CIF Playoff Flaws

[TheGoldenShower]

Is it really that difficult to make a state wide enrollment based playoff similar to Texas. Something like D1-D7? It’s so wrong to lose a playoff game and move on to a bogus regional game and then a regional state game. How does Wilcox, SF and SHP get motivated after a loss? Some of the best so cal teams are left out. People complain about travel, money etc, but people rise up and find a way. My reason for this is below.

Coaches go into these section meetings with intentions to suit their programs instead of the big picture.

 

[Cal 14]

Is it really that difficult to make a state wide enrollment based playoff similar to Texas. Something like D1-D7? It’s so wrong to lose a playoff game and move on to a bogus regional game and then a regional state game. How does Wilcox, SF and SHP get motivated after a loss? Some of the best so cal teams are left out. People complain about travel, money etc, but people rise up and find a way. My reason for this is below.

Coaches go into these section meetings with intentions to suit their programs instead of the big picture.

Is it really that difficult for California to make an enrollment-based playoff system like Texas?

Absolutely it is!

People really need to do some research on what Texas does, then the differences with California would become obvious very quickly. Otherwise, this is a very lazy argument.

Oh, and Sacred Heart Prep isn't advancing. Season is over. Plus, the notion that a section runner-up can't get up for a regional game is nonsense. Last year, every runner-up, statewide, advanced to a state game, with three of them winning.

 

[ESPN Ken]

The notion that a section runner-up can't get up for a regional game is nonsense. Last year, every runner-up, statewide, advanced to a state game, with three of them winning.

They can clearly get up for the game. But the notion that a team that can't even win their section championship but somehow can be a State champion is ludicrous.

 

[joebl]

They can clearly get up for the game. But the notion that a team that can't even win their section championship but somehow can be a State champion is ludicrous.

They can be a State Bowl Champion which is not the same as a State Champion.

 

[ESPN Ken]

They can be a State Bowl Champion which is not the same as a State Champion.

Technically you are correct, but I think we are talking semantics. I guarantee you that the banner they hang up in their gym or stadium would say 'State Champions' and so would the ring that they put on their finger, and IMO that is just wrong. I think you should have to be a section champ to move on to a State-level game.

 

[JCBUST]

Is it really that difficult for California to make an enrollment-based playoff system like Texas?

Absolutely it is!

People really need to do some research on what Texas does, then the differences with California would become obvious very quickly. Otherwise, this is a very lazy argument.

Oh, and Sacred Heart Prep isn't advancing. Season is over. Plus, the notion that a section runner-up can't get up for a regional game is nonsense. Last year, every runner-up, statewide, advanced to a state game, with three of them winning.

I heard there is a new proposal from CCS where multiple B League teams will move on the regional games, what a crime.

Texas sounds like a good idea. Take your Section winners D1-D5 and move on to play the next closest section winner and so forth.

CCS vs SJS
NCS vs NS

SDS vs LA etc etc

I grew up playing in the midwest, we had enrollment based

100-500 D6
501-750-D5
750-1000-D4
1000-1500-D3
1500-2000-D2
2001+D1

You win enrollment you move up, next year you don't make semis you move back down. Obviously the MD, BOSCO, DLS are D! for obvious reasons. It would look something like these Northern teams playing for a true state title against the south. If the enrollment is klarger down South, make a sliding scale.

DLS
Folsom
SF/VC/DO
Cardinal Newman
Carmel
East Nicolas


Pretty soon we will hace a C League team playing in a "STATE BOWL" game which isn't right.

 

[Cal 14]

I heard there is a new proposal from CCS where multiple B League teams will move on the regional games, what a crime.

There's a very good reason why this isn't a crime. I'll elaborate below.

Texas sounds like a good idea.

Why? Be specific. Explain how the Texas system could possibly happen here, much less be good for California.

Take your Section winners D1-D5 and move on to play the next closest section winner and so forth.

CCS vs SJS
NCS vs NS

SDS vs LA etc etc

This doesn't work because the divisions do not line up, plus the sections don't all have the same number of divisions.

Plus, you simply could not have only 5 divisions in California. People really need to get over that.

I grew up playing in the midwest, we had enrollment based

100-500 D6
501-750-D5
750-1000-D4
1000-1500-D3
1500-2000-D2
2001+D1

Obviously the MD, BOSCO, DLS are D! for obvious reasons. It would look something like these Northern teams playing for a true state title against the south. If the enrollment is klarger down South, make a sliding scale.

You need to remember that, regardless of in which Midwest state you were raised, California is going to have at least two-three times more teams. You simply could not break it down like this. Further, 2000 students might be a decent-sized school in NorCal, it's only a medium-sized school in SoCal.

Further, if you put in a sliding scale, you automatically put NorCal at a disadvantage because all of the schools will be smaller than their SoCal counterparts.

You win enrollment you move up, next year you don't make semis you move back down.

Great... but in 4 years, we're going to end up with the same sort of setup we have now, since there are a number of very large schools (3000+ students) that just aren't all that good.

Pretty soon we will hace a C League team playing in a "STATE BOWL" game which isn't right.

Ok, I think that people need to get over this, too. We, especially in NorCal, have this notion that "only the best teams" should be advancing. That's not really the point of having multiple divisions. What should be happening is that the best teams that represent their divisions advance.

People want runner-up teams to stop advancing? Fine, but the result is that B- and C- league teams advance. In case nobody has noticed, this is exactly what happens in all other sections. There's nothing unique about the CCS that should prevent this.

 

[Cal 14]

They can clearly get up for the game. But the notion that a team that can't even win their section championship but somehow can be a State champion is ludicrous.

It happens all the time in other sports. The only thing different about football is the logistics of only being able to play one game each week. While this notion may seem foreign for football, it isn't for "competitive sports" as a whole in California.

 

[SearsPoints]

Explain how the Texas system could possibly happen here, much less be good for California.

The only way it would work is if we do away with all sections and move to a district setup. Again, similar to Texas and Florida. The reason Texas keeps coming up is because they have a similar number of schools playing 11-man football.

So, Cal 14, here is my question for you. Are you happy with the current structure for HS football in the CIF when it comes to crowning State champions?

 

[PALbooster]

I am surprised that no one has brought this up, but in Texas the state football play-off system is only for the public schools. The private schools have a different athletic association and have their own football play-offs.

About 60% of the public school teams make the play-offs in Texas. They have 10 brackets of 64 teams and the play-offs go 6 weeks. I believe they only seed locally at the section level to minimize travel so you initially play within your section and then within your region with many of the best match-ups between the top two rated teams in a bracket often occurring in the round of 16 or quarterfinals. They don't try to balance the brackets within a division for competitive equity.

As many posters have pointed out, the key in Texas is that they have uniform rules set on the state level for setting divisions and enrollment groupings and there is no power at the local, section or regional level to alter these rules.

 

[Cal 14]

The only way it would work is if we do away with all sections and move to a district setup. Again, similar to Texas and Florida. The reason Texas keeps coming up is because they have a similar number of schools playing 11-man football.

So, Cal 14, here is my question for you. Are you happy with the current structure for HS football in the CIF when it comes to crowning State champions?

Yes, people here bring up Texas, but don't really take the time to understand how it actually works over there.

1. There are serious restrictions for private schools. That will never fly here.
2. They use enrollment-based classifications and divisions. There's a reason (several, actually) why California sections have gone away from that.
3. With strict enrollment classifications, you'd end up with small schools having to do some serious traveling if there aren't many other tiny schools in the immediate area (as an example, the CCS has very few schools below 500 students, while the NS is littered with them).

But, the main reason is that we've got sections and that's never going to change. So, instead of dreaming for a way for the round peg of California to fit into a square hole like Texas, we need to work with the system we have to make it as good as it can be.

Am I 100% happy with the current system? No, but no one ever will be as everyone's opinions and biases will always be a source of disagreement. I will say this, though, our current system is light years better than not having anything at all and still significantly better than the original 3-division format.

 

[Cal 14]

I am surprised that no one has brought this up, but in Texas the state football play-off system is only for the public schools. The private schools have a different athletic association and have their own football play-offs.

The private schools aren't 100% restricted out of the UIL playoffs, but it's pretty close. Those who do have to jump through a lot of hurdles because the state doesn't want what has happened in New Jersey or California to happen there.

Before the public school drum-beaters get too excited, keep in mind that you wouldn't be able to call yourself a true state champion without the private schools being involved.

 

[SearsPoints]

Am I 100% happy with the current system? No, but no one ever will be as everyone's opinions and biases will always be a source of disagreement. I will say this, though, our current system is light years better than not having anything at all and still significantly better than the original 3-division format.

I agree with you, it is much better then the original format. I also agree with you that moving away from sections is probably never going to change. But I believe that is the root of the current issue that people have. People don't understand why some section with open division some runner-ups. People don't understand why some section don't send other champions, which was how the current system was based upon. People see the CCS and NCS sending runner-up, yet the SJS does not or better yet, the SS not able to send there D1 runner-up. People don't understand why AAA and OAL are allowed to be there own section and send there league champions to regional bowl games. It's all of this confusion that make if difficult for the average everyday fan to understand. All of us folks that are into all of this get it. But I do think we should continue to try to evolve and look to the next steps to make our state playoff system better. I don't think we should just do what Texas does, but i do believe it can be better.

 

[awood1]

I think it's pretty clear that CA is just too f'in big! Sooooo.............

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/12/ballot-measure-split-california-three-states/

 

[Cal 14]

I agree with you, it is much better then the original format. I also agree with you that moving away from sections is probably never going to change. But I believe that is the root of the current issue that people have. People don't understand why some section with open division some runner-ups. People don't understand why some section don't send other champions, which was how the current system was based upon. People see the CCS and NCS sending runner-up, yet the SJS does not or better yet, the SS not able to send there D1 runner-up. People don't understand why AAA and OAL are allowed to be there own section and send there league champions to regional bowl games. It's all of this confusion that make if difficult for the average everyday fan to understand. All of us folks that are into all of this get it. But I do think we should continue to try to evolve and look to the next steps to make our state playoff system better. I don't think we should just do what Texas does, but i do believe it can be better.

Next year, it's been reported that the runner-up teams are no longer going to be allowed to advance. That alone should make a number of people happy.

However, I take issue with the idea that the SJS or SS "couldn't" send their runner-up teams to the state games. They could... they just elected not to do so. As such, I don't really have a lot of sympathy for those sections complaining about the NCS, CCS, or LACS.

Either way, it's anticipated to be a moot point. In the CCS, it looks like the B and C leagues are going to be able to get their cake and eat it, too... unless the CCS goes right back to making them take on teams like Palma, Valley Christian, and the like.

Yes, we can improve the system, but I've seen many people call for only 5 divisions and that is just silly and lacking reality.

 

[Cal 14]

I think it's pretty clear that CA is just too f'in big! Sooooo.............

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/12/ballot-measure-split-california-three-states/

Do you know where the original office was located for the movement to split the state?

Russia.

Wonder why that is... hmmm.

 

[awood1]

Do you know where the original office was located for the movement to split the state?

Russia.

Wonder why that is... hmmm.

Because of Russia's obsession with determining a true State Champion?

 

[Cal 14]

Because of Russia's obsession with determining a true State Champion?

No... sheesh. It's because they know that by splitting the state, they accomplish two things. They cause discourse and the also weaken the Democratic stronghold of the state. Two more state could mean more Republican senators, which have been more friendly (for some strange reason) recently than Democrats to Russia.

 

[thespecialone]

Is it really that difficult for California to make an enrollment-based playoff system like Texas?

Absolutely it is!

People really need to do some research on what Texas does, then the differences with California would become obvious very quickly. Otherwise, this is a very lazy argument.

Oh, and Sacred Heart Prep isn't advancing. Season is over. Plus, the notion that a section runner-up can't get up for a regional game is nonsense. Last year, every runner-up, statewide, advanced to a state game, with three of them winning.

Yes the "runner up' gets placed in a lower division bowl game and win a "mythical state championship" usually against a smaller less competitive school. That is a joke

 

[shcguy92]

But the CIF does not mind this as they want the best teams in state bowls. Some section champs actually are not as good as other section runners up or even third or fourth place teams in some sections.

You can not tell me the SF Section or Oakland section champs are better than some of the runner ups or 3rd or fourth place finishers of the CCS,NCS or SJS. Are you joking?

I am sure some comparisons can be made with the Southern counterparts but I think a power points system is the best way to go to get THE BEST TEAMS IN THE STATE Championship.

Maybe the CIF should just forgo what they do and do a point system similar to the BCS where the top four teams get into a State semifinal and finals over two weekends. The rest of the teams that qualify, will get to be seeded and games played at higher site much like the way the lower divisions are now. This way we can get a mini bowl series going and each bowl has a sponsor and it will be done based on mlm points.

I know this sounds crazy but it works for NCAA why cant CIF adapt it to the high school level. Now I already know what is going to be said well two of the teams are already decided in DLS and Mater Dei, so why bother but there may be a down year for these schools. But look how year in and year out it is Alavama and either Oklahoma or Texas or some other Southern Cinference winner making up two three or even all four teams from the final.

It sounds crazy but it may work.

 

[Truthhertz]

No... sheesh. It's because they know that by splitting the state, they accomplish two things. They cause discourse and the also weaken the Democratic stronghold of the state. Two more state could mean more Republican senators, which have been more friendly (for some strange reason) recently than Democrats to Russia.

Somebody needs to step away from mainstream media and do some research. “Tell Putin I’ll have more flexibility after election”

 

[SpeedCity51]

The best thing we could probably hope for would be if the Nor Cal sections started working together for football to create a Northern California playoff system. For the top 2-3 divisions you pull from all sections, then the rest of the schools play in traditional section playoffs.

 

[Cal 14]

Somebody needs to step away from mainstream media and do some research. “Tell Putin I’ll have more flexibility after election”

Not going to get into a political squabble here... but I will say that when someone uses that phrase, it tells me everything I need to know about them.

 

[JCBUST]

Not going to get into a political squabble here... but I will say that when someone uses that phrase, it tells me everything I need to know about them.

B and especially C League teams have no business in a regional game. C League teams should aspire to winning a League Championship(great accomplishment) and moving into B play. B League teams should aspire to win a League Championship and moving into A League play while earning an 7/8 seed in playoffs. A League teams should aspire to win a League Title/Section Title/Regional Berth. End of Story.

 

[flashbrown001]

You can argue that the top 3-4 Southern Section teams would beat Folsom. Imagine if Bosco got to move on and play the winner of the Folsom/Central game. Norcal folks, let's count our blessings.

 

[Streak One]

I think the issue with the bowl system is it can be marketed as naming true state champions. I view it more as the Open Division is the state champion and the rest are like the bowl games in college. They are extra football, provide some fun matchups, but don't have much real consequence.

 

[Truthhertz]

Not going to get into a political squabble here... but I will say that when someone uses that phrase, it tells me everything I need to know about them.

Correct I think for myself and don’t follow the narrative.

 

[SPortela24]

I heard there is a new proposal from CCS where multiple B League teams will move on the regional games, what a crime.

Texas sounds like a good idea. Take your Section winners D1-D5 and move on to play the next closest section winner and so forth.

CCS vs SJS
NCS vs NS

SDS vs LA etc etc

I grew up playing in the midwest, we had enrollment based

100-500 D6
501-750-D5
750-1000-D4
1000-1500-D3
1500-2000-D2
2001+D1

You win enrollment you move up, next year you don't make semis you move back down. Obviously the MD, BOSCO, DLS are D! for obvious reasons. It would look something like these Northern teams playing for a true state title against the south. If the enrollment is klarger down South, make a sliding scale.

DLS
Folsom
SF/VC/DO
Cardinal Newman
Carmel
East Nicolas


Pretty soon we will hace a C League team playing in a "STATE BOWL" game which isn't right.

We already do. Lincoln of San Francisco is playing a SBG next week. Galileo played in one last year. A school of 2,300 really got the chance to win a state championship by defeating a school of 380 students (Rio Vista) and one of 260 (Vincent Memorial). Truth is Galileo wouldn't have won the PAL Lake had they played in it. I don't think Lincoln wins it this year either.

 

[TheGoldenShower]

Say it ain’t so!

Just got word, CCS may go to 3 A league playoffs by rank(1-8, 9-16, 17-24). That assures you are sending a team with a losing record during the season to get whitewashed at a “ Regional Game”.

 

[carmelkyd]

Apologize in advance that I have not read this whole thread so this might have already been discussed. John Devine (from the Monterey Herald) says that one proposal is to create five CCS play-off divisions. Teams would be seeded based solely on power points and not on enrollment. Guess A league teams typically have more power points so they would likely be seeded in divisions I and II. But a quick look at PALboosters seedings says that D I would have been:

Wilcox
St Francis
Palma
Palo Alto
MA
SHP
Carmel
Live Oak

And so on.

 

[SpeedCity51]

B and especially C League teams have no business in a regional game. C League teams should aspire to winning a League Championship(great accomplishment) and moving into B play. B League teams should aspire to win a League Championship and moving into A League play while earning an 7/8 seed in playoffs. A League teams should aspire to win a League Title/Section Title/Regional Berth. End of Story.

Demographics and enrollment put a definite ceiling on how good a program can get, no matter how hard the team works or how well coached they are. So get out of here with this “teams need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps” garbage. This isn’t pro sports, it’s an after school program.

 

[joebl]

Apologize in advance that I have not read this whole thread so this might have already been discussed. John Devine (from the Monterey Herald) says that one proposal is to create five CCS play-off divisions. Teams would be seeded based solely on power points and not on enrollment. Guess A league teams typically have more power points so they would likely be seeded in divisions I and II. But a quick look at PALboosters seedings says that D I would have been:

Wilcox
St Francis
Palma
Palo Alto
MA
SHP
Carmel
Live Oak

And so on.

How long before the CCS goes back to awarding extra 1/2 point to WCAL teams if that is true. CCS has tried to push most of the WCAL teams into one playoff bracket to give other Public schools better opportunities to win. Based upon this season, the top CCS team, VC, wouldnt have even made the bracket.

 

[nascar624]

You can argue that the top 3-4 Southern Section teams would beat Folsom. Imagine if Bosco got to move on and play the winner of the Folsom/Central game. Norcal folks, let's count our blessings.

Yes this is probably an accurate statement, but win or lose, I would much rather see a team like Folsom play one of SoCals best and not some slappie they are going to most likely crush. Maybe I'm wrong, but if Folsom ends up being our D1AA rep than I dont see this game being close and that isn't fun for either side.

Basically you get Folsom celebrating another shallow SBG championship. It's like NorCal number 2 against SoCal number 20ish. Who really takes pride in a victory like that especially if they roll CC.

IMO Its 2014 all over again. This years Folsom team is special and only was tested in week 0. 2014 was never tested. I personally want to see them play a team at their level.

Of course they still need to handle Central so my comments comes a day early, but I'm that confident they are going to handle Central with ease.

 

[FBAddict]

B and especially C League teams have no business in a regional game. C League teams should aspire to winning a League Championship(great accomplishment) and moving into B play. B League teams should aspire to win a League Championship and moving into A League play while earning an 7/8 seed in playoffs. A League teams should aspire to win a League Title/Section Title/Regional Berth. End of Story.

That may be the end of the story for you but it seems wrong to me somehow. There are now 13 divisions (actually 14 this year) but you can't possibly be thinking that the 13 divisions should be the the 48 most powerful teams in CA, can you? Or in the 5 divisions granted to CCS, that the 5 divisions should somehow have only top 5 CCS teams in them? So only A league teams should qualify for a RGB spot (as it is now)? What's wrong with a TKA or B-game moving to a RBG game at D6AA or D5A? Using your end of story scenario, why shouldn't the SJS Hilmar team be forced to play Folsom in D1 or Del Oro in D2? Instead they are in a RBG game competing for a state spot in D6-AA. That seems good for CCS too.

 

[Cal 14]

That may be the end of the story for you but it seems wrong to me somehow. There are now 13 divisions (actually 14 this year) but you can't possibly be thinking that the 13 divisions should be the the 48 most powerful teams in CA, can you? Or in the 5 divisions granted to CCS, that the 5 divisions should somehow have only top 5 CCS teams in them? So only A league teams should qualify for a RGB spot (as it is now)? What's wrong with a TKA or B-game moving to a RBG game at D6AA or D5A? Using your end of story scenario, why shouldn't the SJS Hilmar team be forced to play Folsom in D1 or Del Oro in D2? Instead they are in a RBG game competing for a state spot in D6-AA. That seems good for CCS too.

To think otherwise is incredibly short-sighted.

 

[THEOC89]

I think the issue with the bowl system is it can be marketed as naming true state champions. I view it more as the Open Division is the state champion and the rest are like the bowl games in college. They are extra football, provide some fun matchups, but don't have much real consequence.

I Feel the same way! I don't see any problem with the Current system except for the Open... We just need to bring the Open regional Back in Nor Cal...

Nor cal can never do what So Cal has because of the way our sections are... But I think all the bowl games are good for the kids and the schools so keep them... Just have an Open Regional game again where the CIF picks the Top 2 Section Champions to play for the open spot...

I really don't see why it would be so hard to have this back...

 

[1315]

The opinion of any competition other than some obsessed football programs (Open) having little consequence is very disappointing to read.

Spend a season at the dinner table with kids working their butts off “one game at time,” no matter if week 13 or 14 ever arrives. Priceless.

 

[HSfan82]

Here is a thought....

Change season to 8 games and a scrimmage for everybody. Those teams over .500 qualify for a section playoff, which should be about 8 teams per division so thats potentially 3 more games. Let So Cal and NorCal have thier own 8 team State bracket. Create Open division to determine TRUE STATE Champion..consisting of DLS MD Bosco Folsom Centenial etcc...or whoever top 8 teams in state

Teams under .500 based on competitive equity get a "bowl" game. So instead of 3-7 team at #16 seed playing a 9-1 #1 seed and losing by 50, they get 1 more game vs another 3-7 or 4-6 team. If those bottom teams opt out- great season over , if not they play 9 game rather than normal 10 now. If a team that plays in section gets bounced in 1st round they played 9 games.

This should reduce number of games(which seems to be a concern but going up), max games for champions would be 14, everybody else between 9 and 13, could get everything pretty much done by end of November, you would have NorCal champions and So Cal Champions and One California State Champion.

 

[bella123]

Here is a thought....

Change season to 8 games and a scrimmage for everybody. Those teams over .500 qualify for a section playoff, which should be about 8 teams per division so thats potentially 3 more games. Let So Cal and NorCal have thier own 8 team State bracket. Create Open division to determine TRUE STATE Champion..consisting of DLS MD Bosco Folsom Centenial etcc...or whoever top 8 teams in state

Teams under .500 based on competitive equity get a "bowl" game. So instead of 3-7 team at #16 seed playing a 9-1 #1 seed and losing by 50, they get 1 more game vs another 3-7 or 4-6 team. If those bottom teams opt out- great season over , if not they play 9 game rather than normal 10 now. If a team that plays in section gets bounced in 1st round they played 9 games.

This should reduce number of games(which seems to be a concern but going up), max games for champions would be 14, everybody else between 9 and 13, could get everything pretty much done by end of November, you would have NorCal champions and So Cal Champions and One California State Champion.

That’s a pretty good proposal, I’ve always said 9 games, but 8 would work. It will never happen as long as you have sections, no way.

Blow them up and start over. AAA, NS and OAL as their own sections is ridiculous enough. Either make the CIF the whole entity (similar to the UIL) or at least cut it down to 2 sections (NorCal SoCal) or at worst 4 sections.

9 games then you start state playoffs, no NCS, SJS etc. go right into state playoffs. You could still keep things semi regional until you get into further rounds, say final 4. No more than 6 divisions (5 + Open?) 32 teams north, 32 south. Potential 15 games tops if you go to finals.

Travel would obviously be the big issue, right behind the sections giving up control.

 

[JCBUST]

That may be the end of the story for you but it seems wrong to me somehow. There are now 13 divisions (actually 14 this year) but you can't possibly be thinking that the 13 divisions should be the the 48 most powerful teams in CA, can you? Or in the 5 divisions granted to CCS, that the 5 divisions should somehow have only top 5 CCS teams in them? So only A league teams should qualify for a RGB spot (as it is now)? What's wrong with a TKA or B-game moving to a RBG game at D6AA or D5A? Using your end of story scenario, why shouldn't the SJS Hilmar team be forced to play Folsom in D1 or Del Oro in D2? Instead they are in a RBG game competing for a state spot in D6-AA. That seems good for CCS too.

Yes the most powerful by enrollment. Hilmar's enrollment would not be near a Folsom. They would be the lowest enrollment division. California is going to the trophy system so it doesn't matter.