2A Playoff Standings through Week 6

[Antwan]

Antwan,

 

How accurate do you think your quadrants are? I figured the state would be cut in fourths from right to left.

 

 

I don't know. It hasn't been said how the quadrants will be determined. You very well could be right...though.

[ksgovols]

3-to-1 odds says R. Carter would pull his own teeth out before he puts Goodpasture and Alcoa on the same side of the bracket (so that they would only meet in the championship).

 

 

I agree. I think with the Nashville private schools, they can massage the brackets anyway they want. Goodpasture, CPA and DCA could go in any direction depending upon which one needs a team. I think it would be hard for those doing the seeding not to look at potential matchups down the line and move the ABC school accordingly.

[ReitzFan]

You are partially correct too. You are right in that the 32 teams will be divided into quadrants first. After that...the #1's are seeded 1st...#2's next...#3's next...and then the wildcards. This is from the tssaa site.

 

"Once the 32 teams have been selected for the playoffs, the 32 schools will be geographically grouped into four eight-team quadrants. This grouping will be done without regard to region alignments.

Once the four quad brackets are created, the eight teams within each bracket will be seeded from 1 to 8. All #1 region finishers will be listed and seeded using the standard TSSAA football regulation, i.e., head-to-head (if applicable), overall records, etc. Once the #1 seeds are placed in the bracket, then the same procedure will be done for #2, #3 and wild card. Once the teams are seeded in the bracket, the home team will always be the higher seeded team. If two teams are the same seed, such as two #1s, two #2s, etc., then the top team in the bracket in odd years will be the home team and the bottom team in the bracket will be the home team in the even years."

 

 

My apologies. I assumed that when the term "seeded" was used, the TSSAA would actually seed the teams in each quadrant. Placing all of the 1's first, all the 2's next, then the 3's, followed by the wildcards is NOT true seeding. Examples using current standings of teams that will be seeded higher than teams that are better than them would include from region 9 that the 2nd and 3rd seeds both have sub 500 records currently. The 3rd seed from region 1 is now 1-5. The two best teams in region 3 are at 500 and the 3 seed is 2-3. All of the wildcard teams will automactically be seeded lower than teams that make it in via a 1-3 seed. This is just wrong. If you are going to "SEED" a quadrant, you should actually put the best team first and on down the line. According to how I read the TSSAA policy, this is not what is going to happen. Hopefully, after this season, the TSSAA will tweek the process and once teams are in a quadrant they will acutally be seeded and not placed depending on how they may have finished in a region.

[Antwan]

I agree. I think with the Nashville private schools, they can massage the brackets anyway they want. Goodpasture, CPA and DCA could go in any direction depending upon which one needs a team. I think it would be hard for those doing the seeding not to look at potential matchups down the line and move the ABC school accordingly.

 

 

If the need a team for the east...they will move the easternmost team. If they need a team for the west...they will move the westernmost team. They pretty much have to do it that way.

[ReitzFan]

I don't know. It hasn't been said how the quadrants will be determined. You very well could be right...though.

 

 

I was under the assumption that once the top 32 teams are known, then they would be grouped in quadrants geographically, then seeded. I assumed that the Nashville schools would probably be the swing teams and could be placed just about anywhere depending on where a team was needed.

[Antwan]

My apologies. I assumed that when the term "seeded" was used, the TSSAA would actually seed the teams in each quadrant. Placing all of the 1's first, all the 2's next, then the 3's, followed by the wildcards is NOT true seeding. Examples using current standings of teams that will be seeded higher than teams that are better than them would include from region 9 that the 2nd and 3rd seeds both have sub 500 records currently. The 3rd seed from region 1 is now 1-5. The two best teams in region 3 are at 500 and the 3 seed is 2-3. All of the wildcard teams will automactically be seeded lower than teams that make it in via a 1-3 seed. This is just wrong. If you are going to "SEED" a quadrant, you should actually put the best team first and on down the line. According to how I read the TSSAA policy, this is not what is going to happen. Hopefully, after this season, the TSSAA will tweek the process and once teams are in a quadrant they will acutally be seeded and not placed depending on how they may have finished in a region.

 

 

I don't see how that could be done unless a BCS type rating system (Sonny Moore...etc) is used. I don't see that happening. The five wildcards should be thankful just to make the playoffs. They are no better than 4th in their own region. How could you seed them ahead of anybody that is a 1-3? Most 1-3's are going to have a decent record.

[fieldgoal1]

We have to realize that no one is going to REALLY know how it is going to work until November 3rd. Like, the CIA, FBI, and IRS are all in on this one. /dry.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="

[FBGIRL]

All of the wildcard teams will automactically be seeded lower than teams that make it in via a 1-3 seed. This is just wrong. If you are going to "SEED" a quadrant, you should actually put the best team first and on down the line. According to how I read the TSSAA policy, this is not what is going to happen. Hopefully, after this season, the TSSAA will tweek the process and once teams are in a quadrant they will acutally be seeded and not placed depending on how they may have finished in a region.

 

How is it wrong that a team that couldn't place in the top three of their region should be above a team that qualified within the top 3 of their region. True, there will be some better teams make wildcard than say 3rd place teams but no reason to push them ahead. Since they only look at overall record for wildcards, some teams that attempted to play a tough schedule will be penalized. Take CPA who currently is at 3-3 but has played an extemely tough schedule outside of the region.

[curiousdave]

How is it wrong that a team that couldn't place in the top three of their region should be above a team that qualified within the top 3 of their region. True, there will be some better teams make wildcard than say 3rd place teams but no reason to push them ahead. Since they only look at overall record for wildcards, some teams that attempted to play a tough schedule will be penalized. Take CPA who currently is at 3-3 but has played an extemely tough schedule outside of the region.

 

 

CPA is not going to finish 4th

so they dont have to worry about overall record or rankings

[ReitzFan]

I don't see how that could be done unless a BCS type rating system (Sonny Moore...etc) is used. I don't see that happening. The five wildcards should be thankful just to make the playoffs. They are no better than 4th in their own region. How could you seed them ahead of anybody that is a 1-3? Most 1-3's are going to have a decent record.

 

 

The team that would recieve the 3 seed out of region 1 currently has a record of 1-5. The teams who currently hold the 2 and 3 seeds out of region 9 are both sub 500 teams. The 2 best teams in region 3 area currently at 500. The 3 seed out of that region is 2-3. I would take a 4 or 5 seed out of region 8 over any of the teams that I have mentioned. There are 6 examples of teams in which most any wild card team should be a higher seed than a 1-3 seed out of the weaker regions.

[Antwan]

The team that would recieve the 3 seed out of region 1 currently has a record of 1-5. The teams who currently hold the 2 and 3 seeds out of region 9 are both sub 500 teams. The 2 best teams in region 3 area currently at 500. The 3 seed out of that region is 2-3. I would take a 4 or 5 seed out of region 8 over any of the teams that I have mentioned. There are 6 examples of teams in which most any wild card team should be a higher seed than a 1-3 seed out of the weaker regions.

 

 

Like it's been said a couple of times...if you can't finish any higher than 4th in a region...you don't deserve to be ahead of the 1-3's. Otherwise...why play a regular season? What do you have to play for?

[Indian]

Region 3's likely 1 and 2, or 2 and 1, however it finishes, have played teams like Fulton, CAK, Red Bank and South Pittsburg in non-region games so far. If they start trying to place teams in the playoffs by their overall records you'll see teams loading up on easy (or at least easier) non-region games.