Someone on here suggested one time...and I think it might have been GCHS but not certain about it....that they allow only three teams to go to the playoffs from each district. This makes sense to me as it allows the first place team to get a bye week as a reward for winning district and an 0-fer team doesn't slip by because their district only has four teams in it.

Someone on here suggested one time...and I think it might have been GCHS but not certain about it....that they allow only three teams to go to the playoffs from each district. This makes sense to me as it allows the first place team to get a bye week as a reward for winning district and an 0-fer team doesn't slip by because their district only has four teams in it.

 

I did suggest that, but also eliminate the bye week during the regular season. That means if you win the district you do get a bye week at the end of the regular season.

I have not studied this but an educated guess says go to 5 classes. Keep the current class 6A as is (as close to 32 teams as possible) and collapse the other 5 classes down to 4 classes. Keep the 32 team playoff format and you should eliminate the 0-10/1-9 playoff teams with the exception of 6A.

There are 23 districts with only 4 teams that all qualify before playing a single game.

 

1A - 1

2A - 7

3A - 2

4A - 5

5A - 3

6A - 5

 

I like your thinking!

 

How many times do we need to change the format for football?

 

I still think the rest of the classes should rotate who they play in the first round. 6A is the only class scheduled to do this for the next two seasons.

I did suggest that, but also eliminate the bye week during the regular season. That means if you win the district you do get a bye week at the end of the regular season.

 

They have gotten rid of the bye week next year. You can have a bye week but you lose a scrimmage. I don't like the bye week at the end of the season. Some teams may like it but I would think that most would rather contiue playing so that they don't get out of sync.

Not defending the current system, just explaining - 32 teams per class makes for a nice, equitable, easy-to-run, everybody-has-to-play-every-week post-season tournament... Adding the other 30 makes for awkward tournaments.

 

Mike, the problem as I see it is this. On one hand there are 30 teams with bad records staying home, while 96 teams with equally bad records are in. If you're going to include 96 teams with .500 or worse records, why not include 30 more teams. I personally think there should be fewer teams in. Like the NCAA, you should have a minimum number of wins to qualify.