TN Playoff system

[NedNatterjack]

We started this topic under the CAK/Catholic Game 3 thread and I thought it needed it's own title. So here it is.

 

The playoff system in TN seems to give teams TOO many chances at having "off" games in the playoffs. The time of year when it MUST count. District finals and region finals are the same teams every year with the same teams going on and often playing a 3rd or even a 4th time, namely Farragut, Bearden, CAK, and Catholic. There has been many suggestions under CAK/Catholic Game 3 thread, so feel free to check those out.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

QUOTE(BigG @ May 18 2007 - 11:12 AM)

Dins, I understand what you are saying. Georgia teams do it the same way. Top 4 teams in the region qualify for state, then it is single elimination from there on out. I like it that way myself... then you don't have to play any team 4 times in a season. Much more simplified.

 

I also don't see TSSAA changing it to that system. Why, you ask? Because it makes too much sense. (sorry, but I am a bit frustrated with several of the decisions coming into effect this coming year)

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Not only would this system put more emphasis on winning, but it would also eliminate the unnecessary district games, such as the 1 vs. 8 or 2 vs. 7? I mean these games, more times than not, are jokes. It usually consists of a team like Bearden or Farragut playing a team like William Blount or Heritage. How is WB and Heritage supposed to get up for a game like that and how does Bearden and Farragut get up for a game like this. There are no fans, teams are just trying to get their goals and trying not to get anyone hurt.

 

However, BigG, I think we are in a transistion period. I know that in Region 2, District 4 (Bearden, Farragut, South-Doyle, Maryville, Sevier County, Lenoir City, William Blount, and Heritage) have decided at the last district meeting that there will be a change. And I think this is a step in the right direction. Seeds 5, 6, 7, and 8 would have their own playoff on the Saturday before Districts start. This would help the team morale of William Blount and Heritage, giving them more of a chance to stay in the tournament. Losers will go home and winners will play seeds 3 and 4 on Monday, while seeds 1 and 2 will get a bye. Everything after that will be the same.

 

This seems to make much more sense and I would think TSSAA would like it better, rather than having a team like WB and Heritage get blown out EVERY single year in the 1st round. I'm sure there will be some kinks, being the first year, but I do think it is a step in the right direction.

[NedNatterjack]

Think of how the NCAA basketball tournament is. Duke and UNC always go to the tournament, but they go to different regions. They were the two best teams in the ACC, so they both get bids. Same goes for Catholic/CAK. They were both solid in the regular season, so they both should get a high seed, and then the playoffs begin. This business where teams keep playing each other over and over again is ridiculous. And it is even more ridiculous that teams can afford to lose in the playoffs. Most states DO NOT do this. Look at how North Carolina soccer sets up their playoff system. Top bids in the district go to the tourney, and then if you lose, you're out...no resting players, no meeting up with the same team one game later. It is very simple and makes for a more intense playoff atmosphere. Teams play desperately and with more passion. You cannot afford to rest and/or save players if there is a chance you are going home.

 

With the exception of football, TN HS sports gives teams too many chances to be "off their game" in the playoffs.

[reaction]

Back when I played, was the last year they had the format where the top team from the region went to the substate game in 2002. I understand what people say now that teams do get a lot of chances with this newer play off system. I liked the old play off system where only the top teams from the region went on to play in the substate game. It does make the games in the play offs a lot more important. In my opinion it makes it feel like winning the region title is actually worth something, insted of seeding for the substate, and state tournament. One thing I like about this format, is as a fan, and not a player anymore in high school, I get more chances to see more games, and teams play. /laugh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":lol:" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> The only thing with that is, its normally the same teams playing over and over again. This current play off format does make it to where if there are more than 1 team from a region deserving of making it to the state tournament, they have a better chance, but I would rather have teams playing in the play offs with there seasons on the line. District tournament I feel is fine with the top 2 teams moving on to the region tournament, but from region tournament, on through the state tournament I would like to see single elimination.

[mtnman]

I like the system simply for the fact that the two best teams can make it to the state championship... barring any upsets.

 

If you send one from each district or region, you dont have Knox Cath and CAK or CCS and Notre Dame and CSAS. When Grace was good, that made it even worse. This way one of the three does not go but the other two could make it to the state final even if they are in the same district.

 

I want the state championship played on Saturday in Murfreesboro not this week at Knox Catholic. (or wherever)

[reaction]

QUOTE(stamfordbridgesoccer @ May 18 2007 - 09:58 PM) 826462323[/snapback]Hmmm...I agree with everything that has been said but, for the sake of argument, let me try to play devil's advocate. Not sure I am going to be able to convince myself, but here goes.

 

Look at this year's region finalists. Region 6 (?), for instance: You have a young Cleveland team and a veteran Soddy team going to sub-state. I believe that Soddy will beat Cookeville and go to state (although I think I am the only one who sees this). I also believe that on the right night, Cleveland could pull an upset and beat Blackman. As I look at that region, teams there within seem to be those "middle of the pack" teams that no one ever talks about come this time of year. And I realize that is because the powerhouses of state are incredible and have great records while other teams are under the radar because they are sitting at a .500 (or so) record. But even Ooltewah, whose record was dismal, had some good results, being very competitive with Hendersonville and Gallatin, tying CCS (heard that was with 10 men), and looked to be a team that, if all the pieces fell into place properly, could cause some damage. McMinn County tied Farragut - I have no idea what that is all about. Guessing that Farragut was shelling them and just could not finish, but who knows.

 

My point is this. I believe that these middle of the pack teams exist in other regions, as well. And I also believe that one of these middle of the pack teams gets hot at the right time and stays healthy they could cause a shake up in state a state match or two.

 

Another point is this: if region runner-up is eliminated then they do not get the benefit of "big game experience" (I know region finals is big but, come on, its nothing compared to the matches that follow). How much more dangerous could a young Cleveland be (and therefore more likely to shake things up at state) with the experience of a sub-state game come next year?

 

Region finalists being guranteed one more game gives hope to these middle of the pack teams. And I do believe that if one of them gets hot at the right time, they can make a run.

 

Okay. That's me trying to play devil's advocate. Not sure how well I did. Now if only some things would happen in state tourney to support my point. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

 

I understand your points too. You make some good arguments. If you keep the districts the same, then those middle of the road teams still have a chance to get hot. They can still pull the upset and make it to the region tournament. If they did change it to where region was single elimination, the stakes are higher for the region tournament. The reason its not really big now, is the fact that you get to the region finals, and you already know you have another game. The region finals was a "big game" becuase it punched your card to the substate game. The T$$AA will probably won't change the format, anytime soon atleast, but it would be nice if they did.

[Nashville Panther]

The system works well. Thank goodness the TSSAA does not revolve everything around Farragut- Bearden and CAK- Catholic. As while the system doesn't make everyone happy the system is designed for what is everyone's interest.

 

In Middle Tennessee the districts are not created equally. The districts will not be re-designed to even teams out because then the rivalries will disappear. FRA- CPA need to be in the same district. If FRA's schedule was Cascade, White House, Cheatham County and Greenbrier their season would be much less enjoyable. (Oh by the way their gate would stink and they would be hurting for money- but the TSSAA only needs to worry about money according to some on here). Because they unequal it is unfair to send a team to state/ substate from a crappy district/ region when other districts have 2 or 3 dominant teams.

 

Also, the suggestion to get rid of the bottom seeds from the playoffs is never going to happen nor should it.

 

In District 9 A-AA- the 8 seed was Goodpasture and the 1 seed was CPA. In the regular season they tied. Likewise, the 7 seed was MLK and the 2 seed was HF, in the regular season they tied as well. By the logic of the bored East Tennesseans these district matches which were great games wouldn't have happened. This district has several good teams, the margin in the standings is very close from #7 to #4 or 5. By some of the earlier posts logic some decent teams wouldnt' have a shot at the playoffs (which is guaranteed in all sports but football).

 

The funny thing about District 9 A-AA is that nearly all of the top 7 teams would dominate if they were located in the other districts/ regions in Middle Tennessee.

 

The system is designed to allow districts with 2 great teams a chance to make the state.

 

The system the complainers are recommending woukld mean that CAK and CPA would not be at State. However, Giles County and Elizabethton would be.

 

If you think that is fairer to potentially keep the best teams from state than people being "BORED" seeing some games then I guess we will have to disagree.

 

Also, CPA- HF played 3 times. In 2 matches both teams knew they would be moving on. Oddly, the crowds got larger each game and none of their matches could be considered tame or dull.

[akula21]

I have a thought, so be patient with me. What if we combined regions after districts: take the disrict champions and runner-ups and combined those top 4 with the top 4 from the next region and seed them in a single elimination tournament. That way different teams see each other with the ability of the top teams still advancing to state without seeing each other over and over again. For example: if we combined region 1 and 2 in AA/A (since that is the classification I coach in) we would create a region tournament with Catholic, Cak, Seymour, and Alcoa playing against Pigeon Forge, Elizabethon, Gatlingburg Pittman, and University School. The winners move on and everyone else goes home. I did the math and it looks like the same amount of matches with new opponents. I may be wrong about the math, I am a history teacher, but even if it was another game, it seems like the teams that peak at the right time would move on and we wouldn't see so many rematches until state. I think this seems more fair, b/c some regions or districts are heavy loaded with top notch teams that deserve to be at state and now we create an atmosphere that every game is a must win.

[NedNatterjack]

QUOTE(mtnman @ May 18 2007 - 08:17 PM) 826462348[/snapback]I like the system simply for the fact that the two best teams can make it to the state championship... barring any upsets.

 

 

But think about Bearden and Farragut and their respective districts and regions. There are some good teams in that district alone, that in any other region across the state could compete and make it far in the tournament. But they can't get out of their own region because they are having to play the one of the eventual state champion contenders.

 

These teams are getting put out early in the tournament and other schools across the state, that were beaten by them solidly are going on past regions and sub-states. It just doesn't seem fair.

 

I wonder if there could be a seeding like the NCAA basketball tournament. Yeah, now that would be fun! A lot of traveling, I'd say, but it could work.

[manfromtn]

QUOTE(reaction @ May 18 2007 - 09:22 PM) 826462356[/snapback]I understand your points too. You make some good arguments. If you keep the districts the same, then those middle of the road teams still have a chance to get hot. They can still pull the upset and make it to the region tournament. If they did change it to where region was single elimination, the stakes are higher for the region tournament. The reason its not really big now, is the fact that you get to the region finals, and you already know you have another game. The region finals was a "big game" becuase it punched your card to the substate game. The T$$AA will probably won't change the format, anytime soon atleast, but it would be nice if they did.

 

 

 

Let's face facts. It's ALL about the Benjamins. End of discussion.

[mtnman]

Why is the present system all about the $$? It seems to be the best system. At the moment 4 of the best teams, (CAK, Knox Catholic, CCS and Notre Dame) are in two districts. So what if they play each other several times. The system is set up for the best team to make it to the state finals. (with the exception of CSAS this year but there isn't much you can do about that).

 

If only the region winner goes on... CAK is not there and Notre Dame is not there. Not a good state tournament if those two teams are not there.

[manfromtn]

QUOTE(mtnman @ May 20 2007 - 03:26 PM) 826463498[/snapback]Why is the present system all about the $$? It seems to be the best system. At the moment 4 of the best teams, (CAK, Knox Catholic, CCS and Notre Dame) are in two districts. So what if they play each other several times. The system is set up for the best team to make it to the state finals. (with the exception of CSAS this year but there isn't much you can do about that).

 

If only the region winner goes on... CAK is not there and Notre Dame is not there. Not a good state tournament if those two teams are not there.

 

 

Under the current system their are 7 games x 3 divisions to get to a winner = 21. With 4 teams it would be 3 games x 3 divisions = 9 games to get to a winner. This is more than 2 x the gate and concessions. Then add the extra days and twice as many supporters in the host city increases the revenues in hotel, food, gas, etc. This adds to the coffers. All tolled it adds up to 3 times or more $$$.

 

If CAK and ND make it to the final then they can prove your last point. But, the bottom line is still ALL about the Benjamins.

[mtnman]

why would you want less games and less teams to go to the state tournament. Still dont think it is about the benjamins. I guess we just disagree.