CCS Proposed changes for 2023

[FBAddict]

At the CCS Football Committee meeting, the following changes were proposed.

Following the NCS system of Open Division and D1, The CCS FB committee moved on this idea:

AMMENDED PROPOSAL #1
Re-Seed and Reformat CCS Division One. The Divion One would be retitled “Open/Division 1”
Championship.
Re-seed Division 1 as follows:
Round 1
Game #1-Seed #1 vs. Seed #8
Game #2-Seed #2 vs. Seed #7
Game #3-Seed #3 vs. Seed #6
Game #4-Seed #4 vs. Seed #5
Round 2 (Open Championship)
Game #5-Winner Game #1 vs. Winner Game #2 for “Open Championship”
Game #6-Winner Game #3 vs. Winner Game #4
Division 1 Championship
Game #7-Loser Game #5 vs. Winner Game #6 for “Division 1 Championship”
Rationale: Similar to the current system used in the NCS, it would allow an additional team in the CCS
team to earn a championship and play in the CIF Tournament. (Would move forward only if the CIF
approves as additional CIF Bid to the CCS)
M/S/C 13-0

This would add an additional CCS division (if allowed by CIF) and potentially allow second best (losing team) in CCS to represent CCS D1 championship. Personally, I hope this proposal does not pass.

AMMENDED PROPOSAL #2 Divisions I, II and III would consist of only A level teams. Divisions IV and V would be restricted to B and C level teams. By virtue of this proposal, the five at large bids would be designated to four going to A teams, and the last to the highest B or C level team. Rationale: This would allow the B and C level teams to play competition that was closer to what they experienced during the season. In 2021 and 2022, none of the division winners were from the A League. M/S/C 12-1

This idea has been proposed and argued for on this board. The CCS FB committee apparently likes the idea of keeping A league teams out of D4 and D5 divisions. The committee did note that NO D4 or D5 champs were from A leagues in 2021 and 2022. Further, this proposal would exclude B and C leagues for being seeded in D1, D2 or D3. This proposal makes sense. However, it does move CCS further away from a true equity system.

PROPOSAL #3:
Currently the PAL Bay and De Anza Leagues have eight total Automatic Qualifiers (four for each
division). The PAL is requesting that they are afforded the ability to reallocate the bids as follows, due to
competitive equity within their league:
Bay (A)-5 Automatic Qualifiers
De Anza (A)-3 Automatic Qualifiers
Ocean (B)-2 Automatic Qualifiers
El Camino (B)-2 Automatic Qualifiers
Lake (C)-1 Automatic Qualifiers
Rationale: The PAL would like to restructure their two “A” leagues into competitive equity, placing their
top six teams into their top league. Doing so would create a better balance within the league overall.
M/S/C 13-0

This proposal affects the allocation of automatic bids for sister Pal and SCVAL leagues. There was no change in the total number of automatic qualifiers from these sister super leagues.

These proposals have to gain approval by the ADAC committee, league commissioners and executive committee before it is sent to be voted on by the Board of Managers in its final meeting in April, 2023.

 

[Cal 14]

At the CCS Football Committee meeting, the following changes were proposed.

Following the NCS system of Open Division and D1, The CCS FB committee moved on this idea:

AMMENDED PROPOSAL #1
Re-Seed and Reformat CCS Division One. The Divion One would be retitled “Open/Division 1”
Championship.
Re-seed Division 1 as follows:
Round 1
Game #1-Seed #1 vs. Seed #8
Game #2-Seed #2 vs. Seed #7
Game #3-Seed #3 vs. Seed #6
Game #4-Seed #4 vs. Seed #5
Round 2 (Open Championship)
Game #5-Winner Game #1 vs. Winner Game #2 for “Open Championship”
Game #6-Winner Game #3 vs. Winner Game #4
Division 1 Championship
Game #7-Loser Game #5 vs. Winner Game #6 for “Division 1 Championship”
Rationale: Similar to the current system used in the NCS, it would allow an additional team in the CCS
team to earn a championship and play in the CIF Tournament. (Would move forward only if the CIF
approves as additional CIF Bid to the CCS)
M/S/C 13-0

This would add an additional CCS division (if allowed by CIF) and potentially allow second best (losing team) in CCS to represent CCS D1 championship. Personally, I hope this proposal does not pass.

I don't like this, but for a different reason. It renders the D-I 7 and 8 seeds as unworthy cannon fodder. In the NCS, the 7 and 8 seeds really are unworthy, but in the CCS, these teams are supposed to be better than D-II 1 and 2 seeds.

If the CCS were to move to add one more division, then I would be more in favor of doing something similar to the SDS. Place the top 4 teams in the section into an "Open" division (a true Open, unlike the SDS, which only allows D-I teams), then have D 1-5 as normal. This would add 4 more total playoff teams, bringing it more in line with the rest of the state, and still allows that all D-I teams have a chance.

This year, an Open would still have meant Salinas playing Serra, but Los Gatos would have faced St. Francis. In D-I, Wilcox, St. Ignatius, Aptos, and Menlo-Atherton would be included along with Sacred Heart Prep, Mitty, Sacred Heart Cathedral, and Palma (which sounds pretty good to me). Yes, Bellarmine would still have been D-II, but the cutoff has to be somewhere and hindsight is always 20/20.

 

[MTsince2004]

At the CCS Football Committee meeting, the following changes were proposed.

Following the NCS system of Open Division and D1, The CCS FB committee moved on this idea:

AMMENDED PROPOSAL #1
Re-Seed and Reformat CCS Division One. The Divion One would be retitled “Open/Division 1”
Championship.
Re-seed Division 1 as follows:
Round 1
Game #1-Seed #1 vs. Seed #8
Game #2-Seed #2 vs. Seed #7
Game #3-Seed #3 vs. Seed #6
Game #4-Seed #4 vs. Seed #5
Round 2 (Open Championship)
Game #5-Winner Game #1 vs. Winner Game #2 for “Open Championship”
Game #6-Winner Game #3 vs. Winner Game #4
Division 1 Championship
Game #7-Loser Game #5 vs. Winner Game #6 for “Division 1 Championship”
Rationale: Similar to the current system used in the NCS, it would allow an additional team in the CCS
team to earn a championship and play in the CIF Tournament. (Would move forward only if the CIF
approves as additional CIF Bid to the CCS)
M/S/C 13-0

This would add an additional CCS division (if allowed by CIF) and potentially allow second best (losing team) in CCS to represent CCS D1 championship. Personally, I hope this proposal does not pass.

There are indications that this is the way of the future. It allows for the two highest-rated teams in the section to advance and represent that section in the state bowl games, like DLS and Pitt. When the SS figures it out, MD and SJB are going to both end up in the Open and D1-AA games in the same year.

 

[PAL Booster]

I personally like the CCS system as it is. It appears that the motivations for these changes are 1) to get an additional CCS team into the regional bowl system (because if the CIF doesn't allow this the CCS will withdraw this change) and 2) to help get another top 8 CCS team into the regional bowls.

I think the amended proposal that passed for Open/Di doesn't make a lot of sense. I think that there are two better alternatives.

1) Play the "open" championship in week 1 of the play-offs and take the top 2 teams from the regular season points system. Teams 3-8 would play in D1 quarterfinals in week 1 (3 vs 8, 4, vs 7, 5 vs 6) and the loser from the open would drop to the top seed in D1 for the semi-finals and you would re-seed the other three winners with the open loser playing the low remaining seed and the other two winners squaring off int he semi-final.

2) The other alternative is to proceed as the CCS proposed but after round 1 re-seed with the two highest seeds playing for the open - it doesn't make sense in the CCS proposal why the #7 or #8 team would get to play for the open championship if they win in an upset but higher seeds that win their first round would not get into the open game.

I also don't understand the comment that for the lower divisions that none were from A leagues in 2021 or 2022 . In 2022 D IV was won by Santa Teresa and DV was won by Palo Alto - both A league teams. In 2021 D IV was won by Sacred Heart Prep and DV by Aragon -SHP was an A league team - Aragon was a B league team.

 

[BigMann08]

There are indications that this is the way of the future. It allows for the two highest-rated teams in the section to advance and represent that section in the state bowl games, like DLS and Pitt. When the SS figures it out, MD and SJB are going to both end up in the Open and D1-AA games in the same year.

Indeed and when this happens, many Northern teams will request to cancel the game.

 

[FBAddict]

AMMENDED PROPOSAL #2 Divisions I, II and III would consist of only A level teams. Divisions IV and V would be restricted to B and C level teams. By virtue of this proposal, the five at large bids would be designated to four going to A teams, and the last to the highest B or C level team. Rationale: This would allow the B and C level teams to play competition that was closer to what they experienced during the season. In 2021 and 2022, none of the division winners were from the A League. M/S/C 12-1

I didn't catch this before but both Santa Teresa (D4 Champ) and Palo Alto (D5 champ) were from A leagues. I don't know why the proposal mentioned this as fact when it is erroneous.

 

[FBAddict]

I also don't understand the comment that for the lower divisions that none were from A leagues in 2021 or 2022 . In 2022 D IV was won by Santa Teresa and DV was won by Palo Alto - both A league teams. In 2021 D IV was won by Sacred Heart Prep and DV by Aragon -SHP was an A league team - Aragon was a B league team.

Sorry to duplicate your comment - I posted my observation before getting to your post. This is very strange for the Football Committee to make such an error. In 2021 Aragon was B league team but this year they are an A league team. Possibly it was a minutes recorder error.

 

[hsfb44]

I didn't catch this before but both Santa Teresa (D4 Champ) and Palo Alto (D5 champ) were from A leagues. I don't know why the proposal mentioned this as fact when it is erroneous.

So why restrict D4/5 to just B/C teams? CCS equity structure is not without its flaws but it does match the top teams. I can see keeping D5 for B/C but giving up two divisions is getting farther away from EQUITY. The reality is that there are many levels to HS football and as we saw in the OPEN State game the gaps can be quite wide between the levels. Average A league teams are flat out better than 9-1, 10-0 B/C league teams (Santa Teresa, Palo Alto). That is WHY A leagues get 4 Auto qualifiers. We would just water down the playoffs if we don't allow A's in D4 and 5. That said I can see not allowing A's down in D5 and adding a tier at the top OPEN, D1-D5....

 

[94123]

RE the PAL - does anyone know if they have already set the leagues for 2023, or are they waiting for this to pass?

Overall, this looks messy and given the history of this section, whatever they do will be sure to change in the next year or two. Keeping the A's out of 4/5 is good.

 

[Cal 14]

I personally like the CCS system as it is. It appears that the motivations for these changes are 1) to get an additional CCS team into the regional bowl system (because if the CIF doesn't allow this the CCS will withdraw this change) and 2) to help get another top 8 CCS team into the regional bowls.

This can open a can of worms that the rest of the CIF probably doesn't want. If everyone else followed suit, both Mater Dei and SJB would likely advance. Also, people are complaining about the number of divisions as it is.

1) Play the "open" championship in week 1 of the play-offs and take the top 2 teams from the regular season points system. Teams 3-8 would play in D1 quarterfinals in week 1 (3 vs 8, 4, vs 7, 5 vs 6) and the loser from the open would drop to the top seed in D1 for the semi-finals and you would re-seed the other three winners with the open loser playing the low remaining seed and the other two winners squaring off int he semi-final.

If the CCS is going to move in this direction, then I think this is a better way to do it. I don't like the idea of #7 and 8 D-I seeds just getting dismissed because they ended up with more points than #1 and 2 seeds for D-II. NCS D-I/Open #7 and 8 seeds would be in D-III in the CCS or lower. It's not the same setup.

2) The other alternative is to proceed as the CCS proposed but after round 1 re-seed with the two highest seeds playing for the open - it doesn't make sense in the CCS proposal why the #7 or #8 team would get to play for the open championship if they win in an upset but higher seeds that win their first round would not get into the open game.

While it has been extremely rare for a D-I #1 seed to be upset in the first round, it's not without precedence. Watsonville upset Oak Grove many moons ago. Of course, the current situation would make this even more of a remote possibility, but it could happen to the #2 seed. In the first two years of this current setup, there has only been one first-round complete domination across all 8 games.

Lots of great ideas, @PAL Booster.

 

[FBAddict]

RE the PAL - does anyone know if they have already set the leagues for 2023, or are they waiting for this to pass?

Overall, this looks messy and given the history of this section, whatever they do will be sure to change in the next year or two. Keeping the A's out of 4/5 is good.

According Nathan Mollet of the Daily Journal, this is how the alignment will look.

"Beginning next season, the division alignment will be based on a power-point system. League coaches voted last week to the change and the new divisions will look like this:

Bay Division: Burlingame, Los Gatos, Menlo-Atherton, Mountain View, Sacred Heart Prep and Wilcox.

De Anza Division: Half Moon Bay, Homestead, King’s Academy, Menlo School, Palo Alto and Terra Nova.

Ocean Division: Aragon, Capuchino, Hillsdale, San Mateo, Sequoia and Milpitas.

El Camino Division: Carlmont, El Camino, Fremont-Sunnyvale, Los Altos, Santa Clara and Woodside.

Lake Division: Cupertino, Gunn, Jefferson, Lynbrook, Mills, Monta Vista, Saratoga and South City."

Big changes coming to PAL football

Unless you were privy to the inner workings of the merger between the Peninsula Athletic League and Santa Clara Valley Athletic League football merger, 2022 looked a lot like 2021.

www.smdailyjournal.com

This represents a huge change!

 

[Streak One]

I kind of like the new division look. Bay Division should be really good.

 

[FBAddict]

AMMENDED PROPOSAL #2 Divisions I, II and III would consist of only A level teams. Divisions IV and V would be restricted to B and C level teams. By virtue of this proposal, the five at large bids would be designated to four going to A teams, and the last to the highest B or C level team. Rationale: This would allow the B and C level teams to play competition that was closer to what they experienced during the season. In 2021 and 2022, none of the division winners were from the A League. M/S/C 12-1

The minutes for the Football Committee were corrected when presented to the ADAC Committee. It is far more revealing to the rationale for the proposal when the correct statement is presented!

Proposal #2: Reformat which teams may play in Divisions 1 through 5.
Divisions I, II and III would consist of only A level teams.
Divisions IV and V would be restricted to B and C level teams.
By virtue of this proposal, the five at large bids would be designated to four going to A teams, and the last to the highest B or C level team per the current formula for At-Large teams.
Rationale: This would allow the B and C level teams to play competition that was closer to what they experienced during the season.
In 2021 and 2022, nine of the ten of the division winners were from an A League

 

[scvalfan]

The easy part of the CCS playoffs is getting the top 15 or so teams in Division 1 and 2, and then constructing at least one lower level for B/C schools. The most difficult part is finding a way to acknowledge the A teams that finish their challenging schedule at 5-5 or 4-6. It is a tough balance, and I do give CCS and the CCS football coaches for consistently looking for ways to best support kids and programs (although a "perfect" system does not exist!).

 

[PAL Booster]

A look at how the play-offs might have looked with the new proposed rules in place for 2022 and 2021.

2022 Play-Offs - DI and DII no changes; no changes in 40 qualifying teams

Hard to see that DIII would have ended up differently as Menlo beat the revised #1 and #4 seeds in their actual games and beat revised #3 Burlingame near the end of the year.

Actual DIII
Terra Nova (B) at 1. Soquel (B)
5. Hollister (A) vs 4. Burlingame (A)
6. Kings Academy (B) at 3. Menlo (A)
7. Soledad (B) at 2. Live Oak (A)

Revised DIII (with proposed rules – just A Teams)
8. Palo Alto at 1. Live Oak
5. Mountain View vs 4. Hollister
6. Santa Teresa at 3. Burlingame
7. Homestead at 2. Menlo

Soquel would have been a strong favorite to win this revised DIV

DIV Actual
8. Overfelt (B)vs 1. Sequoia (B)
5. St. Francis (W) (B) vs 4. Santa Teresa (A)
6. San Mateo (B) vs 3. Branham (B)
7. Homestead (A) vs 2. Mt. View (A)

Revised DIV
8. San Mateo vs 1 Soquel
5. Sequoia vs 4. Terra Nova
6. Branham vs 3. Soledad
7. St. Francis (W) vs 2. Kings Academy

Monterey or Overfelt would have likely won based on their play-off performances.

D V Actual
8. Willow Glen (C) vs 1. Westmont (B)
5. Monterey (B) vs 4. Pioneer (B)
6. Woodside (C ) vs 3. Seaside (B)
7. Stevenson (C ) vs 2. Palo Alto (A)

Revised
8. Willow Glen vs 1. Overfelt
5. Monterey vs 4. Pioneer
6. Woodside vs 3. Seaside
7. Stevenson vs 2. Westmont

2021 Play-offs DI and DV no changes- Last two at-large A teams Alisal and Milpitas would not have made and been replaced by two Mt. Hamilton B teams – not clear where they might have been placed in DIV or DV

Hard to see any change to Wilcox winning this division. Two undefeated B teams (Meno and Santa Cruz) both got put into DII. Menlo got to the finals beating Half Moon Bay and #1 seed Hollister before losing to Wilcox. Santa Cruz lost ot Wilcox in the first round.

DII Actual
8. Burlingame (A) vs 1) Hollister (A)
5. Half Moon Bay (A) vs 4. Menlo (B)
6. Santa Cruz (B) vs 3. Wilcox (A)
7. Saint Ignatius (A) vs 2. Palma (A)

DII Revised
8. Live Oak vs 1. Hollister
5. Saint Ignatius vs 4. Half Moon Bay
6. Burlingame vs 3. Wilcox
7. Leland vs 2. Palma

Hard to see a change here to the result of Sacred Heart Cathedral winning.

DIII Actual
8. Scotts Valley (B) vs 1. Leland (A)
5. Palo Alto (A) vs 4. Christopher (A)
6. Leigh (B) vs 3. Sacred Heart Cathedral (A)
7. Mt. View (A) vs 2. Live Oak (A)

DIII Revised
8. Lincoln vs 1. Sacred Heart Cathedral
5. Homestead vs 4. Mt. View
6. Sacred Heart Prep vs 3. Palo Alto
7. Santa Teresa vs 2. Christopher

Menlo would have been a heavy favorite – could have been a final with a 12-0 Santa Cruz.

DIV Actual
8. Milpitas (A) vs 1. Homestead (A)
5. Pioneer (B) vs 4. Santa Teresa (A)
6. Alisal (A) vs Sacred Heart Prep (A)
7. Lincoln (A) vs 2. Hillsdale (B)

D IV Revised
8. Overfelt vs 1. Menlo
5. Hillsdale vs 4. Scotts Valley
6. Pioneer vs 3. Leigh
7. Silver Creek vs 2. Santa Cruz

 

[remc]

Indeed and when this happens, many Northern teams will request to cancel the game.

Only the Open and D1 games would be foregone conclusions. The rest would be competitive for the most part. I mean, the Open is already a forgone conclusion. The MD vs SJB game is already the defacto State Open Championship

 

[FBAddict]

A look at how the play-offs might have looked with the new proposed rules in place for 2022 and 2021.

2022 Play-Offs - DI and DII no changes; no changes in 40 qualifying teams

Hard to see that DIII would have ended up differently as Menlo beat the revised #1 and #4 seeds in their actual games and beat revised #3 Burlingame near the end of the year.

Actual DIII
Terra Nova (B) at 1. Soquel (B)
5. Hollister (A) vs 4. Burlingame (A)
6. Kings Academy (B) at 3. Menlo (A)
7. Soledad (B) at 2. Live Oak (A)

Revised DIII (with proposed rules – just A Teams)
8. Palo Alto at 1. Live Oak
5. Mountain View vs 4. Hollister
6. Santa Teresa at 3. Burlingame
7. Homestead at 2. Menlo

Soquel would have been a strong favorite to win this revised DIV

DIV Actual
8. Overfelt (B)vs 1. Sequoia (B)
5. St. Francis (W) (B) vs 4. Santa Teresa (A)
6. San Mateo (B) vs 3. Branham (B)
7. Homestead (A) vs 2. Mt. View (A)

Revised DIV
8. San Mateo vs 1 Soquel
5. Sequoia vs 4. Terra Nova
6. Branham vs 3. Soledad
7. St. Francis (W) vs 2. Kings Academy

Monterey or Overfelt would have likely won based on their play-off performances.

D V Actual
8. Willow Glen (C) vs 1. Westmont (B)
5. Monterey (B) vs 4. Pioneer (B)
6. Woodside (C ) vs 3. Seaside (B)
7. Stevenson (C ) vs 2. Palo Alto (A)

Revised
8. Willow Glen vs 1. Overfelt
5. Monterey vs 4. Pioneer
6. Woodside vs 3. Seaside
7. Stevenson vs 2. Westmont

2021 Play-offs DI and DV no changes- Last two at-large A teams Alisal and Milpitas would not have made and been replaced by two Mt. Hamilton B teams – not clear where they might have been placed in DIV or DV

Hard to see any change to Wilcox winning this division. Two undefeated B teams (Meno and Santa Cruz) both got put into DII. Menlo got to the finals beating Half Moon Bay and #1 seed Hollister before losing to Wilcox. Santa Cruz lost ot Wilcox in the first round.

DII Actual
8. Burlingame (A) vs 1) Hollister (A)
5. Half Moon Bay (A) vs 4. Menlo (B)
6. Santa Cruz (B) vs 3. Wilcox (A)
7. Saint Ignatius (A) vs 2. Palma (A)

DII Revised
8. Live Oak vs 1. Hollister
5. Saint Ignatius vs 4. Half Moon Bay
6. Burlingame vs 3. Wilcox
7. Leland vs 2. Palma

Hard to see a change here to the result of Sacred Heart Cathedral winning.

DIII Actual
8. Scotts Valley (B) vs 1. Leland (A)
5. Palo Alto (A) vs 4. Christopher (A)
6. Leigh (B) vs 3. Sacred Heart Cathedral (A)
7. Mt. View (A) vs 2. Live Oak (A)

DIII Revised
8. Lincoln vs 1. Sacred Heart Cathedral
5. Homestead vs 4. Mt. View
6. Sacred Heart Prep vs 3. Palo Alto
7. Santa Teresa vs 2. Christopher

Menlo would have been a heavy favorite – could have been a final with a 12-0 Santa Cruz.

DIV Actual
8. Milpitas (A) vs 1. Homestead (A)
5. Pioneer (B) vs 4. Santa Teresa (A)
6. Alisal (A) vs Sacred Heart Prep (A)
7. Lincoln (A) vs 2. Hillsdale (B)

D IV Revised
8. Overfelt vs 1. Menlo
5. Hillsdale vs 4. Scotts Valley
6. Pioneer vs 3. Leigh
7. Silver Creek vs 2. Santa Cruz

Great work, Pal. As much as I don't like moving further away from a true equity playoff system, the proposed rule applied to these seasons does seem more fair especially to the B & C league schools.

 

[Scoop and Score]

Why reward C League teams when there are better A/B teams not in the playoffs. We might as well create a “Closed” division with the 8 worst teams in the section facing off. Can you imagine that?

It was painful to watch Santa Teresa underperform against a school where trumpets and bagpipes prevailed. Were the actual players in the game perform the halftime show.

 

[MTsince2004]

Why reward C League teams when there are better A/B teams not in the playoffs. We might as well create a “Closed” division with the 8 worst teams in the section facing off. Can you imagine that?

It was painful to watch Santa Teresa underperform against a school where trumpets and bagpipes prevailed. Were the actual players in the game perform the halftime show.

Honestly, people would watch it. Use only winless teams. You could run the bracket backwards. If you WIN a game, you are done--loser advances until there is only one winless team. The last school is allowed unlimited recruitment contacts with any player in the section and has open boundaries with immediate eligibility and no grade checks.

This is (weak) satire, for those who don't immediately see it.

 

[FBAddict]

All three proposals have passed the ADAC and Executive Committee. Those proposals have been approved by other levels and moved to the final level of Board of Directors meeting January 25th for review. no amendments or alterations have been offered.

 

[hsfb44]

At the CCS Football Committee meeting, the following changes were proposed.

Following the NCS system of Open Division and D1, The CCS FB committee moved on this idea:

AMMENDED PROPOSAL #1
Re-Seed and Reformat CCS Division One. The Divion One would be retitled “Open/Division 1”
Championship.
Re-seed Division 1 as follows:
Round 1
Game #1-Seed #1 vs. Seed #8
Game #2-Seed #2 vs. Seed #7
Game #3-Seed #3 vs. Seed #6
Game #4-Seed #4 vs. Seed #5
Round 2 (Open Championship)
Game #5-Winner Game #1 vs. Winner Game #2 for “Open Championship”
Game #6-Winner Game #3 vs. Winner Game #4
Division 1 Championship
Game #7-Loser Game #5 vs. Winner Game #6 for “Division 1 Championship”
Rationale: Similar to the current system used in the NCS, it would allow an additional team in the CCS
team to earn a championship and play in the CIF Tournament. (Would move forward only if the CIF
approves as additional CIF Bid to the CCS)
M/S/C 13-0

This would add an additional CCS division (if allowed by CIF) and potentially allow second best (losing team) in CCS to represent CCS D1 championship. Personally, I hope this proposal does not pass.

AMMENDED PROPOSAL #2 Divisions I, II and III would consist of only A level teams. Divisions IV and V would be restricted to B and C level teams. By virtue of this proposal, the five at large bids would be designated to four going to A teams, and the last to the highest B or C level team. Rationale: This would allow the B and C level teams to play competition that was closer to what they experienced during the season. In 2021 and 2022, none of the division winners were from the A League. M/S/C 12-1

This idea has been proposed and argued for on this board. The CCS FB committee apparently likes the idea of keeping A league teams out of D4 and D5 divisions. The committee did note that NO D4 or D5 champs were from A leagues in 2021 and 2022. Further, this proposal would exclude B and C leagues for being seeded in D1, D2 or D3. This proposal makes sense. However, it does move CCS further away from a true equity system.

PROPOSAL #3:
Currently the PAL Bay and De Anza Leagues have eight total Automatic Qualifiers (four for each
division). The PAL is requesting that they are afforded the ability to reallocate the bids as follows, due to
competitive equity within their league:
Bay (A)-5 Automatic Qualifiers
De Anza (A)-3 Automatic Qualifiers
Ocean (B)-2 Automatic Qualifiers
El Camino (B)-2 Automatic Qualifiers
Lake (C)-1 Automatic Qualifiers
Rationale: The PAL would like to restructure their two “A” leagues into competitive equity, placing their
top six teams into their top league. Doing so would create a better balance within the league overall.
M/S/C 13-0

This proposal affects the allocation of automatic bids for sister Pal and SCVAL leagues. There was no change in the total number of automatic qualifiers from these sister super leagues.

These proposals have to gain approval by the ADAC committee, league commissioners and executive committee before it is sent to be voted on by the Board of Managers in its final meeting in April, 2023.

Palo Alto won D5 as an A league member. I think D5 should be reserved for B/C and D 4 should end up being mostly B/C but should include A league teams as well. This proposal would eliminate and A team from qualifying and add a B. I think there were 25 A league teams in the playoffs. why are we rewarding lower divisions?

 

[colhenrylives]

It's the AYSO philosophy. Everybody plays. Everybody wins. Everybody is the same. Welcome to the George Orwell School of Rewarding Mediocrity.

 

[FBAddict]

All three proposals have passed the ADAC and Executive Committee. Those proposals have been approved by other levels and moved to the final level of Board of Directors meeting January 25th for review. no amendments or alterations have been offered.

The CCS Board of Managers met last month to vote on these above stated proposals. Two of the three proposals passed but surprising, at least to me, the 2nd proposal failed by a wide margin.

2. Proposal #2: Reformat which teams may play in Divisions 1 through 5. Divisions I, II and III would consist of only A level teams. Divisions IV and V would be restricted to B and C level teams. By virtue of this proposal, the five at large bids would be designated to four going to A teams, and the last to the highest B or C level team per the current formula for At-Large teams. Rationale: This would allow the B and C level teams to play competition that was closer to what they experienced during the season. In 2021 and 2022, nine of the ten of the division winners were from an A League. Commissioner Grissom explained the proposals and answered questions. President Sell called for a motion to approve and it was Moved, Seconded, and Failed to approve. MSF 10-32

 

[Macallan]

The whole thing reeks of "everyone gets a trophy" to me. Just my opinion. CIF makes the choice over and over again to not have a state champion, so each section staff can have a comfy job. They will continuously make decisions for their best interests (an over-compensated salary), rather than for the student-athletes or competition.

 

[Scoop and Score]

The whole thing reeks of "everyone gets a trophy" to me. Just my opinion. CIF makes the choice over and over again to not have a state champion, so each section staff can have a comfy job. They will continuously make decisions for their best interests (an over-compensated salary), rather than for the student-athletes or competition.

I’ve said it for years. There should be an 8 team playoff for the worst 8 Teams as well, generate some real fun.