|
Post by barnacle13 on Jan 4, 2013 22:48:16 GMT -6
You'll have to look at the calculation and figure out how to schedule. I do know that losing to a good team is better in some cases than beating a team with few wins. My guess would be that playing and beating an opponent of similar strength would probably benefit your team the most in skill development and power ranking. If you goal is only to make the playoffs, than losing to a Baton Rouge would definitely help you. However, if you're on the level of say a Sulphur and can pull off a victory, it would help you based on today's results. I believe you get 10 points plus # of opponents wins(for the entire season). A tie gets you 5 points + 75% of opponent wins (for entire season), a loss gets you 0 point + 50% of opponent wins (for the entire season). Losing to Baton Rouge today would give you 0 points plus 17.5 wins X 50% or 8.75 points. Beating Sulphur would get you 10 points + 16 wins X 100% or 26 points. Beating Carencro would get you 10 points + 0 wins or 10 points. Keep in mind though that Baton Rouge does still have 7 district matches to play, so if they won them all you'd get an additional 3.5 points for the loss to them. bringing a loss to them worth 12.25 vs. potentially only 10 points for a win over Carencro. Keep in mind the strength of teams may vary from season to season, so you have to schedule the teams you think you'll get the most points from. If you're an average team (say 7 -10 wins a season) it may benefit you both developmentally and for power rankings to play teams you can compete with. You'll run the risk of losing some of these matches and only getting half of that team's win total, but a win gets you 10 points plus their 7-10 wins. Losing to a strong team gets you only half their win total (not sure what maximum number of games is) likely around 10 - 14 points. Beating a team that gets very few wins, only gets you the 10 points plus a couple points for wins.
Again you have to figure out what is right for your team. When I coach I like to have a mixed schedule, with a couple easy wins, a couple tough challenges that my team will learn from, and at least 50% evenly matched teams that will challenge my team to play their best.
Good luck with your scheduling. I'm sure I probably just muddied up the water a little more for you.
|
|
|
Post by SFC Retired on Jan 4, 2013 23:37:31 GMT -6
Thanks for the help! It's been a bad year with injuries so i may get 7 wins this year. With the new Districts I now have STM and Westgate .
|
|
dirt
Bench Warmer
Posts: 20
|
Post by dirt on Jan 6, 2013 15:41:49 GMT -6
Barnade13 is pretty dead on with his analysis of the systems and teams. On Jan. 1 Sulphur had these numbers opp# 9.167, Lhsaa 14.778, L-rank 10, Flat 10.333, F-rank 17 On Jan. 6 Sulphur had these numbers opp# 9.421, Lhssa 14.882, L-rank 11, Flat 10.671, F-rank 14
Likewise:St. Thomas More Jan 1. opp# 14.083 Lhssa 14.632,L-rank 11, Flat 11.615, F-rank 66
|
|
dirt
Bench Warmer
Posts: 20
|
Post by dirt on Jan 6, 2013 15:50:52 GMT -6
Barnade13 is pretty dead on with his analysis of the systems and teams. On Jan. 1 Sulphur had these numbers opp# 9.167, Lhsaa 14.778, L-rank 10, Flat 10.333, F-rank 17 On Jan. 6 Sulphur had these numbers opp# 9.421, Lhssa 14.882, L-rank 11, Flat 10.671, F-rank 14
Likewise:St. Thomas More Jan 1. opp# 14.083 Lhssa 14.632,L-rank 11, Flat 11.615, F-rank 6 opp#14.079 Lhssa 15.704 L-rank 7 , Flat 12.589 F-rank 4
The difference is these two played a game. We won't go into the score. If you follow Barnade13 advice, an average team can get a good rating by winning what you can and playing teams that win a bunch. Playing an average team that wins a lot also will help the great teams. Barnade13 idea of a schedule is great advice for teams like Sulphur.
|
|
|
Post by mortner on Jan 12, 2013 6:07:11 GMT -6
Is this the system we are going with next year? It appears we (SSA) dropped three spots this week after winning our district schedule and we play a pretty good schedule both district and non-district while on paper Baton Rouge has a schedule that is not as strong as ours yet they are ranked higher. What's the secret? Play more games? Tournaments?
|
|
|
Post by barnacle13 on Jan 12, 2013 9:46:11 GMT -6
In the new Power Ranking I think winning is paramount. The stronger (really more wins) the team you beat the better. I think Baton Rouge is benefitting from teams like Zachary finally making it to district. If you look at the calculation you get a point for every win a team you beat gets. Meanwhile if you're beating teams that don't win many, you aren't getting many points. Baton Rouge took a dip with a win over McKinley as well. You have to remember this is based on the entire season, including tournaments. I tghink the increase in number of games allows for better averaging out of the weaker teams you play. So if you only have 15 matches and 4 of them are against district foes that only win 4 or 5 matches, you're getting 14 or 15 points averaged in 4 times. Meanwhile most of the teams Baton Rouge has played have won against have 7 or more wins. Those couple of extra points go a long way in the average. Sulphur may be a better example here. They are coming in at 17 as of today, but are 0-2 in district and could finish 5th or lower in district. What this demonstrates is that next year (if the proposal goes through) scheduling will be much more important. You'll want to win, against at least good teams and it probably doesn't hurt to play more matches to smooth out your average. Taking the seeding out of coaches hands WILL impact the playoffs and seeding significantly. You'll likely see more away teams winning first round games and possibly making deeper runs into the playoffs. I think the flat3 Power ranking is probably closer to reality, but again this is like choosing Notre Dame to play in the BCS Championship. Only the very deluded felt they belonged there.
|
|
|
Post by sokerfan on Jan 12, 2013 10:04:37 GMT -6
mortner, good question. I would hate to see what would happen if everyone would play the exact schedule next year. What would the rankings look like? How would that affect rankings? I am sure the cream would still rise to the top during the playoffs. But it may put 2 teams that would normally meet in the quarters, playing each other a round early.
I understand that LHSAA wants soccer to use the same method as football, baseball etc. But like the old saying goes, "if it aint broke don't fix it". We went from a set bracket where district champs & runner-ups from most districts would advance and there were teams at home not playing that were better than some who were, to what we currently have. I believe the way it is now the best teams are in the playoffs and no one can be upset they aren't in the playoffs. The only argument is where their team is ranked. Teams 17-32 can't argue because it will probably be 1 and out, as it probably should be. You are ranked there for a reason. Teams 14-18 will argue because the want to be in the upper half to get the home game instead of traveling after the loss. EXAMPLE - whomever BYRD plays in the first round will probably travel from N.O. to Shreveport to get beat and then make the 5 hour trip back home.
There will be some argument in the top 10, just because we just want to be ranked higher than you for the right to say we are #3 and not #5. With that being said the polls that everyone chimes in about, is pretty dead on year in and year out. I think the coaches will rank the teams right again this year. The winner will come from the Top 8 again this year.
|
|
|
Post by mortner on Jan 12, 2013 10:11:57 GMT -6
The one thing you get with power rankings for high school football and the BCS is all the teams participating play a similar number of games. If this system is adapted for high school soccer it should affect your 18 regular season games and tournaments should be lagniappe being that teams complain about them being weighted the same anyway. The playoffs have a team playing a game and a half a week. Tournaments have teams playing three games in 24 hours. If teams wil be rewarded for playing more games, coaches will be dragging their teams all over trying to get the number of games they play up which I'm my opinion isn't always in the best interest of the player. Fatigue translates to injuries.
|
|
|
Post by div1d6 on Jan 12, 2013 12:29:15 GMT -6
The fallacy of the power ratings: Take the top 10 power rated teams in Div I and look at their records against each other.
1. FHS 6-0-2 2. LAF 4-2-0 3. MCA 3-2-3 4. BR 0-1-1 5. SSA 4-1-2 6. STM 2-5-2 7. Byrd 3-3-4 8. DOM 3-4-1 9. MHS 1-3-2 10. NHS 1-5-0
|
|
|
Post by archangel on Jan 12, 2013 16:19:08 GMT -6
The fallacy of the power ratings: Take the top 10 power rated teams in Div I and look at their records against each other. 1. FHS 6-0-2 2. LAF 4-2-0 3. MCA 3-2-3 4. BR 0-1-1 5. SSA 4-1-2 6. STM 2-5-2 7. Byrd 3-3-4 8. DOM 3-4-1 9. MHS 1-3-2 10. NHS 1-5-0 Div1d6, I agree that there are problems with Power rankings, but I am missing your point. I think the power ranking have correctly identified the top 10. We can argue about where people fall, but the top 10 looks solid. For comparison, I have listed those same 10 teams records against everybody else. 1. FHS 6-1-0 2. LAF 5-0-0 3. MCA 14-1-0 4. BR 18-0-2 5. SSA 6-0-0 6. STM 12-0-1 7. Byrd 9-1-0 8. DOM 11-1-1 9. MHS 17-1-0 10. NHS 7-1-0 That is a combined record of 105-6-4. And most of those 6 losses same to Vandy and Teurlings, two of the top teams in D2.
|
|
|
Post by barnacle13 on Jan 12, 2013 17:24:41 GMT -6
I think most folks here like the idea of Coaches seeding. The coaches do seem to have a better feel for where each team's relative strength is. Power Rankings don't always do that. At the end of the day though the Playoffs are a bit of an extended tournament. The best team doesn't always win. You can look to the NFL Playoffs as an example of this or the NCAA Tournament. Sometimes it comes down to luck, depth of bench, to just getting hot at the right time. I agree with archangel's assessment here. Even the Power Rankings have the correct Top 10. Where they fall within that Top 10 is up for debate, but they do correctly pick the Top 10. In the end it's the last team standing, so arguing over a 5 or 7 seed is somewhat immaterial. Power Rankings will change the face of the Playoffs, but not that significantly. It'll change how folks schedule and how many matches they play. It may impact who they put on their schedules. I'd personally like to see PK wins and losses weighed a little differently, since they are unique to our sport. The flat3 and even the old LHSAA Power Ranking give a better indication actual power rank, since they include PK finishes. I also think some of those who don't like where teams stand in current LHSAA wouldn't be as unhappy with flat3 or the old LHSAA model.
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Jan 12, 2013 19:08:24 GMT -6
I'm personally in favor of keeping coach seeding--if it ain't broke, why fix it?--but I think that by the time the end of the season comes around the ratings will be pretty close to what the coaches' seeds would have been. I looked at the boys' rankings from last year's Div. I season and they were pretty close to what the seeds were.
I do worry that a team is going to get seeded 10 spots too low, and that's why I'm against using the power rating for seedings. (I think using them to select the 32 (or 24) teams would be fine.) But I think it's pretty unlikely that things will be drastically off.
|
|
|
Post by coolhandluke on Jan 12, 2013 19:42:45 GMT -6
I think proposed power ratings will have a couple of impacts. Coaches will certainly schedule differently which I think will impact the big tournaments.....especially if you are a smaller Div II or III school. I think coaches may gravitate towards more 2-game weekends and opt out of the normal 3 tournaments.
I also think this board will change. No longer a huge need for Coaches Polls & reporting scores. LHSAA will take care of those functions for us. No score reporting means less discussions about games.
Hope I'm wrong.......
As for LHSAA vs Flat3.....I think the flat3 works better for soccer.
|
|
|
Post by barnacle13 on Jan 12, 2013 20:06:37 GMT -6
There's always a place for the Coaches Poll. It takes awhile for the Power Rankings to "right" themselves. Having the coaches who see the matches and know the teams putting in their 2 cents I think is invaluable. You'll be able to see going into playoffs where upsets are likely. I really don't think any team will be more than 3 or 4 places off on seeding. We'll see when it happens. I'm still a fan of coaches seeding. If Power Rankings are the wave of the future, I think soccer needs to either address the PK win or loss, or allow for ties in District and come up with other rules for determining the District Champ.
|
|
|
Post by pompey on Jan 12, 2013 20:43:32 GMT -6
Excellent thread. Glad most seem to be of the opinion that Power Rankings still need to be used/addressed in the future. I do also think the coaches poll is a great, unbroken, tool:)
Stay dry everyone. Sloppy fields ain't helping my 9-7 dream become reality.
|
|
|
Post by ocsladyvikings on Jan 13, 2013 10:47:41 GMT -6
Opelousas Catholic : As of 1-12-2013 Opelousas Catholics team record is : 16 - 3 District record : 3 - 0
|
|
|
Post by sokerfan on Jan 13, 2013 20:57:20 GMT -6
Okay, now we know why SSA only plays 1 game a day, no tournaments. He believes that, "fatigue translates to injuries". My question to you is, why is it not good for your high school team, when it is okay for them when they play for your club teams? I know your club team plays tournaments. They all play tournaments from U10 on up.
I am not saying I disagree with you. I know your team doesn't, but some teams need to play tournaments in order for coaches to see them in order to rank them. The Mandeville & New Orleans teams have quality teams to play in their area, some of us ALWAYS seems to have to travel to get a good game, thus tournaments. You guys are fortunate to have a district where you have 4 good games, others aren't so lucky.
The number of games a team plays in a season should be limited, but how much. Soccer is not a big money making sport, it's the opposite.
I have a proposal: The district with Mandy, SSA, FHS etc. please vote to play each other once for district play. Then you can schedule those in your district that will give you a good game for non district games. Then that would leave available days to maybe leave the area and play STM, Lafayette, Byrd, Teurlings etc. It has been proven that these teams are willing to travel. In order to play you guys we have to travel to New Orleans to see AL in his tourney or go to Mandy to see Sean for his tourney. Maybe there could be a rotating year to year travel schedule.
The top 10 teams would all get good games, there would be no more posts on running up the scores and the coaches could vote for the ALL STATE TEAMS with knowledge instead of politics.
|
|
|
Post by barbedad20 on Jan 13, 2013 21:57:26 GMT -6
The top 10 teams would all get good games, there would be no more posts on running up the scores and the coaches could vote for the ALL STATE TEAMS with knowledge instead of politics. Alot was said in that one sentence.... And it makes a ton of sense that the top teams in the state play district foes 1 time not twice. What does SSA/Fontainebleau get out out of playing the bottom teams in district and beating them 10-0 when they could play STM or Lafayette.... Let's make it so both districts play 1 game each and then we pick a weekend and do an east vs west with 1 and 2 in District 3 play 1 and 2 in District 6, 3 and 4 play, 5 and 6 play, etc so you would have Lafayette and St Thomas More vs Fontainebleau and SSA Acadiana and Barbe vs Mandeville and Northshore Comeaux and Sulphur vs Slidel and Covington Carencro and Sam Houston vs Ponchatoula I am positive Sam Houston would prefer to play Ponchatoula than Lafayette and St Tomas More a second time. It will never happen but it would make for alot better soccer.....
|
|
|
Post by mortner on Jan 13, 2013 22:22:41 GMT -6
The coaches don't decide the number of district games we play or at least I don't. FYI we travel to Lafayette every other year sokerfan. I tried to get a game with Teurlings this year as well. I personally like playing the top teams in our district twice, and I choose to schedule quality opponents in our open weeks. I'd never be opposed to an east vs west weekend.
Fatigue does lead to injuries and we monitor the number of games our club teams play closely too. I'm still trying to figure out what I've ever done to you.
|
|
|
Post by sokerfan on Jan 14, 2013 0:04:49 GMT -6
Coach, come on, really! You coaches don’t decide how many games you play in district? I find that hard to believe. Someone had to vote to put into effect the playing each other twice rule. In our district there was a motion by a coach not to play everyone twice. It was voted on and passed. Why can’t your district do the same? All it takes is a motion to change things. You can visit it every year if you would like, and if the teams were to become more even as the years go by, then change it. SSA, Mandy, FHS could still play each other twice, but it would allow Ponchatoula and the others a chance to schedule a team more their caliber.
To answer your question, you’ve done nothing to me. I just find it hard to sit back and read what people say about things and not say anything if I don’t agree. If the topic happens to be about you or your team, sorry. I just get tired of those teams from outside the New Orleans area having to scratch claw and bite just to be noticed. I have said some things in the past to push buttons to get responses. That is the only way to get others thinking differently than they have in the past. I know your area is where the majority of the better teams are in the state, but that doesn’t mean the rest of us don't measure up. I had to post something in the past to piss you off in order to get a game between Lafayette and SSA played when the last 9 years it couldn’t be done. I believe if you want to play someone you will make room on your schedule, and that goes for everyone.
Every year Sean and I have a discussion about the ALL STAR TEAM selections. I have nothing against Sean, it is not him it is the coaches that only vote for New Orleans area players because they don’t play anyone else. They don’t leave their back yards. If they would leave home and play someone different maybe they could make choices on knowledge and not hear say. If they do play anyone from outside of the area, it is because the other team came to them. And this is because we want a challenge not necessarily looking for an easy win.
A good example:
Byrd had to travel to the Carencro Tourney, another weekend they traveled to play STM then the next day Lafayette. Then a week later they went to Mandeville to play Mt. Carmel, Byrd, FHS & Mandy (I think) just to be seen by those who rank and vote. It is a shame that it has to be so one sided when it comes to who goes where.
STM traveled to New Orleans Tourney, SSA and Mandy Tourney to be seen. Lafayette traveled to SSA, going to Baton Rouge next week to play Mt. Carmel. Did not go to the 2 tourneys because we wanted more quality games, but Dominican cancelled (that happens) and your district will not leave home and go north of Baton Rouge.
So there you have it in a nutshell. Some say I talk too much, and maybe they are right. But if you know me I am no different than anyone else. I want soccer to grow everywhere and I want it to be even for everybody. I don’t mean lets pick someone from every team sort of stuff. I just believe if you are the best and your fans say you are the best, take the show on the road and show everyone else you are the best. And that goes to ALL who believe that, not directed to anyone or any team in particular.
|
|