REGULAR SEASON

Before the season begins, teams are placed in their respective classes. Everyone knows who is in the class and what possible teams they could match up with in the playoffs.

Eliminate "districts" as we know them. Don't force teams to play teams they don't want to play.  Play 10 games. Play 9 games. Play 8 games. Whatever your school wants to do. If basketball coaches can figure out how to schedule 30 games, volleyball 35, baseball/softball 36, surely football coaches can find a way to schedule 10. The top tier schools may have a little more trouble than others but they would also be able to play other top tier programs (bigger gates, bigger exposure, etc.) Eliminating district games means the end of the district grid during the middle of 90+% of the school's fall break window. 

PLAYOFFS

When the playoffs arrive, teams are ranked based on whatever ranking system is decided. RPI, Cal Preps, combination of them both, etc. 

The number of teams in the playoffs can be argued to exhaustion. No fewer than 16 per class. 20 would be a good number. No more than 24. This should eliminate any first round games being forfeited and having teams lose opportunities to play.

If the argument is that every team should have the opportunity to play that last game, let all teams that don't make the playoffs play one extra game against an opponent that they will at least have a chance to compete in. This might allow a little shred of momentum going into the next year for teams that are used to getting running clocked late in the first quarter. Or if a team is just beat to death and need to end the season, let them end it. Every situation is different. 

CONCLUSION

This method eliminates most all meaningless games. Yes, there will still be running clocks and blowouts. But now this gives the feel of the old 4 class system. Back then, you had to have a capable enough team to win 2-3-4 games in your district just to make it. So even your 4 seeds typically fought for a little while before the better teams extended the score to a comfortable margin. 

It makes going to the playoffs something earned, not given. It allows teams that just don't have the team to compete with top tier teams the chance to schedule teams that they can compete with which should help build up or build back their programs.  In our current system, if you are unlucky enough to be in a 6 team district, that's half of your schedule decided for you. A five team district, 40% of your schedule is gone. I don't think coaches of other sports would be too fond to have 40-50% forced on them, especially if their district is loaded. 

There are the traditional powerhouses that only a state title will be considered a great year. There are schools that want to win ONE playoff game, have a winning record, etc. Each year is different. Each group of kids is different. Without naming schools, there are several that when the new districts came out, you just felt awful for. It doesn't help their program AT ALL. Allow these schools the chance to compete without having to go "independent" or suffer financial consequences. 

 

Thoughts? Make it better. Anything worth moving forward with? 

 

I appreciate the effort and thoughts you put into this. The proposal I have mentioned several times in various threads will accomplish almost the same result in a much simpler way. Here it is:

A team needs 2 wins to qualify for post season play.

That's it. That simple. Make the brackets the same way they are now. If a team is matched up with a team with fewer than 2 wins, that team gets a first round bye.

This does eliminate a lot of bad teams, but still forces the bad teams that beat those really bad teams to play in the playoffs against far superior opponents. 

I'd be ok with just the play your 10 games against anyone you want and then take all four teams and keep it at 32.  

16 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

I appreciate the effort and thoughts you put into this. The proposal I have mentioned several times in various threads will accomplish almost the same result in a much simpler way. Here it is:

A team needs 2 wins to qualify for post season play.

That's it. That simple. Make the brackets the same way they are now. If a team is matched up with a team with fewer than 2 wins, that team gets a first round bye.

I'm fine with that, if the number is five wins. 

Two doesn't really change anything for me. Winning 20% of your games shouldn't result in being rewarded with a playoff game. 

1 minute ago, TheDeuce said:

I'm fine with that, if the number is five wins. 

Two doesn't really change anything for me. Winning 20% of your games shouldn't result in being rewarded with a playoff game. 

I am more in line with this if there is a magic number involved. 

I still say do away with districts, use Calpreps, and play 1-32, 2-31, etc.

1 minute ago, theguru said:

I am more in line with this if there is a magic number involved. 

I still say do away with districts, use Calpreps, and play 1-32, 2-31, etc.

Yeah, I think how the districts are structured is a big issue. 

1 hour ago, ThrowItDeep said:

REGULAR SEASON

Before the season begins, teams are placed in their respective classes. Everyone knows who is in the class and what possible teams they could match up with in the playoffs.

Eliminate "districts" as we know them. Don't force teams to play teams they don't want to play.  Play 10 games. Play 9 games. Play 8 games. Whatever your school wants to do. If basketball coaches can figure out how to schedule 30 games, volleyball 35, baseball/softball 36, surely football coaches can find a way to schedule 10. The top tier schools may have a little more trouble than others but they would also be able to play other top tier programs (bigger gates, bigger exposure, etc.) Eliminating district games means the end of the district grid during the middle of 90+% of the school's fall break window. 

PLAYOFFS

When the playoffs arrive, teams are ranked based on whatever ranking system is decided. RPI, Cal Preps, combination of them both, etc. 

The number of teams in the playoffs can be argued to exhaustion. No fewer than 16 per class. 20 would be a good number. No more than 24. This should eliminate any first round games being forfeited and having teams lose opportunities to play.

If the argument is that every team should have the opportunity to play that last game, let all teams that don't make the playoffs play one extra game against an opponent that they will at least have a chance to compete in. This might allow a little shred of momentum going into the next year for teams that are used to getting running clocked late in the first quarter. Or if a team is just beat to death and need to end the season, let them end it. Every situation is different. 

CONCLUSION

This method eliminates most all meaningless games. Yes, there will still be running clocks and blowouts. But now this gives the feel of the old 4 class system. Back then, you had to have a capable enough team to win 2-3-4 games in your district just to make it. So even your 4 seeds typically fought for a little while before the better teams extended the score to a comfortable margin. 

It makes going to the playoffs something earned, not given. It allows teams that just don't have the team to compete with top tier teams the chance to schedule teams that they can compete with which should help build up or build back their programs.  In our current system, if you are unlucky enough to be in a 6 team district, that's half of your schedule decided for you. A five team district, 40% of your schedule is gone. I don't think coaches of other sports would be too fond to have 40-50% forced on them, especially if their district is loaded. 

There are the traditional powerhouses that only a state title will be considered a great year. There are schools that want to win ONE playoff game, have a winning record, etc. Each year is different. Each group of kids is different. Without naming schools, there are several that when the new districts came out, you just felt awful for. It doesn't help their program AT ALL. Allow these schools the chance to compete without having to go "independent" or suffer financial consequences. 

 

Thoughts? Make it better. Anything worth moving forward with? 

 

Back in the 4 class system 128 teams made the playoffs. In the current 6 class system 192 make it. If we cut it to two teams per district, or just the top 16 teams in a class. Then only 96 teams make it, which is even less than what made it with 4 classes.

Now if you cut it to 3 teams per district, or top 24 based off RPI, Calpreps, etc then 144 make it. So it would only be a little more than more than what made it in the 4 class system, and would be the best of both worlds IMO. 

2 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

I'm fine with that, if the number is five wins. 

Two doesn't really change anything for me. Winning 20% of your games shouldn't result in being rewarded with a playoff game. 

 

2 hours ago, theguru said:

I am more in line with this if there is a magic number involved. 

I still say do away with districts, use Calpreps, and play 1-32, 2-31, etc.

It isn't playoffs and it isn't a reward. Let me repeat that. The post season isn't a reward. Just like the other sports in KY, it is a post-season tournament. That seems to be the big hangup for people. They think post season has to be a reward. Why? Why not let as many kids as possible play more football?

My plan actually makes it more difficult for a school to get into the post-season in football than it is in other KY sports. 

7 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

 

It isn't playoffs and it isn't a reward. Let me repeat that. The post season isn't a reward. Just like the other sports in KY, it is a post-season tournament. That seems to be the big hangup for people. They think post season has to be a reward. Why? Why not let as many kids as possible play more football?

My plan actually makes it more difficult for a school to get into the post-season in football than it is in other KY sports. 

It’s a punishment for some lol… physically. Football was always different… for decades. Not everyone made it. And everyone lived afterwards. I get expanding. But we’ve expanded too much (in my opinion)… 

10. No gambling, bookmaking or point spread comments are allowed in any of the high school forums. Figures of speech that use gambling terms may not be used in any of the high school forums (i.e. bet, over/under, spread, parlay, chips, line, odds, wager). All gambling comments are permitted in the non-high school forums as long as they do not involve any high school sports, students, or student-athletes.

53 minutes ago, ThrowItDeep said:

It’s a punishment for some lol… physically. Football was always different… for decades. Not everyone made it. And everyone lived afterwards. I get expanding. But we’ve expanded too much (in my opinion)… 

Perhaps. That is why I am ok treating football different from every other sport and have a 2 win qualifier. I don't want see kids who want to play eliminated. They work too hard.

3 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

 

It isn't playoffs and it isn't a reward. Let me repeat that. The post season isn't a reward. Just like the other sports in KY, it is a post-season tournament. That seems to be the big hangup for people. They think post season has to be a reward. Why? Why not let as many kids as possible play more football?

My plan actually makes it more difficult for a school to get into the post-season in football than it is in other KY sports. 

This is a great way to look at it. 
 

I’d much rather see too many teams get into the post season than not enough. And through it all, high school sports are just a bunch of kids playing games. Yes, there are lessons to be learned. But sometimes adults lose sight of the fact that the goal of high school sports is to encourage participation, to have fun and to be part of something. The complaints of watered down playoffs, rewarding those who didn’t “earn it”, too many classes, etc aren’t really in the true spirit of high school sports. 

3 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

 

It isn't playoffs and it isn't a reward. Let me repeat that. The post season isn't a reward. Just like the other sports in KY, it is a post-season tournament. That seems to be the big hangup for people. They think post season has to be a reward. Why? Why not let as many kids as possible play more football?

My plan actually makes it more difficult for a school to get into the post-season in football than it is in other KY sports. 

That’s your opinion. Many do see the playoffs as a reward, hence thinking you need to actually win to be eligible. 

And even if it is a tournament..  There are numerous tournaments in every sport that a limited amount of teams play in.

You’re trying to split hairs with playoffs vs tournament. 

Get rid of districts. Find some way to qualify for the playoffs like a point system or something. Getting rid of districts solves a number of regular season and should solve some of the playoff issues. 

1 hour ago, rjs4470 said:

This is a great way to look at it. 
 

I’d much rather see too many teams get into the post season than not enough. And through it all, high school sports are just a bunch of kids playing games. Yes, there are lessons to be learned. But sometimes adults lose sight of the fact that the goal of high school sports is to encourage participation, to have fun and to be part of something. The complaints of watered down playoffs, rewarding those who didn’t “earn it”, too many classes, etc aren’t really in the true spirit of high school sports. 

Getting running clocked year after year against schools you would never think about scheduling does not encourage participation.