I think the higher seed should be rewarded...At least it gives some meaning to the regular season results...

I don't think seeding matters now. Only the district number (odd or even) does. I think Mayfield is on the road in the third round, regardless of the opponent.

 

Here is the tests for 3rd round hosting, the way I understand it.

 

Seeding is the first test. Higher seed hosts.

 

If both teams are the same seed, then odd/even is the test. Odd district hosts in the odd year, even district hosts in the even year.

 

If both districts are odd or both are even, the higher district # hosts in the even years and the odd # hosts in the odd year.

My problem with it is the inconsistency. If the seeding is of paramount importance in the quarterfinals, why doesn't it matter at all for the semifinals?

See this thread for more info.

 

Also notice how some teams will almost assuredly KEEP the home field advantage the next three years in the playoffs.

My problem with it is the inconsistency. If the seeding is of paramount importance in the quarterfinals, why doesn't it matter at all for the semifinals?

 

That is the way it has always been. Seeding prevails for the Regionals and mandatory rotation of the semifinal games between regions.

I could understand it in the past, since adjacent districts were grouped together in the playoffs.

 

Now that those districts are kept apart until the third round, I don't understand why seeding suddenly becomes the determining factor.

I guess it rewards you for taking care of business in the regular season. If you want to secure home field, you better win. Just like always.

If seeding is so important, why didn't it matter for the semifinals? It just seems like an inconsistency to me.

I could understand it in the past, since adjacent districts were grouped together in the playoffs.

 

Now that those districts are kept apart until the third round, I don't understand why seeding suddenly becomes the determining factor.

 

I said in a previous post they should set it up just like baseball. Have a six-year plan for the third round. Seed the first two rounds and let the chips fall in the third round.

 

Year 1: 2@1, 4@3, 6@5, 8@7

Year 2: 1@4, 3@2, 5@8, 7@6

Year 3: 3@1, 2@4, 7@5, 6@8

 

Reverse from previous three years

Year 4: 1@2, 3@4, 5@6, 7@8

Year 5: 4@1, 2@3, 8@5, 6@7

Year 6: 1@3, 4@2, 5@7, 8@6

 

District champion is after two rounds of play. Then play the third round as posted above.

 

In the state semifinals, districts 1-4 would always play in the state semifinals and 5-8 would always play each other. Have the low seeds host in odd years and the high seeds host in even years. I think this would be an easy way to determine hosts/opponents without making it too complex for the normal fan.

If seeding is so important, why didn't it matter for the semifinals? It just seems like an inconsistency to me.

 

I don't know all the answers.

 

My best guess would be with the added travel time of the semifinals, they wanted to make sure that was rotated, so seeding was not taken into account.

 

With the old system, seeding was important because a #1 and a #2 from the same district could meet in the regional finals, and seeding was the fairest way to decide home team.

 

With this new system that is no longer a concern. I can only guess that they wanted to reward the teams that earned that #1 seed in the Regionals, like before. While not necessary, it is still a nice reward. However when you put it into practice, I don't know how many times it will really make a difference. More #1's will make the regionals now than before, IMO, and that will end up putting the odd/even draw as the deciding factor.

I don't know all the answers.

True, although I suspect you put more thought into it than the KHSAA sometimes does. If you thought like them, I would be worried about you. :lol: