What A schools are going 8 man next year???

[troutstamp1]

What about when a 1 seed gets pointless injuries playing in a game against a 3-6 4 seed and costs them a deep run in the playoffs? Nothing said about that. Also like said previously when you let 32 teams in it will water down the accomplishment of even making the playoffs. Soon won’t even matter to kids making that a goal.

First were not talking about how college or pros do it were talking about HS football and 14 to 17 year old kids working to try and make the playoffs. Your worried about an injury to a 1 seeded team and could effect a deep run in the playoffs. What about that team that has key injuries to start the year and that drops a couple games and prevents them from even making the playoffs but don't qualify because of those 2 early loses but are yet one of they top teams when healthy. An injury at the end of the year is the same as one at the beginning because when all games count they can prevent you from making the playoffs as much as making a deep run in the playoffs. The biggest mistake the state made was every single game counts so you have no room for error or injuries no matter when they happen. Also who said that 1 seed will play against a 3-6 team, not if you take all district champions and then all at large and that will take away that 3-6 team from qualifying like in the past where 4 teams from each district made it.

 

[falconfanx3]

I like the idea of 32 but....I think a stipulation should be is you have to be minimum .500 in your class. If your non district is a tough schedule and you play up and lose so be it. But if you are below .500 at the end of the year you shouldnt make the 32 even if you finish second in your district

 

[Zowwy21]

What if you did 24 with the top 8, getting a bye? Back in the day, the first round of playoffs were a joke - every game was a blow out. Talent really drops off after the top 18 - 20. And for those making the argument that the other sports let all teams make the playoffs, I don't think you can compare the playoff format to basketball or baseball which each have 25 - 35 games, so an extra game or even two is not that taxing - football has 8 or 9, and is physically much more demanding. There is no "honor" in making the top half of teams. I get we don't want to exclude some bubble teams especially when there is debate about which one is better, but lets face-it, if they are on the bubble they likely do not have a realistic shot at the title.

 

[troutstamp1]

What if you did 24 with the top 8, getting a bye? Back in the day, the first round of playoffs were a joke - every game was a blow out. Talent really drops off after the top 18 - 20. And for those making the argument that the other sports let all teams make the playoffs, I don't think you can compare the playoff format to basketball or baseball which each have 25 - 35 games, so an extra game or even two is not that taxing - football has 8 or 9, and is physically much more demanding. There is no "honor" in making the top half of teams. I get we don't want to exclude some bubble teams especially when there is debate about which one is better, but lets face-it, if they are on the bubble they likely do not have a realistic shot at the title.

The 24 team format was brought up but the majority of coaches other than 4A that responded to the survey were against it because teams that maybe were a one seed did not want a bye as they would rather play. Again it seems like a common theme that people always go back to when talking about 32 teams and that is to many bad records or poor games in first round. I will state again that is when the top 4 of each district automatically qualified so yes your 4th place team of each district probably had a losing record BUT that is not the proposal going forward. What is proposed is all district champions then the rest at large, then you get the best records from across the state. Right now if you stopped today 32 teams have a winning record in class A with some districts having 3 or 4 of those and some just 1 so my guess would be at worst a 500 team would make it in a 32 team playoff. Take district 7 for example with Hudson being 3-4 right now and Wapsie Valley 4-3, I would take either one of those teams with a 500 record from that district over a few other district champions or runnerups. Same could be said with a couple other districts like 3.

 

[falconfanx3]

Arguably Saint Albert as well.their losses are to schools larger and two class 1a schools ranked in the top 10. their only a loss is to an Earlham team in which they lost their qb in the first quarter.


i think the rpi needs to be adusted. opponets opponets record is the dumbest thing of all time

 

[bigwig055]

What about when a 1 seed gets pointless injuries playing in a game against a 3-6 4 seed and costs them a deep run in the playoffs? Nothing said about that. Also like said previously when you let 32 teams in it will water down the accomplishment of even making the playoffs. Soon won’t even matter to kids making that a goal.

They would have been playing that game anyway, it would have just been a Week 9 game instead of Round 1 of the playoffs.

I truly don't care about "watering down the accomplishment". What does that even mean? We aren't handing out "32 way tie for State Champion" trophies. Even if you firmly believe that "participation trophies" are ruining kids/sports, that wouldn't even apply here - half of the teams still aren't making the playoffs, and its still a playoff!

If your program is at a level that's excited about just getting "playoff appearances", then getting to that point means they've probably earned that excitement. Its a building block - it gives different tiers to motivate different levels of programs. If a program has been 0-9 for 10 years straight and has 20 kids out for football, the stepping stone for improvement from bottom 1% to top 50% is more reasonable, rather than having to go from perennial doormat to winning the district. It gives a "stepping stone" to realistically target and be excited about. Its about keeping the kids engaged and excited, both during the season and for the upcoming season. At least, that's why I enjoy high school football. If you think the "honor" of making the prestigious Iowa High School Football playoffs should be limited to only 25% of the teams instead of 50%, then..that seems unnecessarily arbitrary. Why not make the argument to just reduce it to 1 team per district, if it should be such an accomplishment to just make the playoffs? Or just look at scoring margin from the regular season and crown the champion from there?

If you are a program that is perennially strong, just qualifying won't mean much to you. Some programs don't even hang "qualifier" banners. You still have to earn the opportunity during the regular season, then you have to prove it on the field in the playoffs.

The only reason I can see for someone being concerned about "watering down the accomplishment" is that they have some playoff banners hanging in their gym that they think will look less impressive if they let more teams in. Beyond that, I just don't buy this logic at all.

 

[Sev393]

What about when a 1 seed gets pointless injuries playing in a game against a 3-6 4 seed and costs them a deep run in the playoffs? Nothing said about that. Also like said previously when you let 32 teams in it will water down the accomplishment of even making the playoffs. Soon won’t even matter to kids making that a goal.

what about when your top player sprains his knee week 1 and is out for 4-6 weeks and your team goes 3-3 , loses to their district rival 14-10 in week 1 of district play, and has no chance of getting into a 16 team field cuz the RPI ? There are a crap ton of possible scenarios...

definitely could play games week 0. almost everyone is doing 7 on 7 and installing plays etc during the summer , ahem, practices.

Ultimately the coach's and AD's are the closest thing the students/ players have to represent their sport, and if 90% of them want it played certain way, then the IAHSAA should make that happen.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

The 24 team format was brought up but the majority of coaches other than 4A that responded to the survey were against it because teams that maybe were a one seed did not want a bye as they would rather play. Again it seems like a common theme that people always go back to when talking about 32 teams and that is to many bad records or poor games in first round. I will state again that is when the top 4 of each district automatically qualified so yes your 4th place team of each district probably had a losing record BUT that is not the proposal going forward. What is proposed is all district champions then the rest at large, then you get the best records from across the state. Right now if you stopped today 32 teams have a winning record in class A with some districts having 3 or 4 of those and some just 1 so my guess would be at worst a 500 team would make it in a 32 team playoff. Take district 7 for example with Hudson being 3-4 right now and Wapsie Valley 4-3, I would take either one of those teams with a 500 record from that district over a few other district champions or runnerups. Same could be said with a couple other districts like 3.

Meh, at some point you just have to make a decision and tell the coaches that don't like it to deal with it.

That's how you go to 24 teams.

 

[bigwig055]

Meh, at some point you just have to make a decision and tell the coaches that don't like it to deal with it.

That's how you go to 24 teams.

What is the benefit of 24 over 32 for the "full sized" classes? I buy the reasoning why 4A might not want to have 32 qualifiers (even if I don't agree with it), but why classes with 50-64 teams?

If a district champ were always clear cut, 24 teams with a Round 1 bye might make some sort of sense. But what's the point of offering a bye, which many times would be selected by some imperfect tiebreaker, when you could just have those teams play a game? It would be such a humongous advantage to those teams, that. To me, the point is to win the game, and the best way to prove that is to play on the field. Transitive property & SOS aren't flawless predictors - prove it on the field.

If you have a 3 way tie at the top of your district and its determined by a minor tiebreaker like opponents opponent's winning percentage or point differential or coin flip or reverse alphabetical order, then 1 of those 3 "equal" teams in a 3 way tie gets a huge break in not playing a Round 1 game that was not clearly "earned" on the field. Even if they were an undefeated district champ that beat everyone 100-0, I don't think a bye really makes sense, it just tips the scales too far into their favor and doesn't really address the underlying issues, like the Thanksgiving timeline constraint.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

What is the benefit of 24 over 32 for the "full sized" classes? I buy the reasoning why 4A might not want to have 32 qualifiers (even if I don't agree with it), but why classes with 50-64 teams?

If a district champ were always clear cut, 24 teams with a Round 1 bye might make some sort of sense. But what's the point of offering a bye, which many times would be selected by some imperfect tiebreaker, when you could just have those teams play a game? It would be such a humongous advantage to those teams, that. To me, the point is to win the game, and the best way to prove that is to play on the field. Transitive property & SOS aren't flawless predictors - prove it on the field.

If you have a 3 way tie at the top of your district and its determined by a minor tiebreaker like opponents opponent's winning percentage or point differential or coin flip or reverse alphabetical order, then 1 of those 3 "equal" teams in a 3 way tie gets a huge break in not playing a Round 1 game that was not clearly "earned" on the field. Even if they were an undefeated district champ that beat everyone 100-0, I don't think a bye really makes sense, it just tips the scales too far into their favor and doesn't really address the underlying issues, like the Thanksgiving timeline constraint.

It's going to 24 teams because I said so. Deal with it.