This Rule NEEDS to change TSSAA!

[FridayMainEvent]

10 minutes ago, wpasi said:

Don't smoke any weed my job won't allow it plus (my wife would kill me) how about 4th seed should never host.

Unless 2 four seeds reached semifinals.  Then you'd go by rotation... See how simple the concept is?

[wpasi]

2 minutes ago, FreeAgent11 said:

Unless 2 four seeds reached semifinals.  Then you'd go by rotation... See how simple the concept is?

Ok no 3 or 4 seeds host after week 3. Simple 

[Southtowner]

Upper bracket hosts one year then the lower bracket hosts the next year.    Everyone is heading eastward this week for this year. Then everyone will flow back the other way next year.  

 It's high school football.  This is not college budget type stuff.  Spread it out.  Let the money and the love flow.  Going on a road trip is part of the experience.  Letting a certain bracket host every other year is beautiful thing. I'm gonna enjoy the road trip to Greenback. 

  A semifinal game could be held in your town if you have a team and it's your turn to host.  Shoot,  I remember when championship games were played in other towns besides just one location.  We hosted one in SP back in '74.  

Like I asked before,  ask the coaches what they would prefer.      I'm still your biggest fan.    

[Southtowner]

Am I putting up any argument at all?   Weigh in everybody.  Let's hear it.  What say you? 

[riverrat]

5 hours ago, FreeAgent11 said:

Five of the twelve Division 1 Semi-final matches have a team involved that did not win their region title. That's a good thing...

 

In my opinion the worse rule in the TSSAA is the alternate Home team format for rounds 3 and 4. I think this should only be used in situations involving teams with the same playoff seedings. All other games should be determined by playoff seedings (or region finish) Teams that finish higher in region play should not travel to teams that finished lower. Here are three examples for next Friday:

 

Second seeded Rockwood host region 3 Champs Tyner Academy. Rockwood has an amazing team as their victory over #1 ranked Meigs County last night proves that. My issue is a team which did not even win their own region should not be hosting a team which did. Anytime a higher seed is playing a lower seed the higher seed SHOULD host. The alternate home games between quads should only apply if you have two teams which entered the playoffs with the same seeding.

 

Second Seeded Springfield hosts red hot Haywood County. Never should a region champ be required to travel halfway across the State to play a region runner up that's just wrong.

 

My third and WORSE example here is region Champs Knoxville Catholic being forced to play at Knoxville Central. Granted, this is a very short road trip, but you've got a region champ being forced to travel to an 8-5 team that finished FOURTH in their region. Did they get hot in the post season? Absolutely. Should a region champ be forced to play a road game at a fourth seed? NEVER not in your wildest dreams.

 

I've harped on this forever and it remains one of the worse rules in the TSSAA pertaining to post season football. I hope at some point they revisit this and set it right. SEEDING DETERMINES HOME TEAM WHENEVER POSSIBLE!

 

End Rant......

Your point is argued well... but...I like it like it is.  I would not sign your petition.  Next topic.

 

[wpasi]

36 minutes ago, riverrat said:

Your point is argued well... but...I like it like it is.  I would not sign your petition.  Next topic.

 

+1

[toinemac]

2 hours ago, Southtowner said:

Am I putting up any argument at all?   Weigh in everybody.  Let's hear it.  What say you? 

It would only bother me on regards to region champions if you were a 1 seed and the team you are slated to play in the quarters or semis was not then you should host I think. All others can continue to alternate 

[FridayMainEvent]

2 hours ago, toinemac said:

It would only bother me on regards to region champions if you were a 1 seed and the team you are slated to play in the quarters or semis was not then you should host I think. All others can continue to alternate 

I actually could live with that.   It's a decent compromise...

 

[pizzpatriot]

I agree!

[bluedevil6913]

18 hours ago, FreeAgent11 said:

They would of played all of them at home if they had won the region.   That's my point!  Your rewarded with home games for winning your region.    Speaking toward Southtowners comment:   If you finish second in your region every year and travel to Maryville every year, I'm fine with that.  That means your beating the team that caused you to finish in second place each time.   You should of beaten them the first time and you'd be hosting every other year under my idea also...

See I'm not fine with the same powerhouses hosting every round every year.. I agree that the love should be shared and the rotation should be continued.. if the higher seed can't win one on the road they don't deserve to be in Cookevegas

[rednecktiger31]

13 hours ago, toinemac said:

It would only bother me on regards to region champions if you were a 1 seed and the team you are slated to play in the quarters or semis was not then you should host I think. All others can continue to alternate 

Just remember you can't please everyone. You would have people arguing about region strengths and such. The best thing would be for at least the Semis to be at a neutral site somewhere in between the schools but that would be near impossible to work out in a weeks notice. But imo playoffs for games for state shouldn't have anything to do with homefield advantage. If you can win state you should be able to win at other venues besides just your home field. 

[tradertwo]

16 hours ago, Southtowner said:

Am I putting up any argument at all?   Weigh in everybody.  Let's hear it.  What say you? 

I really couldn't care less! As long as there is a "system" and it is followed correctly, I don't understand why the outcry. If some details were manipulated in order to favor one over another, that would be a little different. Before someone starts with "the powerhouses always..." argument...if you envy their position, knock them out of it. Leave it as it is, or change it...makes no difference to me, but to say one way is more "fair" to all involved than the other would be false for the simple reason that everyone begins their season at 0-0, and nobody knows who will be seeded where at seasons end. Too much complaining about non issues.