Rural classification proposal -- the future of Florida postseason?

[Dr. D]

Saw this agenda item on the upcoming FHSAA Board of Directors meeting:

https://fhsaa.com/documents/2024/2/20/68_72.pdf

You've got to give an "A" for creativity.  And we would get even more "champions"!

[Perspective]

5 minutes ago, Dr. D said:

Saw this agenda item on the upcoming FHSAA Board of Directors meeting:

https://fhsaa.com/documents/2024/2/20/68_72.pdf

You've got to give an "A" for creativity.  And we would get even more "champions"!

So, the Rural B State Champion would, at best, be the 17th best rural team in the state, huh?   Hmmmm.

[DarterBlue2]

15 minutes ago, Dr. D said:

Saw this agenda item on the upcoming FHSAA Board of Directors meeting:

https://fhsaa.com/documents/2024/2/20/68_72.pdf

You've got to give an "A" for creativity.  And we would get even more "champions"!

 

7 minutes ago, Perspective said:

So, the Rural B State Champion would, at best, be the 17th best rural team in the state, huh?   Hmmmm.

Even if this works for the Rural class(es), I object strenuously to any such implementation in the other classes. So the intent is to have like 14-15 "state champs" with half of them coming from the lower echelons of each class? Or am I missing something? 

[Perspective]

Isn't this basically what the Sunshine State Athletic Association did at the end of this past season -- where every team participated in some form of post-season play and the teams were grouped together based on their records/rankings?   

I'm wondering if this is a proactive effort to keep football alive and kicking in the rural areas.  Regardless, I'm not a fan of the 'bottom half' of any classification being able to compete for a "state championship."

[nolebull813]

This is disgusting at best and psychotic at worst. 
 

I pray the FHSAA disbands and any coach or AD who would supports this trash resigns in disgrace 

[gatorman-uf]

I have said a million times that promotion/relegation system is the way to go, but I also understand that many communities/coaches don't understand the benefits of a system like that for the vast majority of programs. I feel like this is dipping their toe in the water of it to prove it is viable. 

One of my contentions is that pro/rel allows teams to be competitive against likewise teams (based on previous years). The "B" division essentially is that (except for that year). Now, would I call this specific group "state" champions, probably not, but that is the least of my concerns. If they are doing seeding, of course there is greater # of mismatches. That is why you are doing seeding, so that the #2 doesn't play the #1 seed in the first round. I don't think the goal is to get 64 teams per class into the playoffs, I think the goal is to show that we can make a competitive system based on MaxPreps rankings.

Now, I do like the idea of taking the rural class as a whole and making it just the North and South and removing regions as a whole. That is something @DisabledAccount aka ColumbiaFan often promoted.

[DarterBlue2]

1 hour ago, nolebull813 said:

This is disgusting at best and psychotic at worst. 
 

I pray the FHSAA disbands and any coach or AD who would supports this trash resigns in disgrace 

Sadly neither will happen.

[THAT S--T WAS FUNNY]

3 hours ago, Dr. D said:

Saw this agenda item on the upcoming FHSAA Board of Directors meeting:

https://fhsaa.com/documents/2024/2/20/68_72.pdf

You've got to give an "A" for creativity.  And we would get even more "champions"!

SOFT

[Nulli Secundus]

I’m waiting for someone to blame this on Lakeland too. 

[CoachGraham]

I don't hate this as a concept if you just look at it as just "more football" for kids/coaches/fans.

 

I personally wouldn't hate having a "B" bracket so long as the winner of said bracket is not considered a state champion...because they're not. But more football isn't a bad thing, it is just all about perspective. You cannot call these teams state champions. 

 

I am concerned this is just a cash grab from the FHSAA though. If they can "prove" that it works in the rural divisions, then they can have more football games at the higher levels of classification and rake in the money....

[Perspective]

1 hour ago, CoachGraham said:

I personally wouldn't hate having a "B" bracket so long as the winner of said bracket is not considered a state champion...because they're not. But more football isn't a bad thing, it is just all about perspective. You cannot call these teams state champions.

Any time something is "all about perspective," I'm in favor of it!  

Joking aside, I'm OK with the idea of 'more football,' and completely agree that you can call the successful teams almost anything you want as long as you don't call them 'state champions.'    Ironically, the concept is being tested in the rural areas, where kids are more likely to play multiple sports.  This idea may actually get some push-back from high school basketball coaches in rural areas, as prolonged football seasons will keep kids off the basketball court that much longer. 

[nolebull813]

What would you call this? If they are not competing for state titles then what’s the point? Might as well just call them bowl games and be done with it. But to separate the classes at the end between the good and bad teams is a travesty. What this state needs is less playoff brackets not more.

[Dr. D]

I do like the mention of adapting the Georgia model of cross-region bracketing and think it would be worth considering for all classifications.  This would allow two teams from the same District/Region to meet in the state finals, rather than one team being eliminated in the Region finals.  If AHP and Norland (now both in District 4A-15) happen to be the two best teams in 4A this year, it would seem more desirable to have them meet in the state finals, or at least the state semi-finals.  The issue of travel has been pointed out as a deterrent to the Georgia model in Florida, but perhaps it could at least be utilized in a "North" and "South" bracket.   

[CoachGraham]

On 2/21/2024 at 10:02 AM, nolebull813 said:

What would you call this? If they are not competing for state titles then what’s the point? Might as well just call them bowl games and be done with it. But to separate the classes at the end between the good and bad teams is a travesty. What this state needs is less playoff brackets not more.

Some schools never have a prayer of winning a state title, especially in today's age. Call them exhibition games for all I care. Just give them more games. More games, more money. More games, more exposure. As long as we don't confuse it for what it is not, I don't see an issue. 

[Floridaatlantic1]

On 2/21/2024 at 8:23 AM, CoachGraham said:

I don't hate this as a concept if you just look at it as just "more football" for kids/coaches/fans.

 

I personally wouldn't hate having a "B" bracket so long as the winner of said bracket is not considered a state champion...because they're not. But more football isn't a bad thing, it is just all about perspective. You cannot call these teams state champions. 

 

I am concerned this is just a cash grab from the FHSAA though. If they can "prove" that it works in the rural divisions, then they can have more football games at the higher levels of classification and rake in the money....

I would not call any tournament under promotion/demotion model except the top a state champion. Call the rest anything you want. The goal is to provide the vast majority of student athlete's a good experience that help build character for the future and learn teamwork.  Its obvious with all the blowouts and the huge distance between the haves and have nots that the current system or even the metro system achieves what is best for the most students.  Teams want to have a fighting chance to at least compete in half their games and being a division with similar teams will help. The SAC calling a 3-7 team a state champion is pathetic. But I get why teams are moving to it or forming own associations.