|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 17, 2019 11:51:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Dec 17, 2019 12:39:25 GMT -6
Sorry, I don't understand the argument at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by gccwolverine on Dec 17, 2019 13:05:53 GMT -6
Good being in a state that uses "districts / regions" they suck and the format sucks. 1. not every game matters 2. districts are unbalanced in terms of numbers or in terms of strength of teams. Teams can win 2 or sometimes 1 game and be in the "playoffs." Make every game matter and allow schools to control their own schedules. I'd encourage everyone to look at the way Ohio does it best system out there in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by DownKickWrap on Dec 17, 2019 14:45:23 GMT -6
Good being in a state that uses "districts / regions" they suck and the format sucks. 1. not every game matters 2. districts are unbalanced in terms of numbers or in terms of strength of teams. Teams can win 2 or sometimes 1 game and be in the "playoffs." Make every game matter and allow schools to control their own schedules. I'd encourage everyone to look at the way Ohio does it best system out there in my opinion. Can you explain how Ohio does it? |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Dec 17, 2019 15:05:47 GMT -6
Sorry, I don't understand the argument at all. Long story boring, the main arguments against districts are: 1) The initial vote passed largely because many schools that don't even play football voted for districts. 2) Buyer remorse. Even though the state association voted in favor of districts last year, once people got a look at how the districts were going to operate and be organized, it led to a lot of cold feet. 3) The plan was heavily dependent on districts being 9 or more teams. With declining enrollments in Illinois and greater numbers of school opting for 8-man football, that is going to be virtually impossible. At least that is my analysis of the results |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Dec 17, 2019 15:22:17 GMT -6
Sorry, I don't understand the argument at all. Long story boring, the main arguments against districts are: 1) The initial vote passed largely because many schools that don't even play football voted for districts. 2) Buyer remorse. Even though the state association voted in favor of districts last year, once people got a look at how the districts were going to operate and be organized, it led to a lot of cold feet. 3) The plan was heavily dependent on districts being 9 or more teams. With declining enrollments in Illinois and greater numbers of school opting for 8-man football, that is going to be virtually impossible. At least that is my analysis of the results I didn't explain myself well. I don't understand any of this. I don't know what they're changing from and what they're changing to. |
|
|
|
Post by gccwolverine on Dec 17, 2019 15:32:29 GMT -6
Good being in a state that uses "districts / regions" they suck and the format sucks. 1. not every game matters 2. districts are unbalanced in terms of numbers or in terms of strength of teams. Teams can win 2 or sometimes 1 game and be in the "playoffs." Make every game matter and allow schools to control their own schedules. I'd encourage everyone to look at the way Ohio does it best system out there in my opinion. Can you explain how Ohio does it? Teams are classified in 7 divisions. Teams are free to form their own leagues and control their own schedules. They can play bigger schools, smaller schools, the same size schools whatever. Wins over teams in the smallest division are worth 3.5 Harbin points each division increases point value by .5 pts. So 3.5 pts for a win over a division 7 team and 7 pts for a win over the largest classification division 1. Then teams get 2nd level points for teams that were beat by the teams they beat. Those points are awarded in the same manner. First level points are added up and divided by the # of games you played, 2nd level points are added up and divided by the total number of games your opponents played. The 2 are added together and you get a "Harbin points average." The top 8 teams in 1 of 4 geographical regions (32 per division) are then in the dance. 1vs8 2vs7 3vs6 4vs5 in each region and play it down to a state champ. 1. Every game matters. 2. You have to win games to get in. 3. Wins vs bigger teams are more valued. 4. Wins vs teams that beat teams are valued. 5. And most importantly schools control their own schedules and bad or struggling teams are not forced to go play perennial powers. Or rebuilding programs can go find competitive games. Or teams that think they'd going to be very good can go schedule up and make a run being a top seed. Here in Georgia we had a few 3-7 team get in the playoffs and we have some regions with only 4 teams where everyone gets in. Or regions with 10 teams where you have to win 6 games to get in. Or really stacked regions where 3 of the final 4 are in the region or really bad regions where none of the teams are playoff material. In Ohio they get the best 32 in the field every year almost and every game matters. |
|
mc140
Sophomore Member
Posts: 218
|
Post by mc140 on Dec 17, 2019 22:03:07 GMT -6
Long story boring, the main arguments against districts are: 1) The initial vote passed largely because many schools that don't even play football voted for districts. 2) Buyer remorse. Even though the state association voted in favor of districts last year, once people got a look at how the districts were going to operate and be organized, it led to a lot of cold feet. 3) The plan was heavily dependent on districts being 9 or more teams. With declining enrollments in Illinois and greater numbers of school opting for 8-man football, that is going to be virtually impossible. At least that is my analysis of the results I didn't explain myself well. I don't understand any of this. I don't know what they're changing from and what they're changing to.
In Illinois the playoff field is not set until after week 9. The top 256 teams make the playoffs and then are placed by enrollment into 8 classes. Most conferences are a mix of schools who typically end up in different classes. Some conferences are a public/private mix. The biggest issue against districts is there are only a handful of big school teams in the St. Louis area and they would have to be in a district 300 miles away to even things out. Also, the public school football in Chicago is mostly atrocious and those schools would have been mixed with the Catholic powers. Which neither side wanted.
|
|
|
|
Post by pvogel on Dec 18, 2019 6:19:42 GMT -6
I like the Florida combo model they've gone to. Still have the districts but its only the WINNER of the district that is automatically it (seeds 1-4 in a region). Then seeds 5-8 are decided by a power point type formula like Ohio and other states. Good medium between the 2 IMO.
They changed it when Miami Central missed the playoffs at like 8-2 and was legitimately one of the top 50 teams in the country haha
|
|
|
|
Post by gccwolverine on Dec 18, 2019 7:01:18 GMT -6
I like the Florida combo model they've gone to. Still have the districts but its only the WINNER of the district that is automatically it (seeds 1-4 in a region). Then seeds 5-8 are decided by a power point type formula like Ohio and other states. Good medium between the 2 IMO. They changed it when Miami Central missed the playoffs at like 8-2 and was legitimately one of the top 50 teams in the country haha This is fine and more reasonable but still doesn't tackle the issue of unbalanced districts in terms of both number of teams and quality of teams. I also don't like teams being locked into games and not controlling their own schedule. Our new region we are in has the best team in the state (they just won the 2A state title and are dropping down to A) and maybe the worst team in the state. The good team could have a legitimate chance to score every time they snap the ball. I don't know how in good conscience the bad team can actually put their kids on a bus and go play the good team. It's really a safety issue. Those 2 shouldn't be forced to play and the bad team should be free to go control its own schedule and build its program up. Not get run by 90pts. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Dec 18, 2019 10:42:54 GMT -6
I didn't explain myself well. I don't understand any of this. I don't know what they're changing from and what they're changing to.
In Illinois the playoff field is not set until after week 9. The top 256 teams make the playoffs and then are placed by enrollment into 8 classes. Most conferences are a mix of schools who typically end up in different classes. Some conferences are a public/private mix. The biggest issue against districts is there are only a handful of big school teams in the St. Louis area and they would have to be in a district 300 miles away to even things out. Also, the public school football in Chicago is mostly atrocious and those schools would have been mixed with the Catholic powers. Which neither side wanted.
So what's the difference between districts and conferences? |
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Dec 18, 2019 11:27:37 GMT -6
In Illinois the playoff field is not set until after week 9. The top 256 teams make the playoffs and then are placed by enrollment into 8 classes. Most conferences are a mix of schools who typically end up in different classes. Some conferences are a public/private mix. The biggest issue against districts is there are only a handful of big school teams in the St. Louis area and they would have to be in a district 300 miles away to even things out. Also, the public school football in Chicago is mostly atrocious and those schools would have been mixed with the Catholic powers. Which neither side wanted.
So what's the difference between districts and conferences? Typically districts means that you only play schools that would be in your division/ classification for playoffs. Conferences can have a mix of opponents from different division/ classification from a playoff perspective. Example: Our conference here in Wisconsin has teams that are either Div 2 or Div 3, with one team that is Div 4 (In wisconsin Division 1 is highest enrollments, division 7 is lowest) We are going to a plan next year that groups all conferences into 8 team conferences (7 conference games - 2 non-conf games) And they tried to balance all conferences so that teams don't play a team that is 2 divisions higher/ lower than them, although it still happens in a few limited spot. |
|
|
|
Post by center on Dec 18, 2019 11:30:24 GMT -6
In Illinois the playoff field is not set until after week 9. The top 256 teams make the playoffs and then are placed by enrollment into 8 classes. Most conferences are a mix of schools who typically end up in different classes. Some conferences are a public/private mix. The biggest issue against districts is there are only a handful of big school teams in the St. Louis area and they would have to be in a district 300 miles away to even things out. Also, the public school football in Chicago is mostly atrocious and those schools would have been mixed with the Catholic powers. Which neither side wanted.
So what's the difference between districts and conferences? In the Illinois plan districts were going to be set by the state and all games within the district were scheduled for you by the state governing body (IHSA). You have no input on who is on your district or schedule. In Illinois conferences are created by the schools themselves with mutual consent. The conference and individual schools take care of all scheduling. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Dec 18, 2019 12:26:48 GMT -6
So what's the difference between districts and conferences? In the Illinois plan districts were going to be set by the state and all games within the district were scheduled for you by the state governing body (IHSA). You have no input on who is on your district or schedule. In Illinois conferences are created by the schools themselves with mutual consent. The conference and individual schools take care of all scheduling. How often do the conferences change? I ask because the our district now has had very few changes since I started coaching over 40 years ago. Specifically: Back before we switched from three classifications to six one school moved down to a lower classification district, one moved up, and one moved up for two years before their enrollment dropped. In addition, one school closed while two others opened in the same school district. |
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Dec 18, 2019 13:28:15 GMT -6
I REALLY miss the old CIF Southern Section way of doing it.
Get into a league of 6-8 similar sized schools that are nearby. Combine 5-6 leagues of schools that are similar in size into a division.
At the end of the season the top 2 teams from each league get automatic playoff births- the remaining at-larges (to make 16) can be filled in with whatever formula you want. But playoffs are played within the division.
You win that 4 round playoff you are champ- bam done. Realign divisions every two years or so to account for population shifts and new schools.
Problem was, it made too much sense and people couldn't justify their professional existence (that and a bunch of large schools hated losing in the playoffs so they wanted a system where they could move down and play small schools in the playoffs.)
|
|
|
|
Post by center on Dec 18, 2019 15:04:27 GMT -6
In the Illinois plan districts were going to be set by the state and all games within the district were scheduled for you by the state governing body (IHSA). You have no input on who is on your district or schedule. In Illinois conferences are created by the schools themselves with mutual consent. The conference and individual schools take care of all scheduling. How often do the conferences change? I ask because the our district now has had very few changes since I started coaching over 40 years ago. Specifically: Back before we switched from three classifications to six one school moved down to a lower classification district, one moved up, and one moved up for two years before their enrollment dropped. In addition, one school closed while two others opened in the same school district. Conference changes were becoming rampant in Illinois and that is why the district proposal came up. In the Illinois playoff system you basically need a 5-4 record or better to qualify for postseason. In fact not all 5-4 teams will make it. Everyone is looking for that magical 5th win so they start looking around at a better conference situation to get it. Football drove all the conference changes and it has become hard to keep track off. It has gotten so bad that schools will make a conference change for 2 years down the road and then change conferences again before they ever start in the new conference. And all the other sports (which all teams qualify for postseason in Illinois) are along for the ride. |
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Dec 18, 2019 17:18:09 GMT -6
What's more important:
having a regular season that features easy travel, good matches, and an occasional lopsided one that the schools want to play for some sentimental reason
-or-
allowing every team a theoretic shot at a single trophy that's a long shot gotten to by a series of knockouts prone to flukage?
|
|
smcauliffe54
Sophomore Member
Wisconsin 2018 Division 4 State Champions 14-0
Posts: 188 
|
Post by smcauliffe54 on Dec 18, 2019 19:37:26 GMT -6
So what's the difference between districts and conferences? Typically districts means that you only play schools that would be in your division/ classification for playoffs. Conferences can have a mix of opponents from different division/ classification from a playoff perspective. Example: Our conference here in Wisconsin has teams that are either Div 2 or Div 3, with one team that is Div 4 (In wisconsin Division 1 is highest enrollments, division 7 is lowest) We are going to a plan next year that groups all conferences into 8 team conferences (7 conference games - 2 non-conf games) And they tried to balance all conferences so that teams don't play a team that is 2 divisions higher/ lower than them, although it still happens in a few limited spot. It is also football only re-alignment. |
|
jmer
Probationary Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by jmer on Dec 19, 2019 12:18:03 GMT -6
Here is Iowa there is talk about splitting up the classes by socioeconomic instead of just enrollment and going to more of a conference schedule instead of districts. The inner city schools can't compete. Over the last 12 years, none of the five 4A (highest class in Iowa) inner city Des Moines schools have beat a single suburban 4A school. The record is like 0-160+ with an average margin of defeat being 40 points. But the inner city schools have an enrollment where nearly 80% of the student body is on free and reduced price lunch while the suburban schools percentage is under 10% of students getting free or reduced price lunch.
So, the model they are looking at is teams having to add or subtract a percentage of enrollment based on where they are at in terms of the average state wide percentage of students who get free or reduced price lunch.
|
|
