16 Team Playoffs worth it?

[RBH23]

Literally every other sport in the state gives these “participation trophies” since football is the only sport in which any teams are left out of the postseason tournament.

Ohio is right at the top of the list of fewest state champions (around 1% of schools win a state title, similar to TX, NY, & PA) and you are crybabying about letting too many kids play in a tournament. Dumb.

Because of the physical toll football takes! That’s why the tournament has been limited. Have any of you played the game?

As for your stats, are you saying all teams should make the playoffs, and Ohio should have many more divisions? We could have hundreds of divisions to guarantee more state winners. Would that make you happy?

I’m not saying there should be more divisions, I’m pointing out that it is more difficult to win a state championship in Ohio than it is virtually any other state. On top of that, football is the only sport in the state that doesn’t include all its athletes in the postseason. The line about “participation trophies” is stupid. The only thing a postseason tournament does is give everyone a chance to win the most difficult trophy to win in the entire country.

I don’t buy your injury risk argument as genuine concern; I believe your opinion comes from this need to apply your idea of competitiveness, which largely comes from professional sports, to high school athletes. Even if it were exclusively about “participation trophies,” it’s high school; yes, there’s value merely in participation at that level.

So your argument is that expanding the number of teams gives more teams the opportunity to win the title. Have you looked at the numbers over the past two years?

Each region now has 7 double digit seeded teams (10-16). That’s 28 per division, or 196 for the entire state. Last year, only 5 of those teams made it to the regional semis with 1 advancing further. In 2022, only 7 made it to the semis.

There are 56 regional final teams each year, or 112 in the past two years. Only 3 double digit teams (two 10’s and one 12) have played in the regional finals with only the Springfield team advancing.

So of the 392 10-16 seeds in the past two years, only 3 advanced to the regional finals with the vast majority losing in the first or second round. This is why I claim it to be a “participation trophy.” I remember when Burg making the playoffs meant something. Now, Burg will never miss the playoffs ever again. Participation trophy!!

The teams that won state in Ohio over the past two years are the same teams that have won the titles before the expansion. The argument that Springfield proves otherwise is somewhat a joke since they have been a top public school of recent years; will be rare to see another team do what they just did.

In other words, expanding the number of teams did not change anything in Ohio. The difficulty of winning a title and the teams doing so is still the same.


With regards to injury risk, obviously the more games/practices that occur, the higher risk of injury. That’s not opinion, it’s simple math. Hence why so many college players now opt out of meaningless bowl games. Their advisors can do math.

So the real question: is the risk of injury from increasing the season by one week worth the additional participation? You say “yes”, and I say “no.” OHSAA of course says yes because it means more money. Injury and player well-being truly does not matter when it comes to their bottom line.

[rimisen49]

nice info

[GoBucks1047]

Here's a wild idea that OHSAA won't do. OHSAA wanted money when they expanded to 16 teams and teams wanted 2 home games, but with 16, it's kinda too easy to make the playoffs and you're either competing for a home game or games or a playoff spot. Well what if we drop the playoffs to 14 teams (or 7 teams from 8 districts), but go up to 8 divisions (top 2 divisions with 72 teams each, bottom 6 divisions evenly split with 92-93 teams each)? Would OHSAA consider reducing the playoff size if they added another division for football?

With 14 teams (or 7 teams in 8 districts) and allowing 3 weeks of teams hosting playoffs instead of 2 weeks before neutral site games, we get teams with a bye (still capable of hosting 2 games), teams hosting 2 games (maybe 3 games), teams hosting 1 game, and teams making the playoffs. Each district or region sees a slight decrease in percentage of teams making the playoffs while overall, the number of playoff teams stays the same making it slightly more tougher to make the playoffs. 16/18 & 16/26-27 vs. 14/18 & 14/23-24 or 7/9 & 7/11-12. This does reduce the postseason by 1 game, which might be the reason OHSAA wouldn't do this despite the fact there would be 1 extra championship game and more games in all the other rounds except the 1st round.

[enigmaax]

Because of the physical toll football takes! That’s why the tournament has been limited. Have any of you played the game?

As for your stats, are you saying all teams should make the playoffs, and Ohio should have many more divisions? We could have hundreds of divisions to guarantee more state winners. Would that make you happy?

I’m not saying there should be more divisions, I’m pointing out that it is more difficult to win a state championship in Ohio than it is virtually any other state. On top of that, football is the only sport in the state that doesn’t include all its athletes in the postseason. The line about “participation trophies” is stupid. The only thing a postseason tournament does is give everyone a chance to win the most difficult trophy to win in the entire country.

I don’t buy your injury risk argument as genuine concern; I believe your opinion comes from this need to apply your idea of competitiveness, which largely comes from professional sports, to high school athletes. Even if it were exclusively about “participation trophies,” it’s high school; yes, there’s value merely in participation at that level.

So your argument is that expanding the number of teams gives more teams the opportunity to win the title. Have you looked at the numbers over the past two years?

Each region now has 7 double digit seeded teams (10-16). That’s 28 per division, or 196 for the entire state. Last year, only 5 of those teams made it to the regional semis with 1 advancing further. In 2022, only 7 made it to the semis.

There are 56 regional final teams each year, or 112 in the past two years. Only 3 double digit teams (two 10’s and one 12) have played in the regional finals with only the Springfield team advancing.

So of the 392 10-16 seeds in the past two years, only 3 advanced to the regional finals with the vast majority losing in the first or second round. This is why I claim it to be a “participation trophy.” I remember when Burg making the playoffs meant something. Now, Burg will never miss the playoffs ever again. Participation trophy!!

The teams that won state in Ohio over the past two years are the same teams that have won the titles before the expansion. The argument that Springfield proves otherwise is somewhat a joke since they have been a top public school of recent years; will be rare to see another team do what they just did.

In other words, expanding the number of teams did not change anything in Ohio. The difficulty of winning a title and the teams doing so is still the same.


With regards to injury risk, obviously the more games/practices that occur, the higher risk of injury. That’s not opinion, it’s simple math. Hence why so many college players now opt out of meaningless bowl games. Their advisors can do math.

So the real question: is the risk of injury from increasing the season by one week worth the additional participation? You say “yes”, and I say “no.” OHSAA of course says yes because it means more money. Injury and player well-being truly does not matter when it comes to their bottom line.

Mathematically, yes it gives more teams a chance to win. I didn’t say that is the argument for doing so. Ohio remains one of the most difficult states to win a championship and it is factual that now more teams have the opportunity to be in the tournament.

It is the experience of a playoff game that makes it worth it. It is the opportunity to win just ONE playoff game that makes it worth it. That’s it; kids get to compete and it doesn’t matter if they have a real shot at a state title or even a regional title. Have you been at a game or in a community where a school gets their first playoff win? They do not care how many teams are in it or whether it becomes their only win; the moment and experience will last a lifetime.

[RBH23]

I’m not saying there should be more divisions, I’m pointing out that it is more difficult to win a state championship in Ohio than it is virtually any other state. On top of that, football is the only sport in the state that doesn’t include all its athletes in the postseason. The line about “participation trophies” is stupid. The only thing a postseason tournament does is give everyone a chance to win the most difficult trophy to win in the entire country.

I don’t buy your injury risk argument as genuine concern; I believe your opinion comes from this need to apply your idea of competitiveness, which largely comes from professional sports, to high school athletes. Even if it were exclusively about “participation trophies,” it’s high school; yes, there’s value merely in participation at that level.

So your argument is that expanding the number of teams gives more teams the opportunity to win the title. Have you looked at the numbers over the past two years?

Each region now has 7 double digit seeded teams (10-16). That’s 28 per division, or 196 for the entire state. Last year, only 5 of those teams made it to the regional semis with 1 advancing further. In 2022, only 7 made it to the semis.

There are 56 regional final teams each year, or 112 in the past two years. Only 3 double digit teams (two 10’s and one 12) have played in the regional finals with only the Springfield team advancing.

So of the 392 10-16 seeds in the past two years, only 3 advanced to the regional finals with the vast majority losing in the first or second round. This is why I claim it to be a “participation trophy.” I remember when Burg making the playoffs meant something. Now, Burg will never miss the playoffs ever again. Participation trophy!!

The teams that won state in Ohio over the past two years are the same teams that have won the titles before the expansion. The argument that Springfield proves otherwise is somewhat a joke since they have been a top public school of recent years; will be rare to see another team do what they just did.

In other words, expanding the number of teams did not change anything in Ohio. The difficulty of winning a title and the teams doing so is still the same.


With regards to injury risk, obviously the more games/practices that occur, the higher risk of injury. That’s not opinion, it’s simple math. Hence why so many college players now opt out of meaningless bowl games. Their advisors can do math.

So the real question: is the risk of injury from increasing the season by one week worth the additional participation? You say “yes”, and I say “no.” OHSAA of course says yes because it means more money. Injury and player well-being truly does not matter when it comes to their bottom line.

Mathematically, yes it gives more teams a chance to win. I didn’t say that is the argument for doing so. Ohio remains one of the most difficult states to win a championship and it is factual that now more teams have the opportunity to be in the tournament.

It is the experience of a playoff game that makes it worth it. It is the opportunity to win just ONE playoff game that makes it worth it. That’s it; kids get to compete and it doesn’t matter if they have a real shot at a state title or even a regional title. Have you been at a game or in a community where a school gets their first playoff win? They do not care how many teams are in it or whether it becomes their only win; the moment and experience will last a lifetime.

So if that’s the reason, why not just allow every team into the playoffs? Would only add one game to the season.

[enigmaax]

So your argument is that expanding the number of teams gives more teams the opportunity to win the title. Have you looked at the numbers over the past two years?

Each region now has 7 double digit seeded teams (10-16). That’s 28 per division, or 196 for the entire state. Last year, only 5 of those teams made it to the regional semis with 1 advancing further. In 2022, only 7 made it to the semis.

There are 56 regional final teams each year, or 112 in the past two years. Only 3 double digit teams (two 10’s and one 12) have played in the regional finals with only the Springfield team advancing.

So of the 392 10-16 seeds in the past two years, only 3 advanced to the regional finals with the vast majority losing in the first or second round. This is why I claim it to be a “participation trophy.” I remember when Burg making the playoffs meant something. Now, Burg will never miss the playoffs ever again. Participation trophy!!

The teams that won state in Ohio over the past two years are the same teams that have won the titles before the expansion. The argument that Springfield proves otherwise is somewhat a joke since they have been a top public school of recent years; will be rare to see another team do what they just did.

In other words, expanding the number of teams did not change anything in Ohio. The difficulty of winning a title and the teams doing so is still the same.


With regards to injury risk, obviously the more games/practices that occur, the higher risk of injury. That’s not opinion, it’s simple math. Hence why so many college players now opt out of meaningless bowl games. Their advisors can do math.

So the real question: is the risk of injury from increasing the season by one week worth the additional participation? You say “yes”, and I say “no.” OHSAA of course says yes because it means more money. Injury and player well-being truly does not matter when it comes to their bottom line.

Mathematically, yes it gives more teams a chance to win. I didn’t say that is the argument for doing so. Ohio remains one of the most difficult states to win a championship and it is factual that now more teams have the opportunity to be in the tournament.

It is the experience of a playoff game that makes it worth it. It is the opportunity to win just ONE playoff game that makes it worth it. That’s it; kids get to compete and it doesn’t matter if they have a real shot at a state title or even a regional title. Have you been at a game or in a community where a school gets their first playoff win? They do not care how many teams are in it or whether it becomes their only win; the moment and experience will last a lifetime.

So if that’s the reason, why not just allow every team into the playoffs? Would only add one game to the season.

Would probably take adding another division to keep it at a 6-game post season, but sure.

[RBH23]

Mathematically, yes it gives more teams a chance to win. I didn’t say that is the argument for doing so. Ohio remains one of the most difficult states to win a championship and it is factual that now more teams have the opportunity to be in the tournament.

It is the experience of a playoff game that makes it worth it. It is the opportunity to win just ONE playoff game that makes it worth it. That’s it; kids get to compete and it doesn’t matter if they have a real shot at a state title or even a regional title. Have you been at a game or in a community where a school gets their first playoff win? They do not care how many teams are in it or whether it becomes their only win; the moment and experience will last a lifetime.

So if that’s the reason, why not just allow every team into the playoffs? Would only add one game to the season.

Would probably take adding another division to keep it at a 6-game post season, but sure.

If it’s about making the kids happy, why should 6 post season games be the limiting factor?

But adding more divisions is an interesting thought. Why not increase the divisions to 20 or even more? That would dramatically increase the number of state champions. Should make the kids really happy.