|
Post by defencerules on Feb 26, 2004 15:49:19 GMT -6
simplest ,and, thereby, maybe the easiest to have accepted would be to eliminate any team with losing record, as has already been suggested. in order to be accepted, might have to limit this to "in distrct" record.
not sure about boys treams, but i know in girls there were at least 2 teams that hadn't won a single game placed as wc in the playoffs: blenk in dI, lost 13-0 to fountainebleu in bidist; and belaire which forfeited bidist to sacred heart, because prinicpal and coach a)didn't know they were going to be in playoffs, and b) both said they "didn't deserve" to be anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy on Feb 26, 2004 16:01:41 GMT -6
Based on some of the ideas put out in this thread (you can't do them all). If you took the District Champ and the runner up along with the 2 wildcards. I used the same two that qualified this year. Rank the top 8 ( I used the last LAPrepsoccer.com poll). This is the poll:
LAprepSoccer.com's 2/02/04 Poll « Thread started on: 02/02/2004 at 17:02:01 »
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- First place votes in parentheses.
Division III
1. St. Louis 59 (5) 2. Newman 55 (1) 3. St. Thomas Aquinas 48 4. St. Frederick 38 5. Episcopal BR 33 6. University 31 7. St. Martin's 30 8 E.D. White 11 9. Opelousas Catholic 10 10. Catholic New Iberia 7
Receiving votes: Teurlings Catholic 2, West Feliciana 1, Parkview Baptist 1, St. Charles Catholic 1.
These top 8 are seeded and .get first round home The other eight are the paired up by location. Here is the scenario that COULD have happened this year in DIII should this have been in place.
Seeding in parenthesis.
Ouachita Christian at (1) St. Louis Lutheran at (8) E.D. White Grace Christian at (5) Episcopal BR Menard at (4) St. Fredrick Pope John Paul at (3) STA Opelousas Catholic at (6) University W. Feliciana at (7) St. Martins Country Day at (2) Newman
How would this have played out?
|
|
|
Post by GriffinCoach on Feb 26, 2004 16:56:03 GMT -6
Crespo-
I hope I didn't come across angry. I'm simply trying to improve the playoff situation. Many times people have complained about our system, but few have done anything about it. I'm simply trying to get a feel for everyone's ideas so that I can come up with a proposal that fits most of our "likes".
As to the problem with reporting. I don't see this as a problem. The way football does it they have a day each week you have to report by. This would be tough for soccer with tournaments and things. The way Volleyball does it there is a date you have to have your record and things reported then a group sits down and checks out any "problems" and then they announce the Power Rankings, I think.
It's simple...you don't report...you don't play...I mean how hard is that.
I've heard some great suggestions. I hope this continues.
Someone mentioned about using the Poll to power rank the teams. I don't think you can do this or even award points for playing a ranked team, because the rankings are so subjective. You are rewarded for the other teams wins so that would be a way to reward you for playing good teams.
Anyway...keep it up...this is good discussion.
|
|
|
Post by GriffinCoach on Feb 26, 2004 17:09:00 GMT -6
OH yea...McScruff...you summed my thoughts up exactly. It's not that anyone is mad.
The playoff should get progressively harder. Can you imagine if the Super Bowl game was played in the first round? Haha
The other aspect that may not matter to the average person but should matter to coaches has to do with money.
Any money the public school soccer programs come by to keep their program up and running is raised by the players with a limit on the number of fundraisers they can do (at least at our school). We don't make much money on regular season gate and conscessions like football does.
However, a BIG semifinal game or Final that you get to host will draw a GOOD crowd. You can "set your account up" for the next year with a decent gate from one of these games. But you don't get that turnout even when big teams meet in the first round. The "hype" just isn't there. With a semifinal or final appearance the school starts "talking" and you get kids out there to watch the game that haven't come all season. This comes in handy when you have to replace uniforms.
Just another reason for it.
|
|
|
Post by McScruff on Feb 26, 2004 17:35:50 GMT -6
I didn't even think about money. Also, how about program prestige. The farther your team makes it in the playoffs, it is more likely that more fans will turn out to the games as griffincoach pointed out. Every new fan that comes out for a playoff game is a potential season-long fan the next season since there is little that is more exciting than a really good playoff game. Therefore, the more exposure your team can get the better the fan base you will have for the future.
Anyway, I know this has gotten a little off topic...
I agree that you can't use the coaches poll. Maybe I don't know enough about it, but it seems like there are only six coaches that vote on it. How can six coaches accurately rank teams from all across the state? They might as well just use the LAprep poll.
|
|
|
Post by barron on Feb 26, 2004 19:58:45 GMT -6
Just to add my two-bits worth--a power rating for soccer is long overdue. No system will be perfect, but almost any system will be better than the way is is now. The methods described above seem okay to me--but I am sure improvements can be made. Also, the system does not have to be "set in stone" the first year. If changes are needed, they can be made in subsequent years.
On a related point, I do not feel that travel, or distance, should be a factor at all in the playoffs. We are not talking about the entire season--only a few playoff games, for heaven sake! Any school making it into the playoffs should be able to find money somewhere for a long trip or two if necessary.
|
|
|
Post by CoPlRef on Feb 26, 2004 20:57:50 GMT -6
The coach's poll could work, if it had the proper representation. Only 6 coaches are voting on the entire poll, and I would guess they are all from south Louisiana. In order for the system to work, all or most all of the coaches in each division would have to be willing and able to participate. I think we can all agree that the #1 team in each district should get the automatic bid. But, how do we determine the rest of the teams? It would be grossly unfair to determine playoff positions by who teams play. A team from Shreveport or Monroe is not going to go to Baton Rouge or New Orleans just to play a non district contest, and teams from down there certainly don't want to come this far. So, strength of schedule can't really be much of an issue. Soccer programs just can't travel like football programs can outside of district. Plus, there are districts that are too large to really allow many non-district matches. One proposal may be to make all the districts the same number, or at least close to the same number of teams. At least then you could get a better representation of a team's record. Teams with larger districts have the advantage with records because in most of those districts there are a couple of saps at the bottom to beat up on. So, all that serves as is padding for the record. If district sizes are reduced, then maybe you have more room to play nondistrict matches, travel to more tournaments furhter away, and you may get a better feel for how good a team really is. I took my boys to the Showcase this past year. It was a great experience as I got to see some really good soccer, and so did they. And, to grow and develop, that is the experience they need. From here, the coach's poll (or another unbiased poll), could rank the teams in each division to try to get the best matchups throughout the playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by defencerules on Feb 26, 2004 21:00:59 GMT -6
further thoughts...i agree that you have to have all district champs, but why (in div I & III, anyway) load up the playoffs to get 32 teams? why not limit it to 16? true, not all 2nd place teams would make it in, but as has been said repeaetedly, not all of them truly belong.
use a power rating system to pick the 7 best teams, after the 9 district champs
|
|
|
Post by defencerules on Feb 26, 2004 21:02:23 GMT -6
i should slow down, and finish before i hit "post"...
of course, eliminating 16 teams from the playoffs will make this a harder sell
|
|
|
Post by McScruff on Feb 26, 2004 22:03:59 GMT -6
I wouldn't like only having 4 playoff games a year.
|
|
|
Post by GrifFan on Feb 27, 2004 6:43:13 GMT -6
Hey GriffinCoach, great thread. I don't know how may of these posters are coaches, but it sounds to me like a brain storming meeting might need to happen. I know it would be tough to get every coach in the state together, but what if one coach from each disctrict was sent a representative with the ideas from all the other coaches in that district. That way you could get input from every district in the state. This message board is great but I'm sure that there are some being left out. Just an idea.
|
|
|
Post by FirstEA on Feb 27, 2004 8:34:58 GMT -6
GriFan...
That sounds like a good idea. How would you like to organize it?? Wink Wink...haha
Seriously though...it might be a good idea to "try" to reach as many coaches as possible and offer them an invitation to meet on this in the summer for more brainstorming.
The problem of course is how do you arrange something like this...
|
|
|
Post by lascholar on Feb 27, 2004 11:25:21 GMT -6
i started a thread about home and home aggregate scores for the quarters and semis of the playoffs to ensure that the best team advances. i would like to know the opinion of some of the coaches that posted on this thread about this idea. i think if changes are going to be made to the current playoff system, this should be one of them.
|
|