You can't satisfy everyone. Especially when it comes to seeding issues surrounding high-profile sports like football and boys' basketball. On one hand, public school backers, for the most part, would prefer to see most, if not all, private/parochial teams quarantined in their own brackets. On the other hand, more than a few private/parochial followers desire a path to CIF glory via brackets that include as many beatable public units as possible. It's the nature of the beast. None of us, no matter how agitated and keyboard-bound we are, can remedy this situation. It's out of our hands. We'll just have to live with it.
A CCS Conundrum
- Thread starter colhenrylives
- Start date
One of the biggest issues I see with playoff hand wringing in the CCS and other section is that all sections play for the same section, NorCal and State title (very few people recognize or care about the difference in division when they are bragging about their school).
I would love to see fewer brackets advance to NorCal and have the rest stop after sections. It will produce less complaining (not end it completely) about placement because there will be a line for teams who want to play in NorCals and those who are content with section play.
I would love to see fewer brackets advance to NorCal and have the rest stop after sections. It will produce less complaining (not end it completely) about placement because there will be a line for teams who want to play in NorCals and those who are content with section play.
I disagree with this. Any team right now can decline a trip to the regionals and/or state games… but with the exceptions of some very small NS schools, they don’t. This is probably the main reason why MC makes no effort to get out of D-4, nor has there been much effort from the NCS to force them out, since they want as many of their teams advancing as possible.
I think the only people complaining about the CCS system are new parents, those who just moved to the area, or are from the NCS. Everyone who has no clear what the history of the section is and how/why we got to where we are now.
What I meant was if you made some of the divisions Non-NorCal eligible, you would disincentivize schools from either hiding in lower divisions or "hoping" to be placed in lower divisions. I think everyone is trying to game the system of what is their best path for a title and I think that would happen less if not every section got the chance to advance to NorCals
While we're at it, I think a distinction should be made between strict boundary publics and open enrollment publics. Open enrollment publics have the same advantages that the privates have, being able to enroll kids who otherwise would be outside the normal boundary of that school. Huge advantage versus boundary public schools. This tends to be ignored in the privates versus publics discussions
I personally love the fact that the top 8 teams in CCS battle it out for the title. Regardless of school size, public or private. It makes the Division 1 CCS Title one of the most meaningful in the state. It was great until the state games started.
CCS should to re-evaluate what the goal is here? Because at the moment, they are sending 7 of their top 8 teams home for Norcals. I have no problem with more divisions, & more Football!
CCS should to re-evaluate what the goal is here? Because at the moment, they are sending 7 of their top 8 teams home for Norcals. I have no problem with more divisions, & more Football!
I agree with this. I mentioned this in the other thread that is going on re: CCS playoffs. I like the battle of Div 1 and being in the top 8 is earned, but I have an issue with sending those 7 teams home and not onward to represent our powerful section. We have the most unique situation in CA with the WCAL and I think we need a way to harness that and send our best to represent us at the state level.
I like the way they volleyball is done. The top 8 teams in the open division move on to NorCals. I understand that we don't have that many spots available and it would be a logistical nightmare for the teams that lose in the first round, but the concept is intriguing.
Don't forget the new buzzword that seems to dictate an awful lot courtesy of CIF: "Equity." The aim is to have the best play the best and so on down the line. Hence the laughable spectacle of AAA teams winning contrived state bowl games against Puswallow College Preparatory and the Tony Soprano Institute of Waste Management.
I'm going to get shamed for this but I dub AAA games as just extended PE.
The goal is to make the most competitive set of playoff brackets.
Again, if you don’t understand anything about the history of the CCS, you’re not going to get why the brackets are what they are.
You can’t do in football what you do in volleyball. The concept is silly, not intriguing.
Once again, we can’t ignore how we got here. The schools from the lower divisions started making noise about how they were always excluded from the state games. As a result the CIF expanded the playoffs to include everyone.
We’re not going to be able to put that genie back into the bottle.
I don’t think it would hurt if the other sections started shaming the NCS over this. I think they should start voting the NCS into higher divisions than where they’d normally be. Maybe even put NCS teams against each other. There needs to be some signal that they shouldn’t be trying to game the system.
I'm with Cal 14. There is tortured path to how we got to where we are (which I like). Themost competitive section play-offs possible wihin CCS in my opinion and a recognition of regional and state games for what they are - bowl games except for the state open championship. CCS teams should aspire to play in the D1 play-offs like Souther Section teams do (the top 9 teams in S. Cal are all in bracket (Southern Section D1)
If we go back to the CCS good old days (MACGA) this is what the play-off would have looked like this year. Just like they did in 2003 when WCAL 2nd place Valley Christian won the thrilling DIV Championship game 69-0 over Pacific Grove without Pacific Grove crossing the 45 yard line. Valley Christian got to the championship by overcoming C league Champion Willow Glen 55-7 in round one and SCCAL third place Santa Cruz 48-20 in the semi-finals. Teams are set by school population into brackets after qualifying.
If we kept this format and the 1 seeds won out the CCS would send its number 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 teams to the regionals. D3 would be exciting with Serra having to ge through C league champ Willow Glen and then Cypress league champion Soledad before getting MT. Hamilton tri-champion Christopher in the final.
DI
8. Santa Teresa at 1. Los Gatos
5. Hollister at 4. Belalrmine
6. Mountain View at 3. Menlo-Atherton
7. Homestead at 2. Salinas
D2
8. Woodside at 1. St. Francis
5. Branham at 4. Sequoia
6. San Mateo at 3. Wilcox
7. Palo Alto at 2. Mitty
D3
8. Willow Glen at 1. Serra
5. Overfelt at4. Soledad
6. Westmont at 3. Lincoln
7. Pioneer at 2. Christopher
D4
8. Monterey at 1. Sacred Heart Cathedral
5. Live Oak at 4. Soquel
6. Burlingame at 3. Aptos
7. Seaside at 2. St. Ignatius
D5
8. Stevenson at 1. Sacred Heart Prep
5. Kings Academy at 4. Menlo
6. Terra Nova at 3. Half Moon Bay
7..St. Francis (w) at 2. Palma
My alma mater has nothing to do with this. It’s simply not productive to present ideas that are entirely not viable, particularly when they’ve already specifically been banned by the CIF.
Look, you’re new. I get it. If I’ve been a little harsh on you because of that, I’m sorry. But, I think you need to understand that a lot of us have been here for a really long time and we’ve watched the evolution of the sectional systems and of these state games over the last 16 years. A lot of what you’ve been suggesting has already been hashed out, attempted, and eventually rejected by the various sections and the CIF.
I do think that some adjustments can be made, but the rejected ideas of the past aren’t coming back.
Thanks for putting in the work to show how nasty enrollment divisions would look like in today’s CCS. Man, those would be awful and the screams from the public schools would be deafening.
Cal14 has a good point that has been made. North Coast Section's format of placement in playoffs allows for teams to stay in enrollment-based divisions. How would other sections sham the NCS to change current policies? I know that over in the SJS, we have system to put teams winning in higher divisions after dominating in lower divisions. CCS needs to find a way, maybe splitting WCAL into (small/large) two leagues. I know you have given much time and consideration and value your opinions in this regard.
There are 7 divisions for CIF Playoffs right? Why do we only have 5 divisions?
Please forgive my newbie ignorance here CAL 14.
PAL not sure what kind of time you have on your hands...
But what would this look like?
D1-3 were A League teams only sorted by enrollment.
D4-5 were B League Teams only sorted by enrollment.
D6-7 were C League Teams only sorted by enrollment.
The CCS has a rule where any league or division must have at least 6 teams in order for them to qualify for the playoffs. So, splitting the WCAL wouldn’t work.
I get it. Long time reader. Heavily involved in CCS. I know the history. Concept had just intriguing to me. I know it’s not feasible.
There are only 7 CIF divisions so that it can accommodate all of the sections’ champions. All sections do not send a team to each division. There are only about 95 schools in the CCS. If it opened up to 7 divisions, pretty much everyone would qualify. No one wants that.
The B/C leagues used to have their own playoff divisions in two eras, but the idea was abandoned for various reasons.
I talked about this in my other post as well. I like the point system to qualify and I like that the top 8 go into DI despite enrollment size. In most cases the CCS DI champion will be placed into the open or the 1A (? the top one) regional.
I think the change needs to be to cap A schools from competing in the 2 lower divisions, where C league champions and B league runner ups are. Any A league team that qualifies should be put into DIII or higher.
I think the change needs to be to cap A schools from competing in the 2 lower divisions, where C league champions and B league runner ups are. Any A league team that qualifies should be put into DIII or higher.
See? Now you’re just getting greedy. I’m on board with no A teams in D-V, but not IV.
My issue with the CCS is not the split into the 5 division playoff brackets but rather that a team winning a Div 5 is considered a CCS Champion when they are realistically winning the 33rd place. CCS Champions are basically 1st, 9th, 17th, 25th and 33rd place teams. Keep the 5 divisions, call Div 2-5 bracket winners, not CCS Champs. Take all the first round winners of Division 1 games as the 4 eligible teams to NorCal.
Yes Cal14 I am. My though process is simple. If you were considered good enough to be placed in your A league then you should not be in the bottom 2 divisions because you were able earn more points for playing an A league schedule to qualify.
And yes I realize not all "A" leagues are created equal (Looking at you MHAL) but that is for a different debate.
Kids no longer have to deal with adversity. C League is a developmental league, get into the B for playoff shot, only B league champs deserve it. A league Teams are playoff teams. Show me a C or B league that would earn a spot in an A Division, you won’t find one. The best teams are not in the playoffs, I can tell you that. B/C league teams should get a “bowl game” vs another C league team in same place. At this point it would be entertains to have a Division 6 which is the worst 8 Teams in a playoff.
I’m in full agreement, I hate the NCS system.
But curious what incentive does each section get per team selected, if any? That woruld be the only reason why I would see a sedtion even caring how many teams got selected, unless they had something to gain financially? And if they do get a certain cut, maybe look to eliminate that (not that I’d like to see the CIF get all the revenue either) and distribute maybe to the school ls thst earned the trip. Same as CFB payout for bowl games?
But, that’s not the philosophy of the CCS. It never has been. It’s always been about advancing the best teams to the playoffs. This is why more A teams get automatic bids. B and C league teams get to face weaker competition in league, so they get to avoid the more powerful programs. But they don’t get the frosting with weaker playoff competition.
This has already been tried and it ended up getting rejected… 30 years ago.
NCS treats its schools like delicate flowers after years of hearing them cry about DLS. Those same teams then are looking for state playoff opportunities, so the NCS continues to baby them, probably because they don’t want the hassle.
All this at the expense of genuinely weaker programs who are subjected to 60-point playoff blowouts. NCS caters to just a few programs at the expense of the rest.
Lame.
Much like the CIF state games, they’re the CCS’s prizes to give out. What anyone else wants to call them is irrelevant. If the CCS calls the D-IV winner a champ, then that’s what they are.
probably. The NCS has 7 divisions instead of 5 and play rounds of 16 lol.
In other words, everyone is a winner!
my bad was at the park with my little man and trying to type at the same time, I failed sir lol
Exactly. NCS should never go this route due to a large amount of small schools. I can never get behind any system that would “reward” a 10-0 500 student school to go against a 3-7 1500 student school.
Is there a perfect system? No. I do not here of many complaints to SJS. Seems CCS and NCS garner the most complaints. I’m not advocating for pure enrollment based divisions but I do think rural public small schools Have unique challenges that keeps them from having sustained success against larger competition.
SS is probably the worst, top seeds in Lower brackets are extremely lucky, and did not prove anything.
