21 replies to this topic

[LimaJock]

Why not add a quality loss component so schools in Ohio stop scheduling all those big school weak sisters in Canada?

[Bobby]

Who determines what a "quality loss" is? What do you consider a "quality loss"?

[bob22]

The coaches association is attempting to make canadian schools not count in computer standings. Points would only be earned by defeating an opponent from a state association that falls under the NFHS umbrella. Another proposal would move a school up a division(s) if the majority of its schedule is made up of higher division schools.

[LimaJock]

Each school is curently ranked in the current system. It would be quite easy to give some points for a quality loss. Things that would be considered would be division level and record. Need something to eliminate the bull poopy that is currently happening. Maybe even only if you come within a certain point range. Shouldnt get points if you get beat 50 - 0. Any ideas.

LJ

[oberhaus]

It would be to subjective. What one person considers a quality loss, another won't. And while you're adding stuff, why not subtract points for a bad win? Like beating a team with a much worse recod by only a TD or less.

Its bad enough they are talking about moving up a division if most your opponents are larger.

They should just eliminate the points for Canadian teams. That I can agree with.

[PHDigger]

A quality loss is still what it is, a loss. There is no reason to earn anything for a loss. I do agree that the Canadian thing needs looked at, but if a team beats an opponent 50 to 0, why is it that everyone just assumes that the 0 team is that bad and the 50 team isn't just that good? I know how that is determined. If the 0 team loses all of their games, they are in fact that bad. Which in turn rewards the 50 team no level 2 points from that team. I dunno. The system works pretty darned good the way I see it. The Canadian problem is that they give them automatic division 1 status. Give them division 6 status, and the problem is solved.

[oberhaus]

Its not automatically D1 status. It still gies by their enrollment. Problem is if they are D1 then every team they beat is D1 level 2 points.

[kaizen]

out of state opponents should be looked at as well. Henry Ford (mich.) who played elida last year was one of the worse teams ive ever seen, yet was in the detroit city championship at the end of the year. wow! stubenville makes a living playing weak out of state competition. in 2010, stuebenville's 8 wins all came from out of state competition. 2011 was almost as bad.

Edited by kaizen, 04 March 2012 - 12:09 PM.

[LimaJock]

Prime example is Kenton and Coldwater. No one will every convince me the loser of this game should get no points and the winner against [worst football program you know] should get points. I can think of a game where the school dresses their freshmen for one game a year and they are playing by 3rd quarter. By the way, college bb does it without difficulty.

LJ

Edited by LimaJock, 04 March 2012 - 12:13 PM.

[Bobby]

kaizen, on 04 March 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

out of state opponents should be looked at as well. Henry Ford (mich.) who played elida last year was one of the worse teams ive ever seen, yet was in the detroit city championship at the end of the year. wow! stubenville makes a living playing weak out of state competition. in 2010, stuebenville's 8 wins all came from out of state competition. 2011 was almost as bad.

there's a huge difference between Canadian teams and out of state teams. I believe Canadian HS football plays by different rules than US teams. Out of state teams play by the same rules as Ohio teams. This past year Hicksville was crushed by Coldwater yet went on to win its league. Do you discount them?

[kaizen]

Bobby, on 04 March 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

there's a huge difference between Canadian teams and out of state teams. I believe Canadian HS football plays by different rules than US teams. Out of state teams play by the same rules as Ohio teams. This past year Hicksville was crushed by Coldwater yet went on to win its league. Do you discount them?

all im saying is that there are some issues playing out of state teams as well when it comes to computer points. its not an argument the ohsaa wont do anything anyway. when 3/4 of your schedule is from out of state thats a problem wouldnt you think? 1 game is not the problem in my opinion, its not gonna skew the computer points that much anyway.

the hicksville coldwater thing was in the playoffs not the regular season so computer points dont matter. i didnt say i wanted to change in state computer points for poor loses / good loses, that is way over the top, imo.

[LimaJock]

If we truely want the best teams in the playoffs each year, then we need a quality loss component. I know of a school who absolutely spanks another each year in their scrimmage. When they go back to their respective leagues the scrimmage loser gets in the playoffs almost each year and the other usually comes close but rarely makes it. Worst, they are in same division and region. I know someone will say, the playoff school must get better while the other does not. Not true. Its Sunday so I'll be nice not naming names. Just wanted to throw out why we need a more detailed system. Actually, I would most like a everyone in concept.

LJ

[Bobby]

kaizen, on 04 March 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

the hicksville coldwater thing was in the playoffs not the regular season so computer points dont matter. i didnt say i wanted to change in state computer points for poor loses / good loses, that is way over the top, imo.

Coldwater beat Hicksville 51-13 in week 2.

[dw629]

what if somehow they added a coaches poll by region and you get points based on where you are ranked in the coaches poll. This would add a human element to the mix. I think it would be to hard to judge a quality win and quality loss OHSAA doesn't have the resources that college football does to determine that.

[lima ball]

dw629 said:

what if somehow they added a coaches poll by region and you get points based on where you are ranked in the coaches poll. This would add a human element to the mix. I think it would be to hard to judge a quality win and quality loss OHSAA doesn't have the resources that college football does to determine that.

Coaches should focus on their team and the schedule they can get. Teams should not be punished because other teams will not schedule them. The system works great. Every team comes into the season knowing what they need to do, which is win and your in the playoffs (with 8 going now). Canadian teams would be the only issue if they play by different rules. Maybe have them and their other wins D4-5 points instead of 1 or 6?.

[kaizen]

Bobby, on 04 March 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

Coldwater beat Hicksville 51-13 in week 2.

in that case CW should be ashamed of themselves.

[falconfan84]

Look...EVERY other sport allows ALL teams to enter tounament play...why not football? It is silly the hoops that some schools jump through to get their team into the playoffs. It is also silly that there are teams EVERY YEAR that sit at home while lesser teams get to participate in the playoffs.

Currently the OHSAA allows 32 teams per division to participate in the playoffs. That's 192 teams (D1 through D6) out of a total 717 football-playing schools (27%). I think it is very possible to allow every HS team to participate in the tournaments. If the playoffs (football sectionals) were extended by just 2 weeks, that would quadruple the number of possible participants (4x192 = 768) making it possible for everyone to participate. This way, "quality losses" would not hurt your chances of making the playoffs, but would actually HELP your chances of becoming a better team for the tournaments (much like any other sport that encourages tougher scheduling to become better). There would not be "creative" scheduling to slide into the playoffs ahead of better, more qualified teams...and I would go so far as to say that we would not be watching all of our leagues going through the current changes if making the playoffs were not such a huge issue.


Here's how the OHSAA could make this happen:

First, the OHSAA has instituted the "Foundation Game" the past couple years as an extra scrimmage. Do away with this game and just start the season ONE week earlier...we're out there playing anyways, aren't we?

Next, only play 9 regular season games. This may not seem very popular...BUT, at this point, we would already be 2 weeks ahead of schedule...and ready to start the sectional tournament.

By this point, each sectional bracket would be drawn up with each team seeded. The first sectional game would be each school's 10th game...the same number we currently play. The losers would be done (having played a full schedule), but we'd still have 64 schools getting an 11th game in, with the chance to advance...TWICE the number of schools currently given a shot at the playoffs. WHAT COACH WOULDN'T WANT THOSE KIND OF CHANCES TO PLAY EXTRA GAMES???...EVERY YEAR.

With this structure, every schools gets a chance. Each sectional send an upper bracket winner and lower bracket winner to the district...just like most other sports the OHSAA has tournaments for. I think this would actually bring in more $$$ for the OHSAA, since there are extra rounds of play. It also gives the kids a reason to not "throw in the towel" after 2 or 3 losses. We all know that the tourney is the "second season" in every other sport and is usually an exciting time for the schools.

You can say that there would be too many blowout games, and that some football teams just don't "belong" in the tournament based on the weakness of their program...BUT, we see blowouts and mis-matches in every other sport, yet we don't hear how those teams shouldn't be allowed the chance to participate.

I think it's about time the OHSAA starts to look at "solutions" that make sense...not like splitting D1 into 2 separate groups and allowing an unequal number of bigger schools the chance to play in the post season. Every time the OHSAA comes up with some sort of "equalizer", we get proposals that make less and less sense...think about last season's proposal for multipliers and bumping schools up or down divisions based on free lunches. It is way too complex and still unfair to many schools when a SIMPLE plan like mine would include EVERYBODY.

Edited by falconfan84, 04 March 2012 - 10:59 PM.

[LimaJock]

It is possible. Even if it was a strength of schedule component which is done by a couple groups right now. Current system rewards teams in weak leagues who schedule cupcake non league. If I was one of you who usually end up a 2,3,4 I wouldnt like this change either. That 5,6, or 7 would be quite possibly a better team.
LJ

[PHDigger]

oberhaus, on 04 March 2012 - 09:05 AM, said:

Its not automatically D1 status. It still gies by their enrollment. Problem is if they are D1 then every team they beat is D1 level 2 points.

Right, I guess I didn't really word that very well. It's still not a good way, by the State, to handle the situation. If accurate numbers cannot be provided, then it shouldn't be allowed to be scheduled, or consider them and their opponents Div 6. It's opens up another loophole if they are just considered a "game not played", because then teams will schedule them, fill the week, and get a lower divisor out of the deal.

[PHDigger]

LimaJock, on 04 March 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

Prime example is Kenton and Coldwater. No one will every convince me the loser of this game should get no points and the winner against [worst football program you know] should get points. I can think of a game where the school dresses their freshmen for one game a year and they are playing by 3rd quarter. By the way, college bb does it without difficulty.

LJ

While the example of CW and Kenton is a good one for the argument, I still don't believe the loser should get any points. The fact still remains that the winner is the winner and the loser is not the winner. How would anybody be able to classify which team gets these losing points? Remember, most of the games on most teams schedules are forced by the league they are in. They take the gamble on their non-league games. If you want an easy win, schedule an easy team. If you want the challenge by playing a (normally) good team to get BIG points, then schedule one. But remember, you may not win the game either. That's the gamble that makes it good. Not by giving sympathy points.