Power Ratings (new calc & playoff impact)

And it's based on the opponent's wins for the entire season (not just at the time that you played them).

That's why you'll see flat3 and others point out that it takes time for the ratings to "true up" - playing a tough team early in the season earns the same as playing them late in the season (and the same for a weaker team).

The ratings will never "true up." They might possibly be of use identifying... say ... the top 30 teams in a division, but will have little accuracy when it comes to ranking them.

Why? Because they treat a win over Eastmudbug Christian the same as a win over Jesuit. A dumbed down schedule against the weakest teams in the state (who also only play the other weakest teams) will produce a higher rating than a 50-50 result against the best.

This has already happened in basketball where the strong teams are being degraded in the rankings because they play a strong schedule. The coaches of the best basketball programs are up in arms, but now it is too late.. too many weak programs are benefitying from the flaws in the system.

And it is evident in the computer programs soccer rankings, last year and this year. Last year you would have had Jesuit and St. Pauls meeting in the semis. In bastketball, you have had top four teams meeting on someone's home floor in the 2nd round!

There are computer programs that take strength of schedule into account, maxpreps for example. But until a computer program can be shown to do what individuals do when they evaluate teams, a program should not be used for ranking purposes.

(What does an individual do when ask to predict results? He ask - "(1) where was the game played? (2) conditions including tournament/non tournament and were the teams at full strength? (3) who have the two teams played against to date? what were those results - close or rout?) The programs ask none of these questions.

Just wondering people's opinions on OT losses counting the same as regulation losses.
The reason: A district opponent of a team like Jesuit could play them to a tie in regulation but then be forced to play overtime possibly losing while a non-district opponent would simply tie and garner the points for it.

good answer ;D I was starting to feel dumb after thinking about that phrase for a couple of minutes ....

Can one of you knowledgeable guys give a short primer one what goes into which teams make the playoffs and how they are then slotted? I remember discussions on it in the past but can't remember the details.

Interesting. I had heard about the proposal but it is good to see it in writing.

First impression for me is that it is a good proposal in that it could encourage and reward teams for playing more difficult opposition - and playing opponents from different divisions. (of course bumping the points for wins from 5 to 10 may temper that a bit).

No sure how I feel about doing away with the shootout distinction. On the one hand it would seem to simplify things a good bit. On the other hand, I think it might be ignoring a genuine and real distinction between winning or losing in game play and winning or losing in shootouts.

Here's a bit of a silly question if anyone knows: Is the rule about deciding ties by shootout in district games a LHSAA (i.e. statewide) rule or is it a rule adopted by the different districts? I could almost see districts deciding to let games end in ties instead of going to PKs if they thought it would benefit more of their members in the wild card hunt.

Very curious to see everyone's take on this new rule (or at least proposed new rule).

Is it too much to ask that no game should ever go to overtime or a shootout unless it's a playoff, tournament, or district tiebreaker game? And can any game decided on penalties be considered a draw? And that wins are 3 points and draws are 1? Or will the Americans who vote on these things not allow it?

I can certainly see the benefits of selecting wild card teams using this method instead of the current one, but would there really be any advantage in doing seeding by power rating instead of by a coaches' vote? Is the seeding system really broke? I wouldn't say so, judging by how often the best seeds win in the playoffs.

And while I think the people who get into the playoffs as wild cards deserve a fair system, let's be realistic: how often has a team from outside of the top two in their own district won a championship? I quickly looked through some of the old brackets and saw that Carencro won in 2006, but I'd guess that it doesn't happen very often.

Two other things I wonder about:
1. Do any states, in any sport, use mathematical systems more advanced than a fairly simple power rating? I'm thinking of something more along the lines of one of the BCS computer rankings.
2. How good are the LHSAA power ratings for other sports? Are they better at predicting playoff results than the final regular season coaches' or writers' polls?

We'll be switched over to LHSAA as the primary sort within a few days at the latest (on both girls and boys sides). We'll keep flat 3 for a little at least since that's what's so familiar on the boys side.

1 question, BC, your comment that seeding will be based on Power Ratings raises a question of whether or not, ALL SCHOOLS will be required to report game scores to LHSAA on a timely basis starting next year. Or will they defer to what's on LA Prep. In either case, we need more participation.

LIKE