Dr. D

Just to be clear, the purpose of the 2022 Metro-Suburban reclassification was not to create "parity". Parity is defined as equality, meaning the intent would be for the vast majority of teams to finish at .500. The NFL strives for parity using a salary cap, draft in reverse order of best record, a more difficult schedule in the following year for teams with the best records, etc. The intent of the 2022 reclassification was to achieve "equity", or fairness; also known as "like vs. like" and "a level playing field". There is nothing in an equity model to prevent a team from winning a title multiple years in a row. Whether the Metro-Suburban reclassification actually made things fairer for more teams is open to debate. There are winners and losers in any reorganization, be it in business or high school football. The fact that the FHSAA is considering returning to an enrollment-based classification system should provide hope for those who see the current system as flawed, given that some of the proposals floated here will never fly in the FHSSA world.

Niceville had to travel 670 miles round-trip to play Nease in round one. IF they beat Bartram Trail, they will (most likely) have a 600-mile round-trip to play Buchholz. The problem is there just aren`t a lot of large enrollment schools west of Lake City, so larger classes would not necessarily solve this problem. These panhandle schools just about have to be drawn into a Region with Jacksonville-area schools. Significant travel is just a fact of life in Region 1, and holds true for other sports as well.

1. The comparison to the district champion/runner-up model is not pertinent, as the current Metro-Suburban/Power Ranking system replaced the 1A-8A/RPI system. The district champion/runner-up model has not been used for at least 5 seasons. But I compared this year's results to the 2021 season, which was the last year of the previous system. 2021 had 96 first-round games, and the median margin of victory was 27 points - the same as this year. So based on a limited sample size, the Metro-Suburban split made first-round games no more or less competitive on the whole. 2. Although the data point that 89% of state champions had come from the 8 highest Metro areas in the previous 10 years was used as evidence of an imbalance, FHSAA documents cite "blowouts in playoff games and state championships" and "achieving a competitive balance in state championship series (i.e. 'playoff games'). It seems incredible that this seismic change would have been undertaken only to make 8 championship games more competitive. In fairness, the 2022 championship games were more competitive than those in 2021. 3. One could argue that if 52 of 104 playoff games were decided by 4 scores or more, there are up to 52 teams who may not belong in the playoffs. We're talking about playoffs, not regular season games, where mismatches should be more likely. 4. NCAA March Madness equates to your first option. Even though we know Southeast Missouri, Canisius, or Western Carolina are not going to win the championship, they are given an opportunity to take their shot. I still happen to enjoy March Madness, even if there are some blowouts. So I guess that makes the FHSAA Playoffs -> November Madness!

While the seeding may be fairly accurate, a more concerning issue is the non-competitive nature of many games. The median margin of victory for the 104 games was 27 points, so 50% of games were decided by 4 scores or more. 33% of games were in running clock territory (35+ margin of victory). One of the purported benefits of the Metro-Suburban split was supposed to be more competitive playoff games (i.e. "competitive equity"). These results are not exactly a ringing endorsement of that logic. Perhaps the games will become more competitive in the later rounds. Perhaps there are too many mediocre teams in the playoffs to begin with....

The classification issue is being discussed today at the FHSAA Board of Directors meeting, but no action is expected today. If the Open-32 Championship was in effect this year, this would be the number of teams represented from each class: 4M: 3 4S: 4 3M: 6 3S: 5 2M: 2 2S: 6 1M: 5 1S: 0 1R: 1 Not sure what this proves, but it would certainly make the playoffs more competitive if the top 4-6 teams are skimmed out of each classification prior to the playoffs. But there would be 31 teams in the Open-32 who would feel they were denied a shot at a championship in their original classification. Any changes to the classification system will have to be approved relatively soon by the FHSAA so that schedules can be set for next year.

I think the answer lies not in what Cocoa (or Chaminade) did in their last game, but what their 9 previous opponents did in their last game. Cocoa's previous 9 opponents went 5-0 (with 4 idle), while Chaminade's previous 9 opponents went 1-3 (with 5 idle). As a result, each of those winning teams improved their Rating, which in turn lifts their previous opponents' strength of schedule (in this case, Cocoa and Chaminade). So I believe Cocoa's strength of schedule improved significantly enough (with respect to that of Chaminade) in the eyes of the computer algorithm to leapfrog Chaminade's previous standing. Convoluted, I know. At least with the previous RPI system, my hypothesis could be proven/disproven.

If this proposal was in effect this year, Miami Central would not qualify for the Open-32 Championship bracket, as they finished #33 in the final FHSAA Power Rankings. Meanwhile, Williston (#16) would host Eau Gallie (#17) in the first round, with the right to play the winner of the Cocoa (#1)/Benjamin (#32) match-up. Hmmm... what will the FHSAA come up with next?

Kudos also to Cocoa for arranging such a difficult schedule that they are the rare team to gain the #1 seed in their classification despite having a worse winning percentage than the #2 team in the classification (First Baptist and STA being the others). The obvious bias toward the winning percentage component of the "proprietary formula" means a team has to have a significantly more difficult schedule to make up the differential, and Cocoa managed to do just that.

Regardless of the merits of the many plans put forth here, one thing needs to be kept in mind. In reviewing the 2022-23 FHSAA Financial Report, about $2.5 million in revenue was earned from FHSAA postseason competitions, undoubtedly the vast majority from football playoff ticket sales. This revenue goes to support the operations and many other activities that the FHSAA sponsors. So I would not expect the FHSAA to reduce the number of classifications (and thus the number of playoff games) any time soon. Or in the words of the astute Nulli Secundus, "follow the money".

The Rankings margin between TC and OC University is very slim, and normally a University win this Friday would be enough to overtake TC for the #1 regional seed. However, that is counterbalanced by Deltona's horrible Ranking, which damages University's SOS component. It's still up to the computer, but I think TC will hold on. And University would probably prefer another game with New Smyrna Beach (41-7 victory first time) anyway. Let the algorithms fall where they may, and good luck!

All states that use this system have a protocol for breaking district ties as you describe. For example, Alabama lists 15 possible ways for a 3-way tie to be broken. They include results against common non-district opponents, highest winning percentage of defeated non-district opponents, total victories, etc., but they are all related in some way to results on the field. The #16 tiebreaker is a coin toss. So there would be options short of relying on mysterious computer algorithms to break ties.

They manage to announce the ratings and playoff pairings by Sunday afternoon after the Week 11 games, so I'm guessing the IT guy doesn't work weekends until then.

Instead, we have a proposal by the FHSAA "Task Force" to do away with district games altogether. Which means fewer common opponents (which the mathematicians say are needed to make computer rankings more accurate). So the Power Rankings will be even worse than they are now! Brilliant!

To clarify (see 2023-24 FHSAA Administrative Procedures, section 3.3.1.1.3), 4 district champs and 4 at-large teams are seeded #1-#8 based on the final FHSAA Power Rankings. The higher seed will always host, EXCEPT in the regional quarterfinal round when a district champ is matched against an at-large team; in this instance, the district champ will host regardless of seeding. Thus, University could be the #1 regional seed, despite DeLand being the district champ, and University/at-large would have to travel to #8 seed/district champ Osceola in the regional quarterfinals.

Thank you for your work and explaining your methodology. Confirms what seemed intuitive initially within the parameters available. The next question would be whether the FHSAA Power Rankings as currently constructed are an accurate measure of the relative strength of teams, but I'll leave that for another day.