OHSAA FOOTBALL PLAYOFFS ?

[FANOSPORTS]

School spirit & inclusiveness or just $$$$$ ? Everyone would like a State championship and in most other sports all schools regardless of records coming in play sectionals, districts, regionals and states and it's a hard road but someone is eventually crowned as a true champion . I know that in football you couldn't have every team in the playoffs for a variety of reasons but with the system we have are we truly putting the BEST teams in the playoffs nowadays or do we just keep expanding divisions for the dollars? I remember when Ohio first started the playoff system (on the field) in 1972 up to and including now:

1972-1979 A-AA-AAA (3 classes, 4 regions, 1 team per region = 12 teams in all)
1980-1984 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 2 teams per region = 40 teams in all)
1985-1993 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 4 teams per region = 80 teams in all)
1994-1998 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions,4 regions, 4 teams per region= 96 teams in all)
1999-2012 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions, 4 regions, 8 teams per region= 192 teams in all)
2013- Pres I-II-III-IV-V-VI-VII (7 divisions,4 regions, 8 teams per region = 224 teams in all)

We have nearly 1/3 of all football playing schools making the playoffs now and there are as many lopsided games in the playoffs as we see % wise in regular seasons now. When the 8 teams per region started in 1999 is when I saw things starting to go backwards and I still see many 4-6 and 5-5 teams with strength of schedule that would absolutely demolish some of these teams that are put in @ 5 thru 8 and I get it that schools feel good and It's good for the communities and yes, any kid would love to say he played on a playoff team for the rest of his life but I think It's just too watered down now because of the $$$$ OHSAA can make. They're probably already planning a D8.

[Pol pot]

Misguided post, the expansion to a 7th division really did not increase revenue. What it did do was create more balance and opportunities for the largest and smallest schools.

[FANOSPORTS]

Misguided post, the expansion to a 7th division really did not increase revenue. What it did do was create more balance and opportunities for the largest and smallest schools.

Yep, created so the Massillon's of the world might win their first title on the field after 26 paper titles or whatever it is and give the smallest schools at least a chance to compete in playoffs but It's still watered down with too many teams and I hope they never expand further. For the SEO area the numbers above really show how good the Ironton, Wheelersburg & Nelsonville York teams had to be just to get there in the early years , let alone win it all and they along with Trimble represented the area well in the early years and continue to do so.

[HamPorter]

Misguided post, the expansion to a 7th division really did not increase revenue. What it did do was create more balance and opportunities for the largest and smallest schools.

Yep, created so the Massillon's of the world might win their first title on the field after 26 paper titles or whatever it is and give the smallest schools at least a chance to compete in playoffs but It's still watered down with too many teams and I hope they never expand further. For the SEO area the numbers above really show how good the Ironton, Wheelersburg & Nelsonville York teams had to be just to get there in the early years , let alone win it all and they along with Trimble represented the area well in the early years and continue to do so.

That seems to be against what your first post said. Also, I think one of the bigger people involved in the SE District might understand the financial side of things better than a poster with an axe to grind against the OHSAA

[FANOSPORTS]

Misguided post, the expansion to a 7th division really did not increase revenue. What it did do was create more balance and opportunities for the largest and smallest schools.

Yep, created so the Massillon's of the world might win their first title on the field after 26 paper titles or whatever it is and give the smallest schools at least a chance to compete in playoffs but It's still watered down with too many teams and I hope they never expand further. For the SEO area the numbers above really show how good the Ironton, Wheelersburg & Nelsonville York teams had to be just to get there in the early years , let alone win it all and they along with Trimble represented the area well in the early years and continue to do so.

That seems to be against what your first post said. Also, I think one of the bigger people involved in the SE District might understand the financial side of things better than a poster with an axe to grind against the OHSAA

Nope, no axe to grind. Just stating what I've seen over the years for playoff team numbers and competition in those games. I don't know the insides of OHSAA finances but as in any association, business etc, if you don't have the money you can't spend the money.

[Orange and Brown]

I think the playoff system is just fine the way it is.

[smurray]

How many eventual State Champions (lower divisions primarily) have been 5-8 seeds simply because their strength of schedule had them playing higher division schools. They may have went 6-4 or 5-5 by playing bigger schools but made the playoffs and won State when they wouldn’t have made when only 4 were in.
I do think the 8 per region format is plenty though.....

[enigmaax]

School spirit & inclusiveness or just $$$$$ ? Everyone would like a State championship and in most other sports all schools regardless of records coming in play sectionals, districts, regionals and states and it's a hard road but someone is eventually crowned as a true champion . I know that in football you couldn't have every team in the playoffs for a variety of reasons but with the system we have are we truly putting the BEST teams in the playoffs nowadays or do we just keep expanding divisions for the dollars? I remember when Ohio first started the playoff system (on the field) in 1972 up to and including now:

1972-1979 A-AA-AAA (3 classes, 4 regions, 1 team per region = 12 teams in all)
1980-1984 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 2 teams per region = 40 teams in all)
1985-1993 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 4 teams per region = 80 teams in all)
1994-1998 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions,4 regions, 4 teams per region= 96 teams in all)
1999-2012 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions, 4 regions, 8 teams per region= 192 teams in all)
2013- Pres I-II-III-IV-V-VI-VII (7 divisions,4 regions, 8 teams per region = 224 teams in all)

We have nearly 1/3 of all football playing schools making the playoffs now and there are as many lopsided games in the playoffs as we see % wise in regular seasons now. When the 8 teams per region started in 1999 is when I saw things starting to go backwards and I still see many 4-6 and 5-5 teams with strength of schedule that would absolutely demolish some of these teams that are put in @ 5 thru 8 and I get it that schools feel good and It's good for the communities and yes, any kid would love to say he played on a playoff team for the rest of his life but I think It's just too watered down now because of the $$$$ OHSAA can make. They're probably already planning a D8.

I'm not clear on what your point is. On one hand, you say that other tournaments crown a "true champion" (not really true, a team can be upset in one game early in the tournament - if that is the only game they lost all season, does it really mean all the teams that progress are "better"). Do you mean that since the football playoffs do not include everyone that there is never a "true champion"?

Then you ask if the "best" teams actually make the playoffs and allude to the fact that you think many teams with losing records could beat teams that are seeded 5-8. So do you think the playoffs should be expanded to include those teams with losing records or do you think the system for determining the teams is not right? Like, would you rather have a selection committee say, "Oh, this 4-6 team is clearly better than that 10-0 team"?I don't understand how the complaint could be that the field is "watered down" while at the same time be that losing teams that aren't making it could win games?

As far as competitiveness, I think there's just a standard discrepancy in performance that is going to show itself regardless of how many teams or who you put in. Yes, there are some lopsided scores in the early rounds. But there are also relatively few nail-biter championship games. If the ultimate goal of a tournament is to get the "right" teams to the title game, you would think those games would be competitive. State Championship games that are decided by a TD or less by key eras:

3 classes, 4 teams = 33% (8/24)
6 divisions, 4 teams = 43% (13/30)
6 divisions, 8 teams = 35% (29/84)
7 divisions, 8 teams = 43% (15/35)

It seems like the last move helped make a difference as to the quality of teams making the championship games and just taking last year as an example, there was just a few percentage points difference in close games between the Regionals and the State Semis & Finals (both were around 26-28%). There are a handful of teams that will beat up just about everybody, a handful of teams who might not belong, and a lot in the middle who will meet up somewhere and have some good games. If you don't have all those teams in the middle playing competitive games, you're still going to have the handful of great teams creating a large number of lopsided games.

[FANOSPORTS]

School spirit & inclusiveness or just $$$$$ ? Everyone would like a State championship and in most other sports all schools regardless of records coming in play sectionals, districts, regionals and states and it's a hard road but someone is eventually crowned as a true champion . I know that in football you couldn't have every team in the playoffs for a variety of reasons but with the system we have are we truly putting the BEST teams in the playoffs nowadays or do we just keep expanding divisions for the dollars? I remember when Ohio first started the playoff system (on the field) in 1972 up to and including now:

1972-1979 A-AA-AAA (3 classes, 4 regions, 1 team per region = 12 teams in all)
1980-1984 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 2 teams per region = 40 teams in all)
1985-1993 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 4 teams per region = 80 teams in all)
1994-1998 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions,4 regions, 4 teams per region= 96 teams in all)
1999-2012 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions, 4 regions, 8 teams per region= 192 teams in all)
2013- Pres I-II-III-IV-V-VI-VII (7 divisions,4 regions, 8 teams per region = 224 teams in all)

We have nearly 1/3 of all football playing schools making the playoffs now and there are as many lopsided games in the playoffs as we see % wise in regular seasons now. When the 8 teams per region started in 1999 is when I saw things starting to go backwards and I still see many 4-6 and 5-5 teams with strength of schedule that would absolutely demolish some of these teams that are put in @ 5 thru 8 and I get it that schools feel good and It's good for the communities and yes, any kid would love to say he played on a playoff team for the rest of his life but I think It's just too watered down now because of the $$$$ OHSAA can make. They're probably already planning a D8.

I'm not clear on what your point is. On one hand, you say that other tournaments crown a "true champion" (not really true, a team can be upset in one game early in the tournament - if that is the only game they lost all season, does it really mean all the teams that progress are "better"). Do you mean that since the football playoffs do not include everyone that there is never a "true champion"?

Then you ask if the "best" teams actually make the playoffs and allude to the fact that you think many teams with losing records could beat teams that are seeded 5-8. So do you think the playoffs should be expanded to include those teams with losing records or do you think the system for determining the teams is not right? Like, would you rather have a selection committee say, "Oh, this 4-6 team is clearly better than that 10-0 team"?I don't understand how the complaint could be that the field is "watered down" while at the same time be that losing teams that aren't making it could win games?

As far as competitiveness, I think there's just a standard discrepancy in performance that is going to show itself regardless of how many teams or who you put in. Yes, there are some lopsided scores in the early rounds. But there are also relatively few nail-biter championship games. If the ultimate goal of a tournament is to get the "right" teams to the title game, you would think those games would be competitive. State Championship games that are decided by a TD or less by key eras:

3 classes, 4 teams = 33% (8/24)
6 divisions, 4 teams = 43% (13/30)
6 divisions, 8 teams = 35% (29/84)
7 divisions, 8 teams = 43% (15/35)

It seems like the last move helped make a difference as to the quality of teams making the championship games and just taking last year as an example, there was just a few percentage points difference in close games between the Regionals and the State Semis & Finals (both were around 26-28%). There are a handful of teams that will beat up just about everybody, a handful of teams who might not belong, and a lot in the middle who will meet up somewhere and have some good games. If you don't have all those teams in the middle playing competitive games, you're still going to have the handful of great teams creating a large number of lopsided games.

Paragraph 1: Yes , as that will always be subjective when all teams don't participate and teams with multiple losses have been in many football championship games much as in baseball and basketball when double digit loss teams get hot at tournament time and make big runs.
Paragraph 2 : Strength of schedule should be weighted more with the current system especially if you play teams 1, 2 and sometimes 3 divisions higher and lose. More expansion, no way.
Paragraph 3: Standard discrepancy yes and an upset is bound to happen every now and then in the first week but with 8 teams you see more lopsided wins than close games & upsets by far in week #1. As far as championship games go you will have a multitude of reasons for off games some years (personnel matchups, philosophies, injuries) once you reach that pinnacle game and some conferences come in knowing they play a better schedule week to week in the regular season than some of these teams play on any one or two given weeks during the season which gives them an edge, i.e. GCL -MAC and other's play independent schedules which include powers from within and outside the state to get ready for this time of year. You'll have an outlier that comes out of nowhere to make a run once in a great while but not to often. I have no magic formula and my opinion means squat but It's all good. Good luck to all SEO playoff teams tomorrow !!!!!

[Otto]

The creation of D7 was a mistake. I think the system was better off with only D1-D6. Even the state championships got so bloated that they had to add a Thursday game to accomodate all the divisions. As it has been mentioned here and on other sites, it seems that the expansion was not really made to help out the small schools, but rather to take pressure off of the D1 schools. Right now there are a lot of schools who are in D2 who should really be in D1.

It's obvious how this just waters down the divisions. Teams that made the playoffs once every 10 years or had never even made the playoffs before now get in routinely. This is the equivalent of the "give every kid a trophy" mentality that plagues sports these days.

[greygoose]

School spirit & inclusiveness or just $$$$$ ? Everyone would like a State championship and in most other sports all schools regardless of records coming in play sectionals, districts, regionals and states and it's a hard road but someone is eventually crowned as a true champion . I know that in football you couldn't have every team in the playoffs for a variety of reasons but with the system we have are we truly putting the BEST teams in the playoffs nowadays or do we just keep expanding divisions for the dollars? I remember when Ohio first started the playoff system (on the field) in 1972 up to and including now:

1972-1979 A-AA-AAA (3 classes, 4 regions, 1 team per region = 12 teams in all)
1980-1984 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 2 teams per region = 40 teams in all)
1985-1993 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 4 teams per region = 80 teams in all)
1994-1998 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions,4 regions, 4 teams per region= 96 teams in all)
1999-2012 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions, 4 regions, 8 teams per region= 192 teams in all)
2013- Pres I-II-III-IV-V-VI-VII (7 divisions,4 regions, 8 teams per region = 224 teams in all)

We have nearly 1/3 of all football playing schools making the playoffs now and there are as many lopsided games in the playoffs as we see % wise in regular seasons now. When the 8 teams per region started in 1999 is when I saw things starting to go backwards and I still see many 4-6 and 5-5 teams with strength of schedule that would absolutely demolish some of these teams that are put in @ 5 thru 8 and I get it that schools feel good and It's good for the communities and yes, any kid would love to say he played on a playoff team for the rest of his life but I think It's just too watered down now because of the $$$$ OHSAA can make. They're probably already planning a D8.

So are you wanting them to go back to 4 teams or what??

[CheeseBurger]

Hey you stats guys how many regional finals have came from 5-8 seed. This should let us know if it was worth it. I would assume it’s a bunch and proves why it needed expanded in the first place. This is why I would assume it was needed.

[FANOSPORTS]

School spirit & inclusiveness or just $$$$$ ? Everyone would like a State championship and in most other sports all schools regardless of records coming in play sectionals, districts, regionals and states and it's a hard road but someone is eventually crowned as a true champion . I know that in football you couldn't have every team in the playoffs for a variety of reasons but with the system we have are we truly putting the BEST teams in the playoffs nowadays or do we just keep expanding divisions for the dollars? I remember when Ohio first started the playoff system (on the field) in 1972 up to and including now:

1972-1979 A-AA-AAA (3 classes, 4 regions, 1 team per region = 12 teams in all)
1980-1984 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 2 teams per region = 40 teams in all)
1985-1993 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 4 teams per region = 80 teams in all)
1994-1998 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions,4 regions, 4 teams per region= 96 teams in all)
1999-2012 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions, 4 regions, 8 teams per region= 192 teams in all)
2013- Pres I-II-III-IV-V-VI-VII (7 divisions,4 regions, 8 teams per region = 224 teams in all)

We have nearly 1/3 of all football playing schools making the playoffs now and there are as many lopsided games in the playoffs as we see % wise in regular seasons now. When the 8 teams per region started in 1999 is when I saw things starting to go backwards and I still see many 4-6 and 5-5 teams with strength of schedule that would absolutely demolish some of these teams that are put in @ 5 thru 8 and I get it that schools feel good and It's good for the communities and yes, any kid would love to say he played on a playoff team for the rest of his life but I think It's just too watered down now because of the $$$$ OHSAA can make. They're probably already planning a D8.

So are you wanting them to go back to 4 teams or what??

In a nutshell yes but it'll never happen. Once something is set into place it seems to just keep rolling like a freight train so all you can do is hope the brakes work and it doesn't crash.

[FANOSPORTS]

The creation of D7 was a mistake. I think the system was better off with only D1-D6. Even the state championships got so bloated that they had to add a Thursday game to accomodate all the divisions. As it has been mentioned here and on other sites, it seems that the expansion was not really made to help out the small schools, but rather to take pressure off of the D1 schools. Right now there are a lot of schools who are in D2 who should really be in D1.

It's obvious how this just waters down the divisions. Teams that made the playoffs once every 10 years or had never even made the playoffs before now get in routinely. This is the equivalent of the "give every kid a trophy" mentality that plagues sports these days.

Well, at least someone on this thread is on my side. I thought I was on my own as I was thinking originally about "every little Johnny gets a trophy " but forgot to add it while typing my original post

[VetteMan]

I agree with what you're saying about the OHSAA and the money. The bottem line is that the money is the only thing they are interested in, and probably in a few years they probably will add another Division. I don't think that they care if it is watered down. More games, more teams, more parents and fans spending more money. It's a little hard to look at it and be objective about certain things, when you see the joy and the coming together that teams like Green and Fisher Catholic and a lot of other small schools and there fans are being able to come together and enjoy.

[CheeseBurger]

The creation of D7 was a mistake. I think the system was better off with only D1-D6. Even the state championships got so bloated that they had to add a Thursday game to accomodate all the divisions. As it has been mentioned here and on other sites, it seems that the expansion was not really made to help out the small schools, but rather to take pressure off of the D1 schools. Right now there are a lot of schools who are in D2 who should really be in D1.

It's obvious how this just waters down the divisions. Teams that made the playoffs once every 10 years or had never even made the playoffs before now get in routinely. This is the equivalent of the "give every kid a trophy" mentality that plagues sports these days.

Well, at least someone on this thread is on my side. I thought I was on my own as I was thinking originally about "every little Johnny gets a trophy " but forgot to add it while typing my original post

I get it wondered why not many schools in d1 regions that changed along with d7 for that reason I would have to also go against it. Looks to me like they need to crack down harder on out of district players when daburg gets another title.

[FANOSPORTS]

The creation of D7 was a mistake. I think the system was better off with only D1-D6. Even the state championships got so bloated that they had to add a Thursday game to accomodate all the divisions. As it has been mentioned here and on other sites, it seems that the expansion was not really made to help out the small schools, but rather to take pressure off of the D1 schools. Right now there are a lot of schools who are in D2 who should really be in D1.

It's obvious how this just waters down the divisions. Teams that made the playoffs once every 10 years or had never even made the playoffs before now get in routinely. This is the equivalent of the "give every kid a trophy" mentality that plagues sports these days.

Well, at least someone on this thread is on my side. I thought I was on my own as I was thinking originally about "every little Johnny gets a trophy " but forgot to add it while typing my original post

I get it wondered why not many schools in d1 regions that changed along with d7 for that reason I would have to also go against it. Looks to me like they need to crack down harder on out of district players when daburg gets another title.

They (OHSAA) finally has all the competitive balance numbers taken care of to appease some people that grumbled about that for decades but the crack down (per media, reports, directives, by-laws, rulings, etc) on transfers will continue to be a problem that won't be remedied anytime soon and will get worse before it gets better all across the state.

[CheeseBurger]

Not like the days of old locked down
Enrollment. Oak hill was the only school I knew of with open enrollment ie “out district “ players students guess they all do now?

[FANOSPORTS]

Not like the days of old locked down
Enrollment. Oak hill was the only school I knew of with open enrollment ie “out district “ players students guess they all do now?

The wave of the present and future

[greygoose]

School spirit & inclusiveness or just $$$$$ ? Everyone would like a State championship and in most other sports all schools regardless of records coming in play sectionals, districts, regionals and states and it's a hard road but someone is eventually crowned as a true champion . I know that in football you couldn't have every team in the playoffs for a variety of reasons but with the system we have are we truly putting the BEST teams in the playoffs nowadays or do we just keep expanding divisions for the dollars? I remember when Ohio first started the playoff system (on the field) in 1972 up to and including now:

1972-1979 A-AA-AAA (3 classes, 4 regions, 1 team per region = 12 teams in all)
1980-1984 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 2 teams per region = 40 teams in all)
1985-1993 I-II-III-IV-V (5 divisions, 4 regions, 4 teams per region = 80 teams in all)
1994-1998 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions,4 regions, 4 teams per region= 96 teams in all)
1999-2012 I-II-III-IV-V-VI (6 divisions, 4 regions, 8 teams per region= 192 teams in all)
2013- Pres I-II-III-IV-V-VI-VII (7 divisions,4 regions, 8 teams per region = 224 teams in all)

We have nearly 1/3 of all football playing schools making the playoffs now and there are as many lopsided games in the playoffs as we see % wise in regular seasons now. When the 8 teams per region started in 1999 is when I saw things starting to go backwards and I still see many 4-6 and 5-5 teams with strength of schedule that would absolutely demolish some of these teams that are put in @ 5 thru 8 and I get it that schools feel good and It's good for the communities and yes, any kid would love to say he played on a playoff team for the rest of his life but I think It's just too watered down now because of the $$$$ OHSAA can make. They're probably already planning a D8.

So are you wanting them to go back to 4 teams or what??

In a nutshell yes but it'll never happen. Once something is set into place it seems to just keep rolling like a freight train so all you can do is hope the brakes work and it doesn't crash.

I'll be honest there's times when I do think it'd be nicer to go back to the 4 team setup, I know most won't agree but it was more prestiges to make it at that point. Teams had to find a happy medium when scheduling because to soft a schedule you weren't getting in, there were plenty of teams going 9-1 and 10-0 not make it. Now it seems like teams that just have a so so year have a shot at making it especially if you find yourself in the right region. To counter that it does give us more football and some games are quality games, some yeah not so much. Like you said though that train has left the station and isn't returning. I'd love for them to fix the region break down, if that's even possible, just because there's no reason to have teams driving 3-4 hrs in the 1st round to play a team within their own region.