Jump to content
Reporting Scores to CoachT ×
How to edit games

The 2 teams with a combined 5 wins...

nrgrizzlies

By nrgrizzlies
in Class 5A & Class 6A

 Share

Recommended Posts

nickknx865 Competitor

nickknx865

Posted
Posted

Region 5-5A had two teams make the playoffs with 4-6 records.So you're saying Gallatin & Overton shouldn't have gotten in? /huh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":huh:" border="0" alt="huh.gif" /> THE SQUAD /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

If they didn't make it to .500, then yes, they shouldn't have got in. Why aren't people just a little irked about teams that get in with 2-8, 3-7, 4-6 records? Those teams almost always get the crap kicked out of them by a 9-1 or 10-0 team.

 

And Livingston Academy won the 3A state championship a couple of years ago with a 5-5 record & a #4 seed...THE SQUAD /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

 

 

But they were .500, and they actually deserved to be in there

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 20
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

KEV-O Record Holder

KEV-O

Posted
Posted

Did they win the games they had to win to get into the playoffs? Did they beat who they had to beat? If the answer is yes, then they have just as much right as anyone else to make the playoffs. What if a 4-6 team comes along with lost for a combined 14 points during some of their games but won enough to get in the play offs? Are you going to kick them out of their spot? Who determines "better" teams from regions?

 

Leave it alone, the kids earned their spot, grow up and deal with it.

 

I agree with that, those kids won the games they needed to, to get into playoffs. Dont bash the kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
just1np Medalist

just1np

Posted
Posted

I agree with the sub-.500 suggestion. currently half the teams in each class make the playoffs. That is way too many. What is really unfair is these teams that are going to the playoffs because they are the 4th best team in a mediodre region are cheating some good teams in other regions from going to the playoffs just because they are in a tougher region.

 

Example: In 5A Gallatin goes to the playoffs at 4-6 while 6-4 Siegal and 5-5 LaVergne stay home.

 

I'm pretty confident in saying that both of those teams were better than Gallatin this year, seeing as 6 of seven GHS losses were not even close.

 

It also de-values all non-region games. Basically there are 3 or 4 games in a season that are exhibition games.

 

I think if you are going to have half of the field make the playoffs it seems you should reward the teams with winning records regardless of their region. If region X can't produce four teams with .500 or better records then region Z deserves to have an extra spot. It makes as much sense as college football saying, "every conference gets the same number of bowl teams". The SEC has ten eligible bowl teams this year. You think they should be limited to six because that would be 'unfair' to Conference USA? It is total bull crap what we do here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE SQUAD Champion

THE SQUAD

Posted
Posted

I agree with the sub-.500 suggestion. currently half the teams in each class make the playoffs. That is way too many. What is really unfair is these teams that are going to the playoffs because they are the 4th best team in a mediodre region are cheating some good teams in other regions from going to the playoffs just because they are in a tougher region.

 

Example: In 5A Gallatin goes to the playoffs at 4-6 while 6-4 Siegal and 5-5 LaVergne stay home.

 

I'm pretty confident in saying that both of those teams were better than Gallatin this year, seeing as 6 of seven GHS losses were not even close.

 

It also de-values all non-region games. Basically there are 3 or 4 games in a season that are exhibition games.

 

I think if you are going to have half of the field make the playoffs it seems you should reward the teams with winning records regardless of their region. If region X can't produce four teams with .500 or better records then region Z deserves to have an extra spot. It makes as much sense as college football saying, "every conference gets the same number of bowl teams". The SEC has ten eligible bowl teams this year. You think they should be limited to six because that would be 'unfair' to Conference USA? It is total bull crap what we do here.

 

 

Decent point.But I just don't see how it could be worked out fairly...

 

 

THE SQUAD /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

Link to comment
Share on other sites
formerblazer Medalist

formerblazer

Posted
Posted

Maybe YOU need to grow up!

 

I voiced an opinion, and am allowed to do so. Where do you get off acting like the authority on anything? If you disagree, fine. Voice it in a respectful manner. If you can't carry on a respectful conversation, then get lost. I don't have time to waste on you.

 

 

How about we just quit playing football all together because I think it is obvious that certain regions, then certain teams, are stronger than the rest. Other teams have no right playing these better teams.

 

Now, while you scoff at what I just said, you have essentially just said this is what you want to do. You don't want games because you think a team is not good enough to play, so why should they be allowed to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spartansfan Competitor

Spartansfan

Posted
Posted

How about we just quit playing football all together because I think it is obvious that certain regions, then certain teams, are stronger than the rest. Other teams have no right playing these better teams.

 

Now, while you scoff at what I just said, you have essentially just said this is what you want to do. You don't want games because you think a team is not good enough to play, so why should they be allowed to play.

 

Apparently you have problems with reading comprehension. So I'll try to keep this real basic for you.

 

1) I really don't have anything at stake in this, so I really don't care if a sub .500 team gets into the playoffs

2) My only point is that there are some pretty decent .500 teams that don't get in. Normally due to being the 5th team in their region, or a situation like what happened with Bartlett this year.

3) I'm all for teams proving their business on the field. I think that's why we play 10 games to determine our seeding for playoffs

4) the rules currently are the top 4 get in. I can live with that, with no problem. But I also think there might be a better way to handle it.

 

That's about as complicated as this gets for me.

 

Your statements insinuate...oops (make it look like) you think I'm taking a strong stance and am angrily trying to make a point. That is not the case. One guy made the post, I gave my opinion. That's pretty much as far as it goes. Your attitude is the only thing rubbing me the wrong way. If you disagree with my opinion, that's fine. I don't have a problem with that. But I do have a problem with you putting words, or drwaing incorrect intentions from what I write. I'm hoping I've made my perspective (point of view) clearer for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
formerblazer Medalist

formerblazer

Posted
Posted

Apparently you have problems with reading comprehension. So I'll try to keep this real basic for you.

 

1) I really don't have anything at stake in this, so I really don't care if a sub .500 team gets into the playoffs

2) My only point is that there are some pretty decent .500 teams that don't get in. Normally due to being the 5th team in their region, or a situation like what happened with Bartlett this year.

3) I'm all for teams proving their business on the field. I think that's why we play 10 games to determine our seeding for playoffs

4) the rules currently are the top 4 get in. I can live with that, with no problem. But I also think there might be a better way to handle it.

 

That's about as complicated as this gets for me.

 

Your statements insinuate...oops (make it look like) you think I'm taking a strong stance and am angrily trying to make a point. That is not the case. One guy made the post, I gave my opinion. That's pretty much as far as it goes. Your attitude is the only thing rubbing me the wrong way. If you disagree with my opinion, that's fine. I don't have a problem with that. But I do have a problem with you putting words, or drwaing incorrect intentions from what I write. I'm hoping I've made my perspective (point of view) clearer for you?

 

 

Sure, I just strongly disagree with the idea of a sub .500 team not being allowed into the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

Announcements

  • Recent Posts

    • GWAVE1
      2024 Oak Ridge Wildcats

      By GWAVE1 · Posted

      I used to think like that many many moons ago.  I wondered the same questions but learned that it is just not that easy.  Hiring assistant coaches can be complicated at times.  It takes a few years for HC’s to get who they feel is right for their system.  Couple that with good assistant coaches getting better jobs at times and leaving your program. More to it than some think.  I think you have a good coach up there and time will tell that story.  
    • ILB1999
      Clinton Problems

      By ILB1999 · Posted

      okay.  Like i said initially, it's question we have to ask, but we sure don't know the answer yet.
    • SweetScience
      Clinton Problems

      By SweetScience · Posted

      You’re right, I shouldn’t jump the gun on it. Hopefully it isn’t related to the sports programs, because it’ll end up affecting a lot of innocent kids who just enjoy playing sports.
    • Fandom101
      Clinton Problems

      By Fandom101 · Posted

      I totally agree but just don’t want to see people jumping the gun by insinuating it was for athletic reasons. Nobody knows at the moment except for those involved in the incident itself and those investigating.
    • cascadehomer
      Trouble retaining players

      By cascadehomer · Posted

      Bruh, That portion of the post was simply a product of my imagination. Try to keep up.  The real purpose of the post was to rub salt in this fresh wound following FF’s departure to BGA.  
×
×
  • Create New...