Absolutely, positively YES.

 

The bottom-line is this: these are HS teams. They develop at different rates. If the whole idea is to have the best teams playing at the end, you need the playoff berths for these teams. Granted, more often than not, the higher seeds win. And the instances of four seeds winning a single game are few and far between. But it does happen, and on occasion, that fourth seed is what gets a tremendous team in the playoffs. SK last year (four seed makes it to the 6A title game and defeats three #1 seeds in the process) is a perfect case in point and just the most recent example.

 

Having four playoff berths per district also keeps the excitement high...the fans are still coming out the ninth and tenth weeks of the season, because the games still mean something...

 

I've heard the argument that these extra games often result in blowouts. So what??? The point is sometimes made that this means additional risk of injury. My response is this: Most prudent coaches don't play their starters very long in those blowouts, so the chance for injury is minimized, and it also provides an opportunity (perhaps the only playoff opportunity) for the subs to play.

 

Another point put forth is that the worst teams - the 0-10 teams making the playoffs because they're in a four-team district - don't really care and don't really want to be there. I have a tremendous difficulty buying this. I'm not saying it doesn't occasionally happen, but I've been coaching kids ages 4-17 for the last dozen years in basketball and baseball. I've had my share of teams that couldn't buy a win - but I don't remember a single team of kids that ever wanted to skip a game because they didn't expect to win. Kids want to PLAY...

 

I'm not really sure where you were going with your last graph, but I do think the record matters. I think most kids that are at the end of any season with a .000, .100,. or .200 winning percentage are pretty well ready to be finished. Suppose a coach in any sport would ask those kids to go play in one more tournament, but they'll have to play one of the best teams in the tournament right off the bat. Would you really expect a lot of enthusiasm after getting beat up for 10 weeks?

 

But I really have a hard time coming to grips with the bolded. It is a state playoff game, but you are basically conceding many teams will plan to and play their subs liberally. How can this be an argument FOR the current system?

Because you can't play 2-3football games in a week.

 

 

No, but in the current system almost everyone makes it and I don't think players at this age are harmed by playing a maximum of 15 games over 16 weeks or so. So why change it? As long as #3 seeds are beating #2 seeds.

I'm not really sure where you were going with your last graph, but I do think the record matters. I think most kids that are at the end of any season with a .000, .100,. or .200 winning percentage are pretty well ready to be finished. Suppose a coach in any sport would ask those kids to go play in one more tournament, but they'll have to play one of the best teams in the tournament right off the bat. Would you really expect a lot of enthusiasm after getting beat up for 10 weeks?

 

But I really have a hard time coming to grips with the bolded. It is a state playoff game, but you are basically conceding many teams will plan to and play their subs liberally. How can this be an argument FOR the current system?

 

They still play it out in all the other sports.

They still play it out in all the other sports.

 

In how many classes? :idunno:

 

See post 60.

In how many classes? :idunno:

 

See post 60.

 

If you think the blowouts are bad now then go ahead and put everyone in one class. How would Trinity vs. Atherton look in the first round? :idunno:

 

The current system hurts no one.

Track and field has 3 classes. Cross-country has three classes. And every single team/individual gets the opportunity to participate in the regional meets.

 

I've heard the argument that there are injury risks in Round 1 of the football playoffs. Got news - they're there from week 1 through week 15. You cannot play scared; football is the wrong game if you do.

 

I like Ram's (and others', to be fair) suggestion. Many times a team will be missing a key player or just take time to gel early in the season, then come on like gangbusters later on. If the idea (and maybe it's not the idea) is to get the best teams into the post-season, a sure-fire way to do so is to get all the teams into the post-season.

 

Last year's 6A playoffs come to mind.

Why should every team be IN the playoffs? So everyone feels better about themselves? What is the benefit of a 60-0 butt kicking for an 0-10 team? Rewards should go to those that EARN them. How do coaches and parents prepare their kids for the real world when the "recognition for participation" philosophy does not apply? When these kids leave school they will have to compete for jobs, compete for promotions and provide for their families where there is no gold star for showing up. Moreover, success should be strived for and rewarded, mediocrity should not be acceptable. The whole point of playing and competing as as kid is to foster a strong work ethic, and learn how to strive for, achieve and accept success. These and other traits help these young people grow into solid and productive adults. If we do not have the courage to teach them these lessons as young adults, when do they learn it?

 

I think you successfully rebutted your own argument. When your team gets beat handily in that first playoff game, you learn first hand that everything is earned and nothing is given .... except opportunity (in this country).

I think you successfully rebutted your own argument. When your team gets beat handily in that first playoff game, you learn first hand that everything is earned and nothing is given .... except opportunity (in this country).

 

Nice post.:thumb:

Kids can have hope in what is called a upset even if you don't believe they can do it.

 

well then they should earn that chacne in the district games, not play like ..... and then decide, it is the playoffs so it is time to play for real. They can still count on those upsets in the regular season until they make it to the playoffs. They need to EARN playoff spots, not just give them to everyone in the state.

Ya think about it if your team is a fourth seat and is 8-2 or 7-3 and had great year wanting a opprtunity to play in the playoffs, when they get nothing. It has been proven that a fourth seat can get to the state title game, then why limit the kids opprtunity make the upset or the run at the title.

 

Not seeing to many teams out there that are a #4 seed with records like that.

 

If they want to prove themselves, that need to start it in their district, if they can not do it there, they do not deserve to play in the plyoaffs. Just because a number four seed has won state, how many times have they not one it. It still comes down to the idea that tehy did not earn the plyoff spot in the first place.

I think you successfully rebutted your own argument. When your team gets beat handily in that first playoff game, you learn first hand that everything is earned and nothing is given .... except opportunity (in this country).

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

 

It is suppossed to be litke that, but it really isn't and I think everyone know it. We are teaching these kids all wrong with this format.

I'm not really sure where you were going with your last graph, but I do think the record matters. I think most kids that are at the end of any season with a .000, .100,. or .200 winning percentage are pretty well ready to be finished. Suppose a coach in any sport would ask those kids to go play in one more tournament, but they'll have to play one of the best teams in the tournament right off the bat. Would you really expect a lot of enthusiasm after getting beat up for 10 weeks?

 

But I really have a hard time coming to grips with the bolded. It is a state playoff game, but you are basically conceding many teams will plan to and play their subs liberally. How can this be an argument FOR the current system?

These are kids, it is your job as a coach to tell them why they should fight to the end, in the face of adversity. That's the problem, people let kids make the decisions

There were tons of games this season where a ton of points were scored. Should we stop playing the regular season games as well?

 

You play the game to PLAY the game. The more games, the better.

All we need to do is get rid of the 4-Team Districts...If you are in a 5,6,7 or 8 team district, then you do have to earn your spot. And I can't think of one High School Football player that would choose to miss the playoffs just to avoid getting beat big in the 1st round. They play every game for a reason.

All we need to do is get rid of the 4-Team Districts...If you are in a 5,6,7 or 8 team district, then you do have to earn your spot. And I can't think of one High School Football player that would choose to miss the playoffs just to avoid getting beat big in the 1st round. They play every game for a reason.

 

That is the point I have been trying to make, at least with 6, 7 or 8 teams, those going to the playoffs earn it.

 

And you are right, I can't think of a player wanting to skip a game just because they might get beat big.