Page 3 of Voting will be this afternoon. The proposed new format will do away with cross-bracketing. Instead, they would opt to have the first two rounds consist... 123 comments | 14820 Views | Go to page 1 →
Jan 16, 19, 01:03 PM #31
Jan 16, 19, 01:12 PM #32No one should get too worked up. Whatever they decide, history says they will change it again in the near future.
Jan 16, 19, 01:16 PM #33
Jan 16, 19, 01:28 PM #34
I’ve said it for years. Shorten the playoffs a week. For the teams that say they are the third or fourth best team in a really good district (Louisville schools) well... finish first or second.
- Join Date
- Aug 11
Jan 16, 19, 01:34 PM #35
What about the districts that have 1 or 2 of the top teams in the state? By the 2nd round someone is already out? It would be nice if it least the top teams could meet in the semi-state. I'm for getting rid of district playoffs and seeding the region
- Join Date
- Aug 18
Jan 16, 19, 01:47 PM #36I see this will have the KHSAA getting in bed with a Corporation (MaxPreps) to determine playoff seeding. Generally speaking I think that is a bad idea but not the end of the world.
I also see margin of victory is not a factor which in my opinion undermines the credibility of any system like this.
I also wonder what happens when a team like Trinity plays a bunch of good out of state teams and gets beat. I assume they end up being seeded way lower than they actually "should be" seeded because it is an all or nothing, win or lose system. Translation, someone(s) is going to be in for a big surprise in the playoffs when they think they are playing a lower seed.
Frankly, if they want to do something like this I think using Calpreps would be much better.
But... it really doesn't matter much, the cream will still rise to the top and it should ensure more competitive state championship games.
And even though I threw out some negatives here, I am for seeding of some kind.
Jan 16, 19, 01:56 PM #37
Jan 16, 19, 02:00 PM #38So I guess we can scrap those future cross-bracketing tables they had published.
Kinda incredible to me that this was not a blip on the radar and got voted in during a single day.
Jan 16, 19, 02:03 PM #39
Jan 16, 19, 02:07 PM #40
Jan 16, 19, 02:16 PM #41
If this had included eliminating the 1 vs. 4 pairing for the first round, as already noted in this thread, then I would've been okay with it.
- Join Date
- Feb 13
Jan 16, 19, 02:32 PM #42Be interesting how this affects Trinity with their out of state schedule. Will the RPI count out of state opponents? I think Cal Preps would be better rating system. Will they mimic the old NCAA percentages to calculate RPI or do different weights?
Jan 16, 19, 02:42 PM #43
Jan 16, 19, 02:47 PM #44
How will out-of-state opponents be handled?
Out-of-state opponents from the following states will be counted the same as in-state opponents:
In other words, teams will receive the true value of their opponents' opponents winning percentage. This is because each of the states listed above are neighboring states to Colorado, and each of these states are also MaxPreps partners. This ensures accurate reporting of data.
All other out-of state opponents will be handled in the following manner: Their direct winning percentage (for example, .750) will count toward the formula, but each of their opponents will have a .500 winning percentage assigned. Were this not the case, schools would be chasing tens of thousands of opponents of out-of-state opponents over the course of a season, and there is no way to ensure the accuracy of that data.
The .500 figure was selected because it is the average value of opponents' opponents winning percentages across all sports in the data we've run.
Note that it is the responsibility of the Colorado school to ensure that the data from their out-of-state opponent is correctly listed on MaxPreps.
Jan 16, 19, 06:01 PM #45Using calpreps.com for seeding in round 3 and 4, and assuming the first two rounds would have produced the same 8 teams for round 3, here is what round 3 looks like for class 1A last year:
#8 Crittenden County at #1 Beechwood ... that is a haul!
#7 Frankfort at #2 Pikeville
#6 Williamsburg at #3 Raceland
#5 Campbellsville at #4 Paintsville
Using calpreps.com matchups, here are the results of those games:
Beechwood 42 Crittenden County 14
Pikeville 42 Frankfort 14
Raceland 34 Williamsburg 21
Paintsville 28 Campbellsville 21
Re-seeding for round 4 produces these state semifinals:
#4 Paintsville at #1 Beechwood
#3 Raceland at #2 Pikeville
We saw Raceland and Pikeville so we will roll with that actual score of:
Pikeville 38 Raceland 19
Using calpreps.com matchup:
Beechwood 34 Paintsville 14
At the end of that, we get the same title game matchup of Beechwood vs. Pikeville.
In this example, the big negative is the travel for teams in round 3.