DII, what will happen?

[SoccerFan08923]

Well said, Hoya75.

[Readthefield]

TackerDad, great post.  The great CBHS teams, in particular, have greatly helped your argument with its threepeat from 2001-2003.

 

Your stats are correct as far as they go.  Yes, the TSSAA participation formula is based on simple math, just as you indicate.  That's the problem, it is simple and it is indiscriminate.

 

Only 12 different teams have ever made it to the DII State tournament since it began in 1998. 

 

In the East, 5 of the 6 total teams (Baylor, Catholic, McCallie, ND and Webb) have advanced to the State tournament since 1998.  Only 4 of the 8 teams in the Middle have ever gone to the tournament (BGA, Father Ryan, MBA and USN).  In the West it is even worse, only 3 teams of the 9 have ever gone to the tournament (CBHS, ECS and MUS).  Put another way, the East has 5 regularly competitve teams, the Middle has 4 and the West has sent the same 3 teams every single year for all seven years.  The rest of the Middle and West teams may win a game or two now and then, but they never get to the tournament.

 

Basing tournament participation purely on the numbers of schools in each area (i.e. teams that NEVER make the tournament) makes no sense.  For soccer purposes, 6 of the 9 West schools (66%), 4 of the 8 Middle schools (50%). but only 1 of the 6 East schools (16%)  are simply not competitve participants at the State level in DII soccer.  Why should the tournament distribution be based on DII's non-factors rather than the teams that actually advance?

 

The frustration of some fans in the East is that the automatic, additional, and annual 3rd selections from the Middle and West have seldom been as strong as the 3rd place teams in the East.  The 2001 McCallie team (#2 or 3 in the Nation) and the 2003 ND side (#1 in the State for most of the year) are the best examples of the concern.  They were left home while clearly less competitive Middle and West 3rd place teams advanced on the backs of weak but numerous schools that have never even been close to being in the tournament.

 

Even though I think you could argue that the true participation stats would indicate 3 teams from the East should advance every year since, despite only sending 2 teams, 42% of all DII teams to ever play at States are from the East, all I'm advocating is rotating the two 3rd place participants (to get 8 teams) from area to area each year, thus, evening the field for each Region.

825667747[/snapback]

Well said hoya the teams in the Middle and West that pad the numbers of berths in the state tournament basically just play the state tournament. In the West there are only four teams that played more than three games in the pre-tournament season, and in the Middle there are only six teams that played more than six games. How can the powers that be think that the East who has five teams with winning records and greater than ten games played should get fewer berths than the West with two teams with winning records and four teams with greater than ten games under their belts, and the Middle with six teams with ten or more and only three teams with winning records. I didn't calculate the winning percentage of WvsM, WvsE, and MvsE but from browsing I would expect that the East is far stronger at least this year. I really think that there needs to be a change in the future about how they figure out the number of berths. Does anyone know who to contact about this? Fairness is hard to come by some times.

[TackerDad]

I was hoping to stir things up a bit. Great post backatcha, Hoya.

 

First, in terms of our stats overall, it just shows that the time period one picks makes a big difference. If you go all the way back to 1995 – as you did – the East stacks up extremely well compared to the West and Middle. However, if you look at the last 4 years – as I did – the East stacks up very poorly. (I'm sure that you wouldn't suggest that the East's "real" best team was upet in regionals and didn't make it to state FOUR years in a row.) As much as anything, I think this is reflective of a real improvement in the quality of high school soccer in Memphis the past four years compared to the previous six.

 

What this also means is that while the East was VERY good compared to West and Middle from 1995-2000, they simply haven't performed very well since.

 

Also, one of your statements isn't exactly true, at least with respect to the past two years. Ironically, though, it cuts both ways to actually support your broader point.

 

You say:

 

"The frustration of some fans in the East is that the automatic, additional, and annual 3rd selections from the Middle and West have seldom been as strong as the 3rd place teams in the East."

 

That may have been the case in the more distant past – I'm not sure – but it certainly has not been true the last two years. Last year's DII title game betwen USN amd MUS was between the West 3rd place and Middle 3rd place teams. They beat the Eastern representatives head-to-head – USN knocked out Knox Catholic last year and MUS beat Knox Webb – so the "annual 3rd selections from the Middle and West have seldom been as strong as the 3rd place teams in the East" argument certainly holds no water that I can see last year.

 

Similarly, MUS reached the finals in '03 against CBHS (an OT game, by the way) as the 3rd place finisher from the West. The Middle went 0-3 that year. Once again, the two finalists beat the East fair and square to make to the finals: CBHS beat Knox Catholic while MUS knocked off McCallie.

 

But while your claim of "weak" Middle and West 3rd place teams is inaccurate for the past two seasons, ironically that fact makes your broader point, since it demonstrates the great opportunity that a STRONG 3rd place team from any region has at state . . . an opportunity that the East never gets.

 

I hate the solution of rotating 3rd place, however: too arbitrary. And if an earlier poster is right – and Catholic and ND are leaving DII – the problem for McCallie, Baylor, and Webb is only going to get worse, since it would be hard to argue that all three should automatically make state every year.

 

Personally – and speaking purely as a soccer fan – I would like to see DII soccer do what DII football did: create a "Super 7" (in this case a "Super 12" ) conference. Again assuming that the previous poster is right and the Eastern Catholic schools are out of the picture, it would be easy to pick the participants: McCallie, Baylor, and Webb from the East; MUS, CBHS, ECS, and Briarcrest from the West; MBA, BGA, USN, Father Ryan, and Brentwood Academy from the Middle. Travel would be an issue and you realistically wouldn't get to play every other team in a "balanced" schedule (neither do the DII football teams, by the way: they play only 4 league games out of a possible 6 each year). But at the end of the season for state you could either:

 

1) give the top 4 finishers (regardless of region) byes for the first round of state; have the other 8 play first round games seeded based on the actual 5-12 standings; then have a great, fair 8 team state tournament; or,

 

2) simply drop #9-#12 in the standings and let the top 8 duke it out for state.

 

Either way, you'd be using current season HEAD-TO-HEAD performance to fill the state tournament field, solving the 3rd place dilemma.

[Hoya]

 

Personally – and speaking purely as a soccer fan – I would like to see DII soccer do what DII football did: create a "Super 7" (in this case a "Super 12" ) conference. Again assuming that the previous poster is right and the Eastern Catholic schools are out of the picture, it would be easy to pick the participants: McCallie, Baylor, and Webb from the East; MUS, CBHS, ECS, and Briarcrest from the West; MBA, BGA, USN, Father Ryan, and Brentwood Academy from the Middle. Travel would be an issue and you realistically wouldn't get to play every other team in a "balanced" schedule (neither do the DII football teams, by the way: they play only 4 league games out of a possible 6 each year). But at the end of the season for state you could either:

 

1) give the top 4 finishers (regardless of region) byes for the first round of state; have the other 8 play first round games seeded based on the actual 5-12 standings; then have a great, fair 8 team state tournament; or,

 

2) simply drop #9-#12 in the standings and let the top 8 duke it out for state.

 

Either way, you'd be using current season HEAD-TO-HEAD performance to fill the state tournament field, solving the 3rd place dilemma.

825667883[/snapback]

 

I think the idea of a "Super 12" solution for DII makes a lot of sense, particularly with Knoxville Catholic and Notre Dame returning to DI A/AA next year. Briarcrest and BA, even though they've never played in the DII tournament, are more competitive than all of the other possibilities and they would be reasonable replacements for the departing two programs.

 

It seems to me that the real downside for the included schools would be budgetary. Travel costs are a significant reason for the withdrawl of ND and Catholic from DII from what I've been told. Then again, many of the remaining 10 schools already schedule regular season cross-state matches, either for tournaments or long weekends. Another negative effect would be on the schools left out. Would you need to hold two DII tournaments---one for the Super 12 and one for the rest?

 

All in all, it sounds like an idea well worth exploring. I'd guess that will doom it with TSSAA. Nevertheless, as a fan, I'd like to see a fair solution to the problem even though I'll be following an A/AA team in the future. My favorite solution of all would be for the big DI schools to stop whining about losing in football to BA and start competing. I'd like to eliminate the DII division altogether and reunify the competition, particularly in soccer. I guess that's a debate for another thread.

 

By the way, you aren't related to an exceptional goalkeeper, are you?

[TackerDad]

Hoya75, I was already pretty convinced that you were a knowledgable observer of soccer but your last comment ("exceptional goalkeeper") proves it conclusively.

 

My screen name tends to give me away . . .

[unanymous89]

Before creating a "super 12" with the 4 previously mentioned teams from the middle ( USN,MBA, BGA, and fr ryan) let's not forget that BA and JP2 have been competitive over the last two years, Jp2 only having been in varsity sports the last two years, and BA beginning to not look to bad either. I don't think a "super 12" will work, there is always the poetential that there will teams in the super 12 not deserving of being there and teams outside that deserve to be there. With the East getting smaller I think it needs to be done away with. And a east and a west division, splitting the middle, be made. The east and the west would only be for regional purposes and during regular season any game against a DII opponent would count towards the seeding (so the middle teams still play each other instead of driving to memphis or chattanooga to play) Then an east and a west regional would be held and the top 4 would advance to the state tournament in nashville (moved because regionals would be in memphis and chattanooga)

[ydet]

Before creating a "super 12" with the 4 previously mentioned teams from the middle ( USN,MBA, BGA, and fr ryan) let's not forget that BA and JP2 have been competitive over the last two years, Jp2 only having been in varsity sports the last two years, and BA beginning to not look to bad either.  I don't think a "super 12" will work, there is always the poetential that there will teams in the super 12 not deserving of being there and teams outside that deserve to be there.  With the East getting smaller I think it needs to be done away with.  And a east and a west division, splitting the middle, be made.  The east and the west would only be for regional purposes and during regular season any game against a DII opponent would count towards the seeding (so the middle teams still play each other instead of driving to memphis or chattanooga to play)  Then an east and a west regional would be held and the top 4 would advance to the state tournament in nashville (moved because regionals would be in memphis and chattanooga)

825668195[/snapback]

BA's alright but jPII didnt win a region game did they.

[HSSoccerfan]

These are all really good suggestions as to fixing the problem with seedings in tournaments and such; however, the problem is(like it is with pretty much all sport-seeding) that whatever system that is put together always seems to be ridiculed. Look at the BCS or something for football, even after drastic changes that were thought to be satisfactory, people still seem to argue over what should be done. Same with the NCAA basketball tournament and just about everything else. My point is that whatever will happen or is happening will always be under constant bickering like we are doing now. I wish there a magic system that always worked but really nothing is perfect. Some systems help other teams while some would prefer a different system that gives the advantage to their own. Just my two cents worth.

[Donnie Everrett]

This sort of goes back to the East v. Middle v. West. The combined losses for all teams playing over 10 games (East: Baylor, Mccallie, Notre Dame, Catholic, and Webb. Middle: BGA, Father Ryan, MBA, USN, BA, and PJPII. West: CBHS, MUS, ECS, and Briarcrest. These are the teams I used.) in each region is: East- 16 losses, Middle-26 losses, West, 15 losses. Of these losses, East teams have beaten other East teams 8 times, 50% of the whole region's losses. The Middle teams have beaten each other 10 times, 38% of the whole region's losses. The West teams have beaten each other 2 times, 13% of the whole region's losses. The fact is that the East beats up on each other.

[gameball]

60 % chance of rain in the west and . WOW, ya''ll are good with all that info, way over my head...WOW