchups are the highest remaining team (#3 CF) plays the lowest remaining team (#16 SEP), with the other two matched up (#5 Bett vs #7 Dowling).

 

[franky1967]

Each pod has a top-4 seed. In a full bracket, the winner of #1's pod would play the winner of #4's pod, and the same for 2/3.

Had the IHSAA not added the reseeding step, you would have had SEP (winner of #1 Centennial pod) playing Bett (winner of #4 IC West pod), and Dowling (winner of #2 Valley pod) playing Cedar Falls (winner of their own #3 pod).

In RPI terms: 16 vs 5 and 3 vs 7.

With the reseed (or reorder, or reset, if you prefer) the semifinal matchups are the highest remaining team (#3 CF) plays the lowest remaining team (#16 SEP), with the other two matched up (#5 Bett vs #7 Dowling).

So you are saying Bracket "A" would have played bracket "D" and B vs C?

I looked in last years manual and did not see where any pods or brackets had any kind of matchup. It was just the winner advancing to the Semis. Then the seeds playing out like they do any other round.

Last year before the Semis, I took the remaining seeds and paired them without paying any attention to Brackets or Pods and that who played who.

So your telling me if the top 4seeds advance today to the Semifinals,
That if no reseeding takes place you could have 1vs 2 and 3vs4?

 

[KidSilverhair]

I follow what ISUChip is saying. I think we have a semantic difference in how we're using the term "reseeding" after the quarterfinals.

In my view, this is why the state only publishes the four "pod" brackets when the playoffs start. While each "pod" has each one of the top 4 seeds, they don't put them together in a complete bracket to the championship because who plays who depends on who survive through the quarterfinals.

The state doesn't follow the "bracket" when it comes to the semis (which is why they don't publish a bracket that looks like that). They take the RPIs of the four surviving teams and go 1 v 4, 2 v 3.

We all have the same understanding of what happens after the quarters, it's just the terms we're using aren't the same.

 

[franky1967]

I follow what ISUChip is saying. I think we have a semantic difference in how we're using the term "reseeding" after the quarterfinals.

In my view, this is why the state only publishes the four "pod" brackets when the playoffs start. While each "pod" has each one of the top 4 seeds, they don't put them together in a complete bracket to the championship because who plays who depends on who survive through the quarterfinals.

The state doesn't follow the "bracket" when it comes to the semis (which is why they don't publish a bracket that looks like that). They take the RPIs of the four surviving teams and go 1 v 4, 2 v 3.

We all have the same understanding of what happens after the quarters, it's just the terms we're using aren't the same.

That makes sense as unless I missed it in the manual, I didn't see Brackets or Pods grouped to play eachother. Thank You for the explanation

 

[ISUChip]

Last year before the Semis, I took the remaining seeds and paired them

THAT is exactly the reseeding process that you've previously said doesn't happen:
"I think there is a myth out there that they reseed the playoffs after the QF round"

 

[franky1967]

THAT is exactly the reseeding process that you've previously said doesn't happen:
"I think there is a myth out there that they reseed the playoffs after the QF round"

No I took the teams left with the RPI and paired them according to their seeds without using pods or brackets like Kid Silver hair pointed out.

It's not reseeding, it's just taking the seeds and advancing them and pairing them as they do in R1 and QF.

There were no pods or brackets that I know of in the manual that point out a predetermined Bracket or Pod that would have given you "A&D" and "C &D

All the seeds last year played the other seeds that appear to be determined by the RPI. Reseeding to me would have been, let's reseed them again maybe 1-4. Which in that case how would you even done that not using the RPI?

After week 9 is over. I will post an example of who will be in the semis and who will play who determined by the RPI. The teams may not be right but the pairings will be correct no matter what class.

 

[Reasoned]

Good discussion, which confirms my previous post that even given the limitations of the current IHSAA playoff format, it’s still better than previous versions. It seems they’re addressing the prior instances when there were two clearly “strong” teams meeting before the finals, solution: don’t put in the same pod and separate in the semis. Of course, there’s always an upset but that’s why they play the game!

 

[franky1967]

Good discussion, which confirms my previous post that even given the limitations of the current IHSAA playoff format, it’s still better than previous versions. It seems they’re addressing the prior instances when there were two clearly “strong” teams meeting before the finals, solution: don’t put in the same pod and separate in the semis. Of course, there’s always an upset but that’s why they play the game!

I guess I was trying to figure out how they were reseeding, when it appeared they were taking whatever seeds made it out of the bracket and pairing them like they did in 1St Round determination