The Sunday Q&A with Bernard Childress: TSSAA may revise playoff system a

[winstonblue]

I have lived under different playoff systems for many years and to me this one is the best ever! It is exciting and fair. I like the the wildcards because it gives some teams a chance that otherwise would have none. I have not been associated with the state's powerful teams and at the schools I have closely affiliated with, both were helped by this format. Before this the football program was for all intents and purposes dead. Jackson County and White County had enjoyed little success under the old system. The split into 6 divisions gave those schools a chance to play with other schools more closely resembling them. I don't mind playing with larger schools in the district as long as they can play with similar schools when the playoffs arrive. It is not perfect but as someone who has been around TSSAA football for over 30 years I hope they keep it as it is!

[Solomon]

Under this scenario we would likely either have 16 districts with 4/5 teams each, or eight with 9/10 teams each. If the TSSAA doesn't want to lose money to the revival of bowls games that will no doubt pop up then they will have to take 32 teams per classification. 

 

In the 4/5 teams scenario it may be hard scheduling six to seven teams out of district each year, especially trying to avoid teams that you may meet in the post season.  And in the 9/10 scenario it will be like playing to get to the national champion in college football: ever game would be critical for the post-season.

 

I'm thinking five classifications is the best in terms of break-downs. We could have eight regions with 7/8 teams; just like a few years back. 

 

Indian - I don't know or care about privates.  That's just my 2 cents.  For argument's sake, I'm including them.

 

I basically have two ideas in mind for this.

 

Idea #1 - 4 classes 8 regions.  There are approximately 300 D-1 schools currently.  That's about 75 teams per class.  So yeah, it would be 9 or 10 team regions, but it's not like we don't have those now anyway.  Each region can decide how they want to do it.  Play round robin, play 7 games, etc.  Top 2 from each district would make the playoffs.  To offset the $$$ the TSSAA would lose, this is where the idea of the preseason kickoff games come into play.  Think the HOF games in basketball, only football.  Civic groups, schools, whatever can host.  TSSAA can take their share and they remainder can be distributed however they see fit.  In my mind, this is a great chance for some inter-sectional games to be played.  Pros of this are that is should limit travel and provide a fairly clear-cut method to determining playoff teams.  Would also reduce the number of .500 or less teams that make playoffs to essentially 0.  Cons - could kill some out of district rivalries, but the 11th game could help that out.

 

Idea #2 - Somewhat modeled after the NCAA D-2 model.  I would do 12 districts grouped into 4 regions/quads of 3 districts.  Each district would have 6-7 teams.  I'd go 32 teams per class with this model and no kickoff/preseason game.  Top 2 teams from each district make the playoffs automatically and the top 2 of the third place teams in each quad make it.  Pros- easier scheduling IMO, more teams make playoffs, expands regional interest  Cons - There's still a bit of the wildcard factor involved, even though in this scenario you are battling more local teams and not teams across state to get in.  The criteria for making playoffs would have to be revisited.  TSSAA would have to figure out how to make up lost revenue.

 

There is no "perfect" system that's going to get the 32 best teams year after year.  There's always going to be teams that get in over a better team.  I just think 5 or 6 classes is too many (have thought this for a long time), and there is a way to make 4 classes work.  Truthfully, after thinking through it again, I really like my second idea.

[davidlimbaugh]

I shake my head at people who believe non-district games should count for determining post-season teams and seeding.  They may be great football fans but IMHO do not understand high school sports too well.

 

In the NFL, even though there are some great teams, good teams, so-so teams and bad teams, they are on a somewhat level playing field.  All pro players.  Same roster size for each.  A salary cap.  A draft.  A waiver system.

 

In college football, each division is on a somewhat even playing field.  There are arguments over SEC vs Pac-12, Big 10/11 vs Big 12, etc...  and it is recognized that the AQ conferences are usually stronger than the MAC, Sunbelt and others...

 

In High School, there is such a diversity in enrollment, economic and social demographics, local commitment and involvement, and a complete laundry list of factors.

 

I commented on this forum years ago that the current system then and now does not give much of a incintive to schedule strong opponents and definetly does not discourage schools from schedule weaker opponents.

 

If they had agreed to play us, Riverdale could have scheduled say Coffee County, MTCS, Cannon County and Mt. Juliet Christian Academy much like Ohio State scheduled Florida A&M, Buffalo and San Diego St or my Tide scheduled Georgia State and Chattanooga.   To get wins.   How is that even remotely fair?    NCAA Conference championships are determined by their conference games for that very reason.   If Riverdale (or a number of other schools around the state) could schedule 4 'cupcakes') to make sure they get 6 or 7 wins, how is that fair to the other schools trying to get 6 or 7 wins?

 

People lament how a 4-6 team could make the playoffs.  I lament that we have a system that drives ADs and coaches to create schedules to make sure they get to 6-4 or 7-3.  The goal should be to win as many district games as you can, because in high school sports that is the closest thing to fair and equal that we have.   Our current system does not even do that right.  Is it fair to say 7AAA or another AA or A district that has all of their teams at the highest (6A, 4A, 2A) classification to have to compete for overall wins with districts that may have 0 or 1 6A, 4A or 2A members but a lot of 5A, 3A or 1A members?   How is that even close to being fair? 

Edited October 29, 2013 by davidlimbaugh

[Hoganknows]

David , thanks for all your hard work. This playoff system can be compared to ObamaCare....a complete mess and voted in for political reasons only. I know a lot of high school football coaches and AD's and I know not one, not one single one who likes this present playoff plan the TSSAA is presently using. It's a joke!!!

[Indian]

I still believe 4 classes would work. The point made about the districts being too small on the average, only about 5 teams each, is valid. One very quick fix, have up to three non-district games assigned by the state. This would be no different than being assigned to a district except the non-district games would not count toward the playoffs. Proximity would be a main factor. Class A teams would play nearby Class AA teams, AA could play A or AAA, and AAA could play AA or AAAA. It wouldn't be just random so a team wouldn't draw Fulton, Maryville, and Greeneville non-district by chance.  If the district has 5 teams, 3 games are assigned, giving three chances for rivalries/payday games. Six team district, two games assigned. The reason I don't have teams in the same classes assigned is because some would not want likely or possible playoff matches.

 

Teams would play home and away then move on to different assigned opponents after two years. If the assigned opponent is already a yearly rival, they would be one of the non-assigned matchups after two years.

 

That's a very quick rundown on a thought I just had so I am sure it could use some work. Some teams might get a bad opponent as far as bringing a crowd but most districts have teams like that already. There would be non-assigned, non-district slots open to help make up for it.

[alltime]

I have lived under different playoff systems for many years and to me this one is the best ever! It is exciting and fair. I like the the wildcards because it gives some teams a chance that otherwise would have none. I have not been associated with the state's powerful teams and at the schools I have closely affiliated with, both were helped by this format. Before this the football program was for all intents and purposes dead. Jackson County and White County had enjoyed little success under the old system. The split into 6 divisions gave those schools a chance to play with other schools more closely resembling them. I don't mind playing with larger schools in the district as long as they can play with similar schools when the playoffs arrive. It is not perfect but as someone who has been around TSSAA football for over 30 years I hope they keep it as it is!

How can it be fair when 1A,3A,and 5A schools have to beat 2A,4A,and 6A schools just to qualify for the playoffs?

[davidlimbaugh]

How can it be fair when 1A,3A,and 5A schools have to beat 2A,4A,and 6A schools just to qualify for the playoffs?

 

Especially if you are the one or A two teams in a district with rest being AA where another district may be ALL A schools...

 

Examples: 

 

This is more fair to a A school:

 

Marion County (2A) A 6 3 0 153 8 8 1 375 112 Whitwell,Lookout Valley,Sale Creek South Pittsburg South Pittsburg (1A) A 6 3 0 192 8 8 1 390 115 Sale Creek,Whitwell,Lookout Valley Marion County Whitwell (2A) A 6 2 2 108 113 5 5 331 274 Lookout Valley,Sale Creek   Lookout Valley (1A) A 6 0 3 16 172 0 9 74 445   Sale Creek Sale Creek (1A) A 6 0 3 8 176 0 9 73 502   Lookout Valley

 

 

Than this is Fair to Middleton...

Trinity Christian (2A) A 15 4 0 176 58 8 1 356 199 Adamsville,Scotts Hill,Jackson Christian,Middleton Riverside Adamsville (2A) A 15 3 1 166 62 7 2 342 154 Riverside,Middleton,Scotts Hill Jackson Christian Riverside (2A) A 15 3 1 153 69 6 3 321 192 Middleton,Scotts Hill,Jackson Christian Trinity Christian Jackson Christian (2A) A 15 2 2 129 92 3 6 236 283 Scotts Hill,Middleton Adamsville Middleton (1A) A 15 0 4 30 203 1 8 142 408   Scotts Hill Scotts Hill (2A) A 15 0 4 14 184 1 8 105 328   Middleton

 

or Memphis Northside?

 

Mitchell (2A) A 16 6 0 291 28 6 3 331 112 KIPP Academy,Booker T. Washington,Oakhaven,MAHS,Carver,Hillcrest Memphis North Side Hillcrest (2A) A 16 5 1 154 50 5 4 178 158 Carver,Oakhaven,MAHS,Booker T. Washington,Memphis North Side KIPP Academy Carver (2A) A 16 4 2 144 107 4 5 172 267 MAHS,Booker T. Washington,Memphis North Side,KIPP Academy Oakhaven Booker T. Washington (2A) A 16 3 3 168 150 3 6 180 277 KIPP Academy,Oakhaven,Memphis North Side MAHS MAHS (2A) A 16 3 3 119 133 3 6 142 276 Oakhaven,KIPP Academy,Memphis North Side Booker T. Washington KIPP Academy (2A) A 16 2 4 60 145 3 6 98 220 Memphis North Side,Oakhaven Hillcrest Oakhaven (2A) A 16 1 5 104 144 1 8 110 277 Memphis North Side Carver Memphis North Side (1A) A 16 0 6 8 291 0 9 8 476   Mitchell

[Indian]

One more effort, and I will try and be brief as I can really get rolling on these types of topics-

Four classes, and 12 districts in each. That keeps the districts/regions from being too spread out like 8 could do, and gives an average of six teams in each district. Non-district games don't count on playoffs so having 5 non-district games is easier to manage. If need be, a couple of non-district games pitting teams in the same area could be assigned by the TSSAA as mentioned in another post.

 

1-4 in each district make the playoffs, four quads. No formula needed, the reason non-district games do not matter. Three district winners at the top, runners-up are 4-6, third place teams are 7-9, and #4's are 10-12.

 

District winners get a bye, and are seeded 1-2-3 in a predetermined order. Start District 1 then 2 then 3 the first year, then 2-3-1 the second year, 3-1-2 in year three. That seems complicated but it's similar to a team from Districts 1-4 traveling to Districts 5-8 in the semifinals one year, then swapping the next year, as in the old system.

 

The one relatively small hold-up, determining which runner-up gets the #4 spot and gets a first round bye as 5-12 play in the first round. Go by fewest district losses, and if each has just 1 district loss, go back to whichever district is scheduled to be placed higher that particular year.

 

Here is an example in what Districts 5-7 in AA could look like, with 1-4 finishes then playoff seedings:

 

District 5:
Polk County
Tyner
McMinn Central
Sweetwater

District 6:
Signal Mountain
Notre Dame
Marion County
Sequatchie

District 7:
Upperman
Westmoreland
Smith County
York Institute

1-Polk County
2-Signal Mountain
3-Upperman
4-Tyner
5-Notre Dame
6-Westmoreland
7-McMinn Central
8-Marion County
9-Smith County
10-Sweetwater
11-Sequatchie County
12-York Institute

 

York would play at Notre Dame in the first round, and so on. In the next round, barring upsets, Polk would play Marion County, etc.
 

[midtnmale]

If non-district games don't count then why have them? Playing four to six  games every year that don't count is ridiculous. Especially when travel and the possibility of injuries is taken into account. Granted, some schools with strong programs won't mind playing five games that don't mean anything for seeding purposes.  But most schools don't have strong programs.  Non-distict games, at the very least, need to count as tie-breaakers.

 

If winning the district means a first round bye (and losing the gate) then why bother? Apart from pride, I think many programs would rather have the gate receipts than get a bye.

 

 

Five classifications with 8 districts is the simplest, long-term solution. Just take the top four from each district, as was done before the TSSAA went to six classifications. 

 

 

Then again, some school's (such as La Vergne before Stewarts Creek) best chance of winning a game is outside of the district. So I guess a non-disctict game can count for something after all. 

 

 

 

One more effort, and I will try and be brief as I can really get rolling on these types of topics-

Four classes, and 12 districts in each. That keeps the districts/regions from being too spread out like 8 could do, and gives an average of six teams in each district. Non-district games don't count on playoffs so having 5 non-district games is easier to manage. If need be, a couple of non-district games pitting teams in the same area could be assigned by the TSSAA as mentioned in another post.

 

1-4 in each district make the playoffs, four quads. No formula needed, the reason non-district games do not matter. Three district winners at the top, runners-up are 4-6, third place teams are 7-9, and #4's are 10-12.

 

District winners get a bye, and are seeded 1-2-3 in a predetermined order. Start District 1 then 2 then 3 the first year, then 2-3-1 the second year, 3-1-2 in year three. That seems complicated but it's similar to a team from Districts 1-4 traveling to Districts 5-8 in the semifinals one year, then swapping the next year, as in the old system.

 

The one relatively small hold-up, determining which runner-up gets the #4 spot and gets a first round bye as 5-12 play in the first round. Go by fewest district losses, and if each has just 1 district loss, go back to whichever district is scheduled to be placed higher that particular year.

 

Here is an example in what Districts 5-7 in AA could look like, with 1-4 finishes then playoff seedings:

 

District 5:
Polk County
Tyner
McMinn Central
Sweetwater

District 6:
Signal Mountain
Notre Dame
Marion County
Sequatchie

District 7:
Upperman
Westmoreland
Smith County
York Institute

1-Polk County
2-Signal Mountain
3-Upperman
4-Tyner
5-Notre Dame
6-Westmoreland
7-McMinn Central
8-Marion County
9-Smith County
10-Sweetwater
11-Sequatchie County
12-York Institute

 

York would play at Notre Dame in the first round, and so on. In the next round, barring upsets, Polk would play Marion County, etc.
 

[Indian]

I'd like five classes, eight regions more if things weren't so spread out for some of them, hurting the gate. Some fans will travel regardless, some simply can't due to finances or can't leave early enough due to work. This four class plan is not as complicated as the length of the breakdown might make it seem. It keeps nearby teams close together in classes with 12 districts. You also have a good idea of who your playoff opponent will be, another thing the coaches currently do not like. And it switches each year with Districts 1, 4, 7, and 10 at the top to start, then 2, 5, etc the next year. That switches up the post season matchups so things wouldn't get stale with the same 1-4 playing the same 1-4 nearly each postseason.

 

It might be useless but I will put together districts 1-12 in each of four classes and send it to them. It won't take long as I have all of the enrollments handy. I think it could work. As of now I'll include the Division I private schools though things could be changing pretty soon.

 

The reason non-district games shouldn't count on the playoffs is how some teams can load up with wins, and some may be unable to load up if they wanted to (due to being isolated from teams that would play them, etc).

[GWAVE1]

Non district games have always counted in tie breakers. I do not see a problem with it.

[devils25]

This is one of the fairest systems in high school football. The state of West Virginia WVSSAC uses a simple power ranking that rewards teams that have to play up a class and teams that schedule strong teams.

 Here is their system in a nut shell  very easy.

1) For each win you have over a Class AAA team (5a & 6a) you get 12 points

2) For each win over a Class AA (3a &4a) team you get 9 points

3) For each win over a Class A (1a & 2a) team you get 6 points

4) 1 bonus point for each win of your defeated opponents

5) divide the point total by the # of games played 

 

The top 16 in power ranking make the playoffs each year. With #1 playing #16 , #2 playing 15 and so on. Higher seed hosts. This could easily be adapted for TN just split the state into  2 equal halves east and west and rank the teams in each half and the top 16 teams in the east and top 16 in the west make the playoffs. under this systems if you get wins over higher class and teams that have more wins your power ranking reflects it. 

 

I did the numbers this week in 4a and under a this system. 4A would be 1) Greeneville 2) Sullivan South 3)Fulton 4) Carter. instead of Fulton, Carter, Sullivan South, Greeneville