FBAddict,
Did the WCAL put SI up first in line for an at-large bid leaving Mitty and Bellarmine out or did the put the teams up in order of their CCS Points?
CCS Finals/Regional Berths
- Thread starter PALbooster
- Start date
Did the WCAL put SI up first in line for an at-large bid leaving Mitty and Bellarmine out or did the put the teams up in order of their CCS Points?
As the playoff seeding proves this year, WCAL is no longer enforcing their own bylaws for the "integrity Rule" but instead allowing all of their teams to be submitted and seeded according to CCS powerpoints.
Actual CCS Play-off Brackets
Calpreps CCS Rank in parentheses)
Open Division I
8. Bellarmine 4-6 18 (10) vs 1 Milpitas 10-0 31.5 (2)
5. Menlo-Atherton 6-4 22.5 (13) vs 4. San Benito 6-4 23 (21)
6. Los Gatos 5-5 22 (22) vs 3. Piedmont Hills 8-2 26 (29)
7. Palo Alto 3-7 19 (33) vs 2. Salinas 8-2 30.5 (7)
Open Division II
8. Mitty 5-5 21(8) vs 1. Serra 8-2 30 (1)
5. Oak Grove 6-4 26.5 (23) vs 4. Valley Christian 8-2 26.5 (3)
6. Wilcox 7-3 24.5 (11) vs 3. St Francis 7-3 27 (4)
7. Westmont 7-3 23 (38) vs 2. Aragon 9-1 27.5 (6)
Open Division III
8. Bulringame 6-4 20 (20) vs 1. Half Moon Bay 10-0 29.5 (5)
5 Live Oak 6-4 22.5 (31) vs 3. Sacred Heart Cathedral 6-4 23 (12)
6. Seaside 6-4 22.5 (25) vs 3. Palma 6-4 23.5 (15)
7. Terra Nova 5-5 20 (16) vs 2. Aptos 7-3 25.5 (9)
Non-Open D IV
8. Willow Glen 7-3 20 (42) vs 1. Leland 9-1 25.5 (26)
5. Independence 7-3 20.5 (37) vs 4. Santa Clara 7-3 20.5 (47)
6. Alisal 6-4 20.5 (43) vs 3. Branham 7-3 21.5 (40)
7. Cupertino 7-3 20.5 (55) vs 2. Christopher 8-2 23 (27)
Division V
8. Santa Cruz 5-5 15 (74) vs 1. Gilroy 10-0 26.5 (17)
5. Sobrato 8-2 19.5 (49) vs 4. Hillsdale 7-3 20.5 (19)
6. Scotts Valley 6-4 19.5 (39) vs 3. Soledad 7-3 21(32)
7. Jefferson 8-2 18.5 (36) vs 2. Menlo 6-4 21.5 (18)
Calpreps CCS Rank in parentheses)
Open Division I
8. Bellarmine 4-6 18 (10) vs 1 Milpitas 10-0 31.5 (2)
5. Menlo-Atherton 6-4 22.5 (13) vs 4. San Benito 6-4 23 (21)
6. Los Gatos 5-5 22 (22) vs 3. Piedmont Hills 8-2 26 (29)
7. Palo Alto 3-7 19 (33) vs 2. Salinas 8-2 30.5 (7)
Open Division II
8. Mitty 5-5 21(8) vs 1. Serra 8-2 30 (1)
5. Oak Grove 6-4 26.5 (23) vs 4. Valley Christian 8-2 26.5 (3)
6. Wilcox 7-3 24.5 (11) vs 3. St Francis 7-3 27 (4)
7. Westmont 7-3 23 (38) vs 2. Aragon 9-1 27.5 (6)
Open Division III
8. Bulringame 6-4 20 (20) vs 1. Half Moon Bay 10-0 29.5 (5)
5 Live Oak 6-4 22.5 (31) vs 3. Sacred Heart Cathedral 6-4 23 (12)
6. Seaside 6-4 22.5 (25) vs 3. Palma 6-4 23.5 (15)
7. Terra Nova 5-5 20 (16) vs 2. Aptos 7-3 25.5 (9)
Non-Open D IV
8. Willow Glen 7-3 20 (42) vs 1. Leland 9-1 25.5 (26)
5. Independence 7-3 20.5 (37) vs 4. Santa Clara 7-3 20.5 (47)
6. Alisal 6-4 20.5 (43) vs 3. Branham 7-3 21.5 (40)
7. Cupertino 7-3 20.5 (55) vs 2. Christopher 8-2 23 (27)
Division V
8. Santa Cruz 5-5 15 (74) vs 1. Gilroy 10-0 26.5 (17)
5. Sobrato 8-2 19.5 (49) vs 4. Hillsdale 7-3 20.5 (19)
6. Scotts Valley 6-4 19.5 (39) vs 3. Soledad 7-3 21(32)
7. Jefferson 8-2 18.5 (36) vs 2. Menlo 6-4 21.5 (18)
Last edited:
Unless Leigh is playing in the NCS playoffs, I was correct! It was the right call. They were an automatic qualifier.
Leigh was not an automatic qualifier. If they had submitted their form they would have been in a three way tie with Bellarmine and SHP to draw the last at large spot in. If they didn't submit their form it hurt SHP who would lose a head to head tiebreaker with Bellarmine with common opponents as Bellarmine beat MA and SHP lost to MA. In a three way tie with Leigh all three teams would have been part of an equal draw
St Francis got the biggest benefit in this seeding and almost certain to get to finals and a bowl bid.
Here's a good rule of thumb for all CCS followers: Never doubt the expertise of PAL Booster. He, or she, knows a thing or two because he, or she, has seen a thing or two. And that's the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me, Amos Alonzo Stagg.
Certainly certainly did get a good route to a bowl. They seem to have an easier route than Milpitas that faces Bellarmine and potentially Menl Atherton that may be able to match up physically. If my niece is cheerleading for the game (not sure about playoffs), I will probably attend that game over Palma v Seaside which will kost likely be a close game. Seems D3 Open will have the matchups that could be closer scores at the first round than the other divisions. Terra Nova versus Aptos should be close.
It reminds me of last year's RBG bid selection where CCS suddenly decided to take their normally very straight-forward bylaw language and confound it with unclear meaning. The bylaws stated that the winner of head-to-head competition would be used as the first criteria for deciding which two of the three runner up teams would be chosen for RGB bids. Only afterwards did the CCS committee disclose that all three teams had to meet each other for the head-to-head rule to take effect. This year, another wrinkle was introduced, at the CCS seeding meeting, by recognizing DLS as a league champ. CCS should have not allowed that to happen this year when it has not been used in previous years. In fact, if what Darren Sabedra reported is true, that CCS was the initiator to gain clarification for DLS' status as league champ from the NCS, it increases CCS' culpability in this confusion. Why: 1) They are asking now in 2017 when the decision was made by the NCS in 2012. 2) They authorized DLS' status this year when it was not recognized in previous years.
I used to think CCS was the most clear and forthright section in the state. Now I think CCS lacks full integrity. My take away: I can't wait for the next sly bone to be thrown in the mix by CCS.
FBAddict, I think you are interpreting what happened here a bit wrong. The WCAL did enforce the rule, however, SI withdrew which allowed all the teams below them to move up a spot and therefore qualify. Kudos to SI if true, as they realized not only would they not have qualified, but if they did not withdraw they would have eliminated other WCAL teams.
So they withdrew and screwed over non-WCAL teams? The process shouldn’t be dependent on whether or not a team that wouldn’t have qualified “withdraws”.
You might be right. Are you suggesting that the SI withdrawal action allowed both Mitty and BCP to submit their bids by WCAL rules? And if there were playoff slots for one of them, only Mitty's bid would have been allowed?
WCAL put SI, Mitty and Bells on Board in that order but in the AT LARGE spot. Oddly them and Santa Theresa and Alvarez were erased from the board. They crossed out MVC. Then they circled Bgame Seaside Mitty for At large most points. SHP and Bells were tied at 18 and common opponent tiebreak gave bid to Bells. SHP was then crossed out. Coudn't hear discussion about why teams were erased. No mention of the so called Integrity rule was made.
Why don’t they just get rid of the rule if they have no intention of actually following it?
My guess is that St. Francis had contacted the CCS first, then the section took it from there.
I really wasn't all that concerned about Bellarmine (and I don't think Milpitas is, either). I was concerned about a potential matchup with M-A, though. I see them about at the same level as Aptos, which gave Salinas a really good game.
M-A is loaded with individual talent, especially along the lines. But that has not translated into a lot of wins on the field. Their No.1 playmaker is their 6-2 frosh wide receiver. Getting him the ball is not always easy. And teams aren't allowing him to return kicks. If they ever get their act together, look out. But time is running out for them.
If a 3-way tie equates to an automatic bid to you we have nothing more to disagree about. Whatever fits your narrative I guess.
Here is the WCAL bylaws, section 15d:
In the event a team chooses not to participate in the CCS Playoffs or does not have enough CCS entry points to quality for the CCS playoffs, each team below that team in the round robin standings moves up one place.
The key there with SI, is that they did not have enough CCS entry points to qualify, which allowed the teams below them to move up.
The reason this was even a potential messy situation was because of the CCS point system which rewards a team playing Oak Grove the same amount of points as playing Folsom or DLS. Everyone knows unequivocally that those teams are not equivalent, so why do we have a point system in place that says they are?
Eh, again, I don’t see what is so terrible about the CCS system. Just have to agree to disagree with you on that one.
Again, the CCS football seeding system has been in a state of flux seemingly forever. The overwhelming influence of the WCAL is the primary reason. There is no perfect system. This one is probably the best one yet, however. In 2017, it's quite possible that four of the five CCS divisional champions will be public schools. And that will surely please the vast majority of CCS coaches, parents, players, administrators, etc. who view the WCAL (in all sports) as an athletic plague.
they use it when it affects teams from their league but not when it affects others... or maybe its just dead. Leigh not applying affected SHP and the brackets. Then the so called integrity rule that had SI ahead of Mitty and Bells would have prohibited them from making playoffs. However, CCS just looks at points so Mitty in and Bells win tiebreak.
MA has really underachieved with their talent so far this year. They do seem like a team that could give Salinas a problem. I see them as maybe better than Aptos. At least physically they match up. Milpitas physicality got to Salinas in the first game. They completely shut down the Cowboy offense although they have had time to get things ironed out on the offense. Palma played MA close in the first half ealry in the season and got burned. The thing about Salinas is they need to shore up their pass defense which they may have some, but MA has a QB that can wing it at times and decent WR. Still I think Salinas is better than MA. I think Salinas has as close to an automatic bid to a final as any team in the playoff open divisions. If they don't get to the finals with this team and this path, I think it will be a huge under achievment. There is zero excuse with this team. Beating Milpitas will be a different thing, but if they play well I think it could be competitive and I think the Cowboys could upset them. I think if they lose, they will be in a much better situation for a regional game. If they win, the CCS D1 Open winner will have a very tough matchup.
That "decent" wide receiver at M-A is a gifted 6-2 frosh who already has Division I offers. He is an outstanding receiver and kick returner. He is, by far, the Bears' No.1 offensive threat, the guy foes have to plan for in some detail. A primary issue for M-A: Getting this teen the melon.
I know about Franklin - watched him a couple times. He will be a national recruit. However, good teams can limit one great player (and he's still young) like not kicking it to him. It just seems QB play isn't always there and what was suppose to be one of their best teams in a long time hasn't produced. The league has been pretty good and they have faced some tough opponents but so far no signature wins and losses to two middle WCAL teams and the top PAL Bay teams. I've always like MA - my college sweetheart lived around the block and I used to play alot of tennis at the school and take in a game from time to time. That final drive against Aragon, they looked spent on defense and like swiss cheese. Milpitas is a physical and athltic and fast team. I give MA a shot, but definately an underdog is they face Milpitas. They could fair better against Bellamine if somehow the Bells upset Milpitas. MA got a very good 1st round game.
So they were trying to improve their position via backdoor shenanigans because they were unable to do it on the field.
"Pretty good?" The PAL Bay Division, at least in 2017, was the second best league in CCS behind only the WCAL. That includes anything Santa Cruz-Monterey area had to offer.
I get you're salty about how it shook out for VC, but that's a bold conclusion based on nothing but a "guess" by Cal 14. I'm curious if there was ever confirmation about whether Serra received a point for playing DLS last year.
Hard to rate how good PAL Bay was, they played ZERO teams in the top 1000. Only MA played against a WCAL team and went 0-2 vs the 6th and 7th place teams. The CCS is very down this year, so 2nd best league does rate a "pretty good" IMO.
Mitty and Bellarmine were 2 of the 3 schools tied for 5th place, a little disingenuous to call them the 6th and 7th place teams. But I guess it doesn’t make your point look as good to say the 3rd place Pal Bay school went 0-2 against 2 of the 3 5th place WCAL teams by 5 and 7 points.
Yes. I do mean pretty good. CCS is down. PAL Bay is pretty good - Not elite. The WCAL isn't elite this year. It's a down year in CCS. MBAL Gab is also down. Does that make sense now.
Anyone know what’s going on at OG? Sounds like Braun wasn’t at the last game or the meeting.
I guess Braun is out at OG, no explanation.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/11/14/ccs-football-playoffs-oak-grove-led-by-interim-coach/
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/11/14/ccs-football-playoffs-oak-grove-led-by-interim-coach/
[B said:
Speed - just to clarify Joebl is correct in his post about Mitty & Bellarmine being the 6th and 7th place teams in WCAL. You are going strictly by win/loss records and the WCAL also takes into consideration head to head results. S.I. beat both Mitty and Bellarmine so S.I. is the 5th place team this season. Mitty beat Bellarmine so Mitty edges out Bells for 6th place and Bells fall into 7th place. There are some instances where a tie can occur such as last season for WCAL 1rst place when VC beat Serra, Serra beat SF and SF beat VC all ending with 6-1 records, which eliminates 2nd & 3rd place. That is not the case with S.I. Mitty and Bells this season.
Final 2017 WCAL League Standings:
1] Serra 7-05]
2] VC 6-1
3] SF 5-2
4] SHC 3-4
5] S.I. 2-5
6] Mitty 2-5
7] Bells 2-5
8] ARHS 1-6
Last edited:
With a guy with such high character and winning tradition built at YB and Cupertino, I am shocked!
