Google AdSense
Flawed D1 playoff system
Submitted by lancecollins on Sun, 2006-05-14 15:04.
it seems that in the first year of realignment in D1, the playoff system was slightly flawed. Instead of having the 3rd place team from metro automatically getting in, i think that the best 3rd place team should get in automatically, and the other two 3rd place teams should have to play a play in game, or just have the two 3rd place teams with the best record automatically get in. This would most likely prevent a 3-13 team(like lakeside) getting in over a 11-5 team(like bellevue).
Would Bellevue have won?
Would Bellevue have won anything in the playoffs if they had made it past Curtis? NO! so bellevue kids need to quit trying to come up with excuses for why they wernt the team they hyped themselves up to be!
Also, every league is going to have its winners and losers, the conferences will never be perfectly balanced, get over it!
Best Record
lakeside had no business being in the playoffs. being 3-13 or 4-12 does not make a team playoff material. They lost to Prep 13-0 and that was with a sloppy Prep team; the differential could have been more lopsided if Prep showed up with their A game.
So take the best records of all the teams. All winning records and rank them. Bainbridge, Issaquah and Mercer Island,had good records with Garfield and Bellevue close behind. Thats five teams right there. Vashon, Prep and Curtis should have made up the final 3 to have 8 teams.
How hard is that? The problem comes from placing teams in Metro, Mountain or Sound Conference or some other crap like that. We do not have enough teams to be segregated like this. Lump everybody together and the top eight teams are in the playoffs.
absolutely flawed.
When the top three teams in the conference that, after Saturday, have won the the State D1 championship the last 3 years. Also, the top 3 teams in that conference had more wins than all of the teams combined in both other conferences, and still has to have a team play into the playoffs. Something is wrong. Bellevue should have been in by virtue of their overall record, and their previous victory, convincing, I might add against the other playin team. All 3 programs look to be significantly better again next year. Will this happen again?
Never over look an opponent
If you should have been in the playoffs(final 8 teams) which in my opinion the play in game was a play off game, and I am sure that Curtis treated it like it was. And if your victory was so convincing over Curtis the first time then why couldn’t you win when it really counted? I think it’s because you got cocky and thought Curtis was just going hold the door open and let you walk into the quarter finals and now your upset because you blew your opportunity and want to blame the system. I would be upset to if I were Bellevue, but if Bellevue was as good as you think they were then they should have beaten Curtis.
this might sound kind of
this might sound kind of strange, but maybe every team make the playoffs and during the season you just fight for your overall seeding in the brackets.
Just throwing something new out there
hmmm i like that idea a lot
hmmm i like that idea a lot actually, unfortunently with 13 teams it would be kind of an awkward set up. But with 14, you could do something like this:
First Round:
3 v 14 game 1
4 v 13 game 2
5 v 12 game 3
6 v 11 game 4
7 v 10 game 5
8 v 9 game 6
Second Round:
GAME SEVEN: 1 v game 6 winner
GAME EIGHT: 2 v game 5 winner
GAME NINE: game 1 winner vs game 4 winner
GAME TEN: game 2 winner vs game 3
Third Round:
GAME ELEVEN Game seven winner v game ten winner
GAME TWELVE eight winner v game nine winner
Final:
Game eleven winner v game 12 winner
People should earn the trip
how about having the play-in game based on certain criteria, like record maybe? Or Strength of Schedule? Or interdivisional record. Or anything other than what they did this year so that teams like Bellevue could be in the "real" playoffs and teams like Lakeside could stay at home. Going 4-12 with wins over Hale, MV and Roughriders is hardly worthy of a trip to the postseason. Maybe Bellevue could've put up a better struggle than 17-4 joke against BI. If you're going to have 3 divisions and 8 spots, you should take the division leaders, and then figure out a way to determine the next 5 "best" teams. Division standings don't necessarily indicate how good of a team you have. DII was a perfect example of this as the Olympic Division sent three to the playoffs and all three lost their opening round games, while the Evergreen Division sent 3 with 3 victories. Hopefully, we're learning from our mistakes.
ehh..
Bellevue made the playoffs and lost, it doesnt matter if you have a different system or not, if you lose to curtis in the play in round, i doubt they would have been able to get past the other teams.
Secondly, I was noticing a recent poll that asked what teams people wanted to see in the Championship this year. And our semi-finals feature all four of those teams.
So whats the beef?
yes bellevue "made" the
yes bellevue "made" the playoffs, but they shouldnt of been in the play in game. The play in game should have been curtis vs. lakeside. All im saying is that bellevue kind of got screwed by the seeding. Who knows, maybe they would of beat mercer - i doubt it, but you never know.
I think the divisions need to be set up differently too. Bellevue, issaquah, and MI are all in one division. Garfield is all alone in the metro. Some people say prep is a solid second team there but if you look at their wins, 6 were against hale, roughriders, and lakeside, teams with a combined record of 7-33. There other 3 wins were against eastside, maple valley, and curtis. They didnt beat a single team with a winning record. I just think that there is still some work to be done with how this whole thing is set up.
well
First of all, the conferences are set up by geography, so its not the leagues fault that the perennial powers have ended up in the same conference, it just kind of worked out that way. Being in that strong conference myself, i know that I would not enjoy having to go to Curtis, Vashon, or any of those other teams far away from the eastside every year.
Also, its just the way things worked out this year, lakeside or other metro teams arent always going to be bad, soon enough things will level out, and it will make sense.
And unless youre saying that bellevue would have won state had they not been in that play in game, you have no point.
Lastly, as I said before, the four best teams, are all still playing for a state championship, so I see no problem.
the problem is...
a tourney seeding isn't about who winds up in the final four, it is about equal bracketing to get there. The playoff bracketing could have been much more simple, by taking the top two teams in each conference, and then having two wild-card teams. Each wild-card spot is decided by best overall record outside the conference, and points against- strongest win is a joke. That is why teams leave starters in when dogging a team out.
This year, that would have removed Lakeside 3-10 for sure, and put the same teams in, but none of this stupid play-in game crap...and no- I am not on Bellevue. Then you stack the seeding from 1-8 based on overall record, and move the tie-break to being in-conference wins or points against. Simple.
Bellevue should be congratulated!
Not to say the system's perfect but it seems they got into the 9-team playoff but unfortunately lost in the first round - as will four other teams. The question may be more one of seeding and who their first round match-up was (?) No seeding system will be perfect.
haha exlax
i like your name
um
no one conrgatulates the 65th seed in the NCAA tourney, so...