SJS, NCS, CS and NS are all creating D1-7 Open divisions so they can have their runner ups continue on. 52 teams will now move forward. What the heck are we doing here? The way competition works is you lose and your OUT. There arguably could be one exception. EBAL D1 runner up should advance because they face DLS each year. CCS Wake Up, losers go home. You are ruining the high school spirit of competition.
Why does CCS continually have losing teams play on?
- Thread starter decoydan
- Start date
This has been discussed at nausiem in other threads. Try spewing in one of those.
As for "ruining the high school spirit of competition", please keep in mind that we've been doing this in the basketball playoffs for over 20 years.
Last night the number 2 team in the state SJ Bosco lost to Centennial. They are done yet Milpitas is still playing on? Come on, this is ridiculous. Basketball is a uniform system of at large qualifiers. What we are seeing here is CCS being a rogue section. SS successfully deals with the pac5 and public schools. Maybe CCS needs to go learn from the best. Have the CCS commissioner go spend time at SS to learn best practices. I can tell you that recent commissioners hired in other sections, did just that.
In case you've just started paying attention to CA high school football on a state level, the CCS has been doing nearly the identical thing as the SS for the last 10+ years. This new system was setup as a compromise within the CCS.
But guess what, next year the SS is changing their playoffs to competitive equity brackets. Don't be shocked if they declare their top division(s) as "Open". As for the rest of the sections, I don't see this as unfair at all. Any one of them can do exactly what the CCS did at any given time.
First, I have been following high school football, high school sports and even more importantly education in California for a long time. I have been a long time supporter of competitive equity as many of my previous postings reflect.
I do not totally disagree with what you are saying. If every section creates top to bottom open divisions, then the number of state champions drastically increases or the season is extended and additional playoff rounds are added. I do not see how this would ever work? On some of the out of state boards, there is a push to send representation from California to a national contest. One of the stated issues is the California season is too long. We all know that DLS plays way better in December then in August. I would love to see DLS or a Centennial Corona team have this opportunity.
I think the one point you and I disagree on is that CCS is allowed to send forward losing teams and other sections are not. I do not think this is fair or equitable. If you are a child on Elk Grove, St. John Bosco, Foothill, etc, do you feel that what is happening with CCS is an equitable system? One of Governor Brown's top priorities is creating an equitable education system. In my book, high school sports should not get a free pass on developing policies and practices that support this direction. I would not be surprised if during the next CIF certification that the Governor does not require the CIF sections to become uniformly aligned to provide consistent policies across all sections.
I do not totally disagree with what you are saying. If every section creates top to bottom open divisions, then the number of state champions drastically increases or the season is extended and additional playoff rounds are added. I do not see how this would ever work? On some of the out of state boards, there is a push to send representation from California to a national contest. One of the stated issues is the California season is too long. We all know that DLS plays way better in December then in August. I would love to see DLS or a Centennial Corona team have this opportunity.
I think the one point you and I disagree on is that CCS is allowed to send forward losing teams and other sections are not. I do not think this is fair or equitable. If you are a child on Elk Grove, St. John Bosco, Foothill, etc, do you feel that what is happening with CCS is an equitable system? One of Governor Brown's top priorities is creating an equitable education system. In my book, high school sports should not get a free pass on developing policies and practices that support this direction. I would not be surprised if during the next CIF certification that the Governor does not require the CIF sections to become uniformly aligned to provide consistent policies across all sections.
Geesh. If you paid attention to what the CCS actually did, you'd see that the exact same number of CCS teams are advancing as would if it had a playoff system like the NCS and SJS. There would not be any additional brackets.
Also, once again, ANY section can do exactly the same thing that the CCS did. If Johnny on Elk Grove wants to see teams like his advance, he can write the SJS commissioner and request that the section implement something similar. At this point, the CCS merely had an idea that was approved during a vote by members of all of the CIF sections. If the other sections choose to not follow suit, then that's their freakin' problem. It's like all of the SoCal people complaining about the Pac-5 and blaming the CIF. The CIF had nothing do with how the SS set up their playoffs. If they want to complain to someone, they (and everyone else) need(s) to start with their own backyard.
Gotta agree with Cal 14 -- the format was voted on and agreed to by all sections -- time to stop whining and remember it's just high school football.
As you stated, the CIF (state office I assume) had nothing to do with how the SS set up their playoffs. Yes, you are correct and that is a problem. The last time I checked this is the State of California. The CIF is a federation which gives the sections a ton of power. I often compare the CIF to the proposed 6 state split of California. The state of Jefferson is the SJS, the state of Silicon Valley is the CCS and so on. The problem is we have not voted to split the state of California. In my opinion, in dealing with education and the rights of kids, the policies need to be consistent for every child. I do not think we would be having this conversation if the CIF was an Association as opposed to a Federation.
Its funny people continue to say they know what CCS is doing and complain about it but then they say inaccurate things. Everyone wants to blame CCS for this when in reality they should be blaming CIF. The new format has made everyone in their section happy and kept the competition up. They send 5 quality teams to regionals that went through a much tougher playoff then they would have in a 5 division format. I get it winner should advance and losers go home. By that thinking though teams who cant win their league shouldnt have a shot at winning a section either though and they definitely shouldnt have a chance at regionals or state.
You know what, the CCS Open, PAC-5, SDS Open, etc. always got screwed under the old system. If they benefit for a few years now before the system is tweaked and changed yet again, I have no problem with it.
Not whining, my school is still playing. I just do not want to see the state playoffs expand even more. Like was stated on this stream, when one section gets a leg up by enacting policy that is not consistent with other sections, it does not take long before other sections jump on board. The SS is a sleeping giant that nobody wants to wake up. If they start sending runner ups, it is not going to be pretty. How would a Del Oro or a Milpitas fair against St. John Bosco? The one saving grace that Nor Cal has is that most of the top ranked teams in the state are eliminated from playoffs before the state championship games. I could see a system where the entire state is ranked in one pool. There is no longer a north and south. Outside of DLS and maybe Folsom, all the top divisions would be filled with So Cal teams. Then Del Oro, Milpitas, etc would be slotted according to ranking (D3-D4). This would be a true statewide competitive equity system where the best teams are not eliminated in the So Cal slug fest.
Let's not over rate So cal football. Nor Cal has proven over and over they are every bit the quality football region that So cal is.
Of course So cal has more- they have more people and teams so logic dictates they would have more. This narrative that So cal is superior has not been upheld by the results on the field.
Of course So cal has more- they have more people and teams so logic dictates they would have more. This narrative that So cal is superior has not been upheld by the results on the field.
Paul, you are one of the most respected opinions on this board. I took a look at it and you might be right. If the best teams by ranking advanced from Nor Cal and So Cal it would look like the following: I have the South winning 7 of 10 but there are a couple close ones that could go either way. Certainly not as one sided as the picture I previously painted.
DLS vs Centennial
Folsom vs St. John Bosco
Elk Grove vs Mater Dei
Bellarmine vs Mission Viejo
Central Catholic vs Bishop Amat
Foothill vs Helix
Oakridge vs Camarillo
Del Oro vs Serra Gardena
Liberty Bakersfield vs Orange Lutheran
Rocklin vs Vista Murrieta
DLS vs Centennial
Folsom vs St. John Bosco
Elk Grove vs Mater Dei
Bellarmine vs Mission Viejo
Central Catholic vs Bishop Amat
Foothill vs Helix
Oakridge vs Camarillo
Del Oro vs Serra Gardena
Liberty Bakersfield vs Orange Lutheran
Rocklin vs Vista Murrieta
You claim you've been following CA football for a while, but you clearly haven't. There's NEVER been a time where all of the sections had the same format. Someone who's followed this would know that.
I just want every CCS team to get beat in the next round. I also don't think it's fair to allow teams that lost to continue on. It sets a bad precedent.
Believe me I know that and this is the problem I stated as the difference between associations and federations. The majority of the high school interscholastic agencies in the United States are associations. California and New York for sure are federations. Federations give power to the sections to enact policy whereas associations generally generate policy from the state office. Every one of your posting keeps accusing me of not knowing what is going on in high school athletics. Last time I checked everyone is entitled to an opinion. My opinion is that forwarding losing teams is going to change the entire dynamics of the playoff system. If NCS enacts a policy tomorrow that gives them a leg up do you think that other sections are going to standby and let it happen? This same thing happens between San Diego section and SS. When SD section makes a policy change that gives them a leg up, SS counters it with a policy change. My entire point is do we really want to forward losing teams?, knowing that SS and SD section have 8 of the top 10 ranked teams in the state. If they enact the same policy as you suggested the dynamics of football in this state is going to change. Some might argue it is for the better and some might argue that it is for the worst. Again, just my opinion which I am entitled whether I follow the CCS or not.
I would think that you would root for who ever would give the North the best chance against the South. If every CCS team advances it might be best for the North so IDK why you would be against that.
I could not have said it better. I guess being a fan of NorCal football in general, I find myself more concerned about us sending our best to battle SoCal over the dumb bickering about who is still playing versus who is not. I wish CA had a true state playoff format, but that is not possible with the current setup with the sections currently in place. We're stuck with what we have and as long as this is what we got, I am pulling whole heartedly for all North schools to make a good showing when they face SoCal and I am hoping we send the best of who is left standing at this point.
If they make it past this round I will definitely pull for them. I pulled hard for SHP when they went 2 years ago.
Last edited:
This is totally what I was thinking earlier today. No one seems to mind when a 5th place team advances to the playoffs.
Shp went undefeated but didn'tget picked last year. That is why all these new formats are in place I believe. They went undefeated and won the ccs open, but were left out of a regional game.
Yeah that was not cool. I thought they should have went back to the state game last year. I remember voicing my opinion on here about that.
SHP might have been the top D3 school in the state last year. Atleast they got to go the year before. But just remember they werent even the best D3 school in CCS that year. They didnt even win league.
You gotta give credit for the whooping they put on El Cerrito. That game opened up some eyes.
It was an injustice to SHP to have to be considered only for open or D1. I would have loved to see them play in the D3 game, but again as always the way the sections are set up they had no choice and had they been picked over Grant, chances are they still would not have gone to state. Just don't see them beating the best team Folsom ever had.
I hear you, but not one person on this board or anywhere for that matter thought SHP even had a slight chance against El Cerrito. I have seen Palo Alto do the unthinkable and beat Cenntinial, and I think that SHP team last year was hot at the right time and would have had a chance to beat Folsom, but we will never know. They just didn't win the CCS open, they dominated it!
Agree ThunderRam -- all sections complained about the prior format, and sounds like this year nobody is complaining. Let it run its course. Can always go back to taking only best record league champs, having one section game and a committee selects teams for State - only two more games, not six!! Either way, looks like Decoydan has bowed out of his own thread!
But were not sending our best when second place teams like Foothill and Elk Grove don't get a chance in the playoffs but Milpitas does. The point is that very few on this board would rate Milpitas ahead of these two or even Rocklin but CCS has devised a system to get them there.
before all the regional/state games were instituted, the section championship was the last level. thus 2nd and 3rd place teams from different leagues went to section playoffs. lose and go home
now, with regional/state games the last level, i guess we are seeing 2nd place teams from sections advancing to the next round.
now imagine if this went national
now, with regional/state games the last level, i guess we are seeing 2nd place teams from sections advancing to the next round.
now imagine if this went national
QUOTE="PAL95, post: 77606, member: 1638"]I hear you, but not one person on this board or anywhere for that matter thought SHP even had a slight chance against El Cerrito. I have seen Palo Alto do the unthinkable and beat Cenntinial, and I think that SHP team last year was hot at the right time and would have had a chance to beat Folsom, but we will never know. They just didn't win the CCS open, they dominated it![/QUOTE]
PAL, I am not sure what games you were watching but I attended both the semifinal and final when SHP upset LG and Bellarmine. They far from dominated either game.
Los Gatos out gained SHP and possessed the ball almost 10 minutes longer. An interception was the tipping factor and SHP won by 7 points with LG missing the end zone on the last play of the game. 28-21
SHP contained Bellarmine better than they did LG and earned a shut out, but he game was a scoreless tie into the 3rd quarter. SHP won the turnover battle again with a couple of timely interceptions and fumble recoveries and won the game by two scores. 14-0
Both game were closely contested and gone either way
PAL, I am not sure what games you were watching but I attended both the semifinal and final when SHP upset LG and Bellarmine. They far from dominated either game.
Los Gatos out gained SHP and possessed the ball almost 10 minutes longer. An interception was the tipping factor and SHP won by 7 points with LG missing the end zone on the last play of the game. 28-21
SHP contained Bellarmine better than they did LG and earned a shut out, but he game was a scoreless tie into the 3rd quarter. SHP won the turnover battle again with a couple of timely interceptions and fumble recoveries and won the game by two scores. 14-0
Both game were closely contested and gone either way
PAL, I am not sure what games you were watching but I attended both the semifinal and final when SHP upset LG and Bellarmine. They far from dominated either game.
Los Gatos out gained SHP and possessed the ball almost 10 minutes longer. An interception was the tipping factor and SHP won by 7 points with LG missing the end zone on the last play of the game. 28-21
SHP contained Bellarmine better than they did LG and earned a shut out, but he game was a scoreless tie into the 3rd quarter. SHP won the turnover battle again with a couple of timely interceptions and fumble recoveries and won the game by two scores. 14-0
Both game were closely contested and gone either way[/QUOTE]
They were both double digit wins and both teams had no answer for BBK.
They were both double digit wins and both teams had no answer for BBK.[/QUOTE]And two shutouts.
To have a good Open division, SJS section would need to create a seeding system where to top leagues (or teams) would be put into one division (or more as in the case of CCS). If, for argument's sake, the SJS DI was that open division, it should have pulled the top teams of the section into it, including Central Catholic, and move teams like Kennedy and/or Gregori to a lower division. Then the section would need to define in their football section bylaws which division NOT to allow its sectional champion to move to regionals,
In the above scenario, Folsom and probably runner up Elk Grove would advance, Central Catholic would get knocked out in quarter or semi-round And DVII champ (or some other of the 6 remaining SJS divisions) would stay home.
Last edited:
Or they just do exactly what CCS did and have multiple open division based on enrollment so they dont have your smaller schools playing against the large schools. But as you said they will have to eliminate certain divisions from a chance of playing in a regional game.
Pal95, You have lost me here, how do you come to the conclusion a 28-21 game was a shutout or a double digit loss???
BTW BKK had 84 yds on 18 carries so yes they did have an answer to him. BKK a very good player and was the best overall player on the field that night but in this game not the superman you claim
I ll give you the Bell game was a shutout 14-0 but the LG game was definitely not. And BKK was the best overall player on the field that night as well.
Last edited:
I never said he was superman , but he was all over the field vs LG. If they didn't have him in that game LG wins by two scores. Their average margin of victory was double digits in the open. That is pretty dominant. I won't get into it anymore as that is the past. LG is out and SHP is still playing.
Not really, very rarely did a CCS open champion not have an average of double digit margin even SI had a average double digit margin of victory. The first round games almost guaranty it.
SHP played very well won the turnover battle in each game and came out the deserved champions no question but dominant not even close. The small school taking the crown was fantastic. Hasn't happened since Palma's run. Too bad we will not see it again
I'm pretty sure you have a good idea how CCS set up their open divisions. So you know they didn't just use enrollment as the defining factor for the open divisions. Otherwise you wouldn't get SHP (enrollment of 599) playing in Open DIII and have Silver Creek (enrollment of 2378) playing in division IV.
I really don't like the CCS set up this year. But I hated last year's setup and previous years' setup even worse. CCS crammed all their top teams into one division. In comparison, imagine SJS open division having these schools in one division: Folsom, Elk Grove, Central Catholic, Oak Ridge, Del Oro, Rocklin, Oakdale, Grant, Granite Bay, St. Mary's, Antelope, Napa, Wood, Franklin (Elk Grove), Cosumnes Oaks and Inderkum. In trade for Folsom and Elk Grove, you give up DII Del Oro and DIII (Small School Open contender) Central Catholic. Also, you force much weaker teams to represent at DII and DIII and eliminate one presently allowed division champ from regionals.
CCS lower teams (the bulk of the CCS voice) simply wouldn't allow a straight enrollment-based distribution for divisions. I think CCS came up with the best compromise possible that was allowed by CIF.
