So let's look at the brackets by how each section did, as opposed to conspiracy theories, and see if there's a pattern that might reflect how persuasive each section commissioner was in the meeting.
CCS: Looks pretty good here. Presentation and Eastside, both of which by MaxPreps' rankings could have been Open, drop to D1. Eastside, which lost to an NCS team seeded below it, by 28, is seeded second. Valley Christian, a team with record below .500, gets seeded third in D2. Woodside Priory, which could have been a D3 team since many of its losses occurred before its top-shelf point guard played, wound up as the top seed in D4 and 14-12 Notre Dame of Belmont was the second seed. (The CCS rep must have gotten a little tired after that, because not much in D5 and D6, but all in all, a good day's work.)
Northern: Pleasant Valley, by all rights a middle seed in D1, winds up as the top seed in D2. (And note the D2 championship game is played at a host site, so if form holds, Pleasant Valley is playing at home in front of a screaming crowd against a team that had to drive several hours to get there.) And the top two seeds in D6 are from the Northern Section.
San Francisco: Not good work here, as the best team in San Francisco gets to drive four hours to play a Central Section team. Really?
Oakland: So Oakland Tech, which lost to KIPP King, gets kicked to D4, and KIPP King drops to D5. Reverse those, and Tech has a chance to do very well.
NCS: So NCS has one No. 1 seed, in D5. It has two No. 2 seeds, Eureka in D2, and Clear Lake in D5. Its four Open teams were seeded 5-8. Its top two D1 teams were seeded third and fourth, one of them behind a team it beat by 28. Though NCS isn't necessarily the power it once was, it does seem that the seeding tilted against its teams rather than, as was the case with CCS and Northern, for them. (And again, Miramonte is not complaining about its bracket placement -- it's more about the logic involved, or persuasion.)
SJS: Seems neutral, though things didn't jump out at me as they did with some other sections.
So if you're looking for a conspiracy, I think looking at section results might deliver more evidence. Perhaps the Northern and CCS folks got together beforehand, worked something out with commissioners from the south, did what they needed to do with the CIF reps, and got their way.
Or they were just better talkers ...
CCS: Looks pretty good here. Presentation and Eastside, both of which by MaxPreps' rankings could have been Open, drop to D1. Eastside, which lost to an NCS team seeded below it, by 28, is seeded second. Valley Christian, a team with record below .500, gets seeded third in D2. Woodside Priory, which could have been a D3 team since many of its losses occurred before its top-shelf point guard played, wound up as the top seed in D4 and 14-12 Notre Dame of Belmont was the second seed. (The CCS rep must have gotten a little tired after that, because not much in D5 and D6, but all in all, a good day's work.)
Northern: Pleasant Valley, by all rights a middle seed in D1, winds up as the top seed in D2. (And note the D2 championship game is played at a host site, so if form holds, Pleasant Valley is playing at home in front of a screaming crowd against a team that had to drive several hours to get there.) And the top two seeds in D6 are from the Northern Section.
San Francisco: Not good work here, as the best team in San Francisco gets to drive four hours to play a Central Section team. Really?
Oakland: So Oakland Tech, which lost to KIPP King, gets kicked to D4, and KIPP King drops to D5. Reverse those, and Tech has a chance to do very well.
NCS: So NCS has one No. 1 seed, in D5. It has two No. 2 seeds, Eureka in D2, and Clear Lake in D5. Its four Open teams were seeded 5-8. Its top two D1 teams were seeded third and fourth, one of them behind a team it beat by 28. Though NCS isn't necessarily the power it once was, it does seem that the seeding tilted against its teams rather than, as was the case with CCS and Northern, for them. (And again, Miramonte is not complaining about its bracket placement -- it's more about the logic involved, or persuasion.)
SJS: Seems neutral, though things didn't jump out at me as they did with some other sections.
So if you're looking for a conspiracy, I think looking at section results might deliver more evidence. Perhaps the Northern and CCS folks got together beforehand, worked something out with commissioners from the south, did what they needed to do with the CIF reps, and got their way.
Or they were just better talkers ...
