Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2013 13:06:27 GMT -6
Just like UEFA league coefficients...the same could be done regarding seeding teams across the divisions. D1 getting around half to 2/3 of the CL slots with D2 and D3 getting the other allotments.
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Dec 24, 2013 13:24:17 GMT -6
Here's what last year's CL would have looked like. I ran the teams through a simple probabilty formula and it simulated the results. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by chelsea007 on Dec 24, 2013 13:31:12 GMT -6
A fourth is added. Have an opt out for the smaller schools if you like. Being able to lose TWO matches in the playoffs and still win a Division III title seems like a good deal to me. But I see an opt out clause would be more acceptable to some schools due to size etc. I would add that a Divsion I school could not opt out and a Division II school would also have to play in their Division or higher. As for an 'tournament' throughout the season, I don't see it flying. With weather being an issue, even a St. Paul would probably be opposed to games 4 or 5 nights in a week, especially in our district. Throw in exams, retreats etc. and this has a bigger potential to be a mess than a quality cup style tournament IMO. Just my thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Dec 24, 2013 15:13:26 GMT -6
Here's what last year's CL would have looked like. I ran the teams through a simple probabilty formula and it simulated the results. I don't know how some of these teams got into the equation ... but at least eight of them are not in the top ten of their divisions this year, some don't have any votes at all. And several others are barely in the top ten with multiple losses. That is a significant percentage of the "qualifiers."
The point? It is pretty unscientific to use last year's final rankings as a marker for this year's strength. Don't know how you get around it, but ... the results of this set of matchups was pretty predictable. And I don't see much difference between it and the playoffs other than including a few lower division teams as fodder ... there just aren't many D-II or D-III teams that can compete with the top D-I teams over a full 80 min. game.
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Dec 24, 2013 18:01:24 GMT -6
Here's what last year's CL would have looked like. I ran the teams through a simple probabilty formula and it simulated the results. I don't know how some of these teams got into the equation ... but at least eight of them are not in the top ten of their divisions this year, some don't have any votes at all. And several others are barely in the top ten with multiple losses. That is a significant percentage of the "qualifiers."
The point? It is pretty unscientific to use last year's final rankings as a marker for this year's strength. Don't know how you get around it, but ... the results of this set of matchups was pretty predictable. And I don't see much difference between it and the playoffs other than including a few lower division teams as fodder ... there just aren't many D-II or D-III teams that can compete with the top D-I teams over a full 80 min. game.
That was what last season's(2012-2013) CL would have looked like. So those teams that qualified faired well in the 2011-2012 playoffs. I have many, and yes I mean many, different formats for a champions cup style set up. I think what you and Jimmy are trying to get around is having weaker smaller schools being able to qualify, wgike some stronger schools sit out. I can agree leaving a school like Grace King out while a weaker team is competing sort of takes away from the "Champions league" status but how rewarding would it be if a junior heavy Haynes squad qualified and went into that competition the following year ready to shock the state. Ala Lusher 13-14. With a restricted 20 games/3 tournaments or 18 games/4 tournaments its hard to really develop a legit qualification process during the year. I'm just looking for a way to have the best teams play in a meaningful competition that doesn't require playing 3-5 games in a 2 day span.
|
|
|
Post by d4enthusiast on Dec 24, 2013 20:02:36 GMT -6
What about 12-teams (semi-finalists) placed into four groups of three. Home and away legs during the season, say during December when there is a dearth of meaningful games (in comparison to January typically hosting district games and February hosting the playoffs). This would mean adding 4 quality games to the schedule (hardly an inconvenience one would hope) in December to decide the semi finalists of said champions league tournament. Then, the highest ranking team could host a four team invitational tournament at their school involving themselves and the three other qualifying teams. As beauchenecoach suggested, the end to the event then could be hosted at one site. If such a thing were to occur, it would simply be classified as 12 teams scheduling 4 specific games if they choose to do so, and one team hosting a four team invitational which would count as a tournament (uninterrupted by fixtures in between). Also, employing only semifinalists would allow the upper end of all divisions to compete against each other, where D3 teams could be reasonably expected to hold their own. Just another of many possible permutations for such a tournament I figured I would offer up
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Dec 24, 2013 22:14:27 GMT -6
What about 12-teams (semi-finalists) placed into four groups of three. Home and away legs during the season, say during December when there is a dearth of meaningful games (in comparison to January typically hosting district games and February hosting the playoffs). This would mean adding 4 quality games to the schedule (hardly an inconvenience one would hope) in December to decide the semi finalists of said champions league tournament. Then, the highest ranking team could host a four team invitational tournament at their school involving themselves and the three other qualifying teams. As beauchenecoach suggested, the end to the event then could be hosted at one site. If such a thing were to occur, it would simply be classified as 12 teams scheduling 4 specific games if they choose to do so, and one team hosting a four team invitational which would count as a tournament (uninterrupted by fixtures in between). Also, employing only semifinalists would allow the upper end of all divisions to compete against each other, where D3 teams could be reasonably expected to hold their own. Just another of many possible permutations for such a tournament I figured I would offer up Excellent! and to add to all of the other of the teams schedule, you could host a weekend tournament where every team outside of the semifinalists get to play two games at the final four site and it could count as one of the 4 tournaments allowed for everyone. That way, all of the teams have that weekend booked on their schedule as a tournament. Also, the teams eliminated in group stage could schedule each other during the knockout rounds to fill their schedule since they will all be looking to fill that hole that was saved for this cup once they are eliminated... In fact, why not have the Cup Coordiantor schedule the draw of games for those eliminated so that it is fair and meaningful to that regular season for all teams.
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Dec 24, 2013 23:00:44 GMT -6
Here's what a 12 team champions league would look like. Group A | Group B | Group C | Group D | Jesuit | St. Louis | Episcopal BR | St. Paul's | Newman | Beau Chene | Brother Martin | Lafayette | Parkview | Vandebilt | Ben Franklin | University |
If a team were to opt out then Airline would take their place. As I posted earlier today. Here is what the 12 team set up would look like this year if it were in place. Alright who wants to get all the literature in order?
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Dec 25, 2013 11:55:33 GMT -6
Here's what a 12 team champions league would look like. Group A | Group B | Group C | Group D | Jesuit | St. Louis | Episcopal BR | St. Paul's | Newman | Beau Chene | Brother Martin | Lafayette | Parkview | Vandebilt | Ben Franklin | University |
If a team were to opt out then Airline would take their place. As I posted earlier today. Here is what the 12 team set up would look like this year if it were in place. Alright who wants to get all the literature in order? Honestly, there isn't a proposal needed. Each team would have to just enter and save the dates on their schedule for each group round and knockout round and final weekend (tournament). And like I said... After group stage, the Coordinator (with input from the team coaches) would schedule games for the eliminated teams during knock out stage and let them know. This is all legal under current rules. The final tournament weekend could give all teams, even eliminated ones, two full length, highly competitive games at one site. If all 12 of the semifinalists from this year want in or enough with the next qualifying quarter finalist to take their place... I'd love to help you run this! I'M sure a couple other coaches would as well....Could be a great thing! It would just use a set number of regular season games on schedule and one of the allowed tournaments... So 4 group games, 2 knockout games... And 1 tournament. Would take 6 games and 1 tournament from the teams that qualify and enter. That is easy stuff!
|
|
|
Post by d4enthusiast on Dec 25, 2013 13:12:17 GMT -6
Very true; no proposal would be necessary. But I think I'm losing you on the two knockout games. I understand playing both teams in your group. This would yield 4 teams advancing to a semi-finals and 8 teams looking for quality matches that weekend. Where do the knockout rounds come in? Also, for those who are interested in some sort of Europa action, the 8 teams eliminated could play a quarterfinal knockout tournament at the site of the CL final since it is entirely possible that some teams barely don't advance because of something like goal differential.
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Dec 25, 2013 13:19:06 GMT -6
Very true; no proposal would be necessary. But I think I'm losing you on the two knockout games. I understand playing both teams in your group. This would yield 4 teams advancing to a semi-finals and 8 teams looking for quality matches that weekend. Where do the knockout rounds come in? Also, for those who are interested in some sort of Europa action, the 8 teams eliminated could play a quarterfinal knockout tournament at the site of the CL final since it is entirely possible that some teams barely don't advance because of something like goal differential. You are correct... Was still thinking 8 groups and a quarterfinals round... So this makes it even easier with 4 groups of 3 and 12 teams. The 12 team format would only need 4 games and a tournament off each teams schedule. Extremely doable!
|
|
|
Post by retired_thibodaux_coach on Dec 25, 2013 22:58:48 GMT -6
This sounds awesome. I would love to see this happen. My only concern would be playing home/away in the knockout stage (and possibly group stage). Just seems with district games, holidays, other tournaments, and the state championships this would be many games compacted into a short season. Could one solution be if your team was to compete in the "Champions League" would you just avoid scheduling non-district games for that year? Or if you were to be eliminated, just play the other eliminated teams as your non-district games?
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Dec 30, 2013 11:46:22 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Feb 19, 2014 8:27:25 GMT -6
Teams that have qualified for the first Louisiana High School Champions League in 2014-2015.
Div I St. Paul's (Covington) Acadiana (Lafayette) Grace King (Metairie) Jesuit (New Orleans)
Div II Beau Chene (Arnaudville) Ben Franklin (New Orleans) Vandebilt (Houma) St. Thomas More (Lafayette)
Div III Newman (New Orleans) Northlake Christian (Covington) Lusher (New Orleans) St. Louis (Lake Charles)
|
|
|
Post by playwide on Feb 19, 2014 8:43:16 GMT -6
Now what happens when a team earns their way in this season and loses a bunch of seniors, suddenly goes into rebuilding mode and now has to play the best teams in the state with a team which is not able to compete?
It's what makes professional teams different from high school. A professional team can retain the core of their team plus spend money to buy other plays to compete.
I think the League is a great idea, but you will have to give a team the ability to opt out if their level of play is going to drop for the next season.
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Feb 19, 2014 9:17:51 GMT -6
Well then I'd expect the coach to respectfully decline and we'll go down the order of teams that would qualify next. If Lusher were to decline, then Brother Martin would be the next team that qualifies. So forth and so on.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyisbeastly on Feb 19, 2014 13:18:18 GMT -6
The high school champions league idea is pretty much the Saint Pauls tournament (with a few exceptions)
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Feb 19, 2014 13:40:48 GMT -6
The high school champions league idea is pretty much the Saint Pauls tournament (with a few exceptions) Do you agree that those "exceptions" are what makes this tournament far better than a 2/3 day tired legs festival?
|
|
passion
All-District
YNWA
Posts: 186
|
Post by passion on Feb 19, 2014 15:50:27 GMT -6
I wish could get the Haynes band to compose a Louisiana Champions League Anthem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2014 9:42:38 GMT -6
Ok, not trying to start a heated discussion here...
But...
The general consensus is that everyone wants equal representation between the three divisions.
And that very well may work with a 12 team format.
But with 16 or more teams, I would argue that more slots should be awarded to D1 teams. (Like the UEFA coefficients...EPL, La Liga, etc get more CL slots than say, Ligue 1 and the Russian league.)
I could be wrong, but it seems a 10th ranked D1 team hypothetically is going to be comparable to say, a 3rd or 2nd ranked D3 team.
Any thoughts on this?
|
|