Hypocrisy in the point/playoff system!!

[DILLARDBOYZ954]

So before this new playoff system a year ago there was alot of complaints & moaning in groaning about teams with losing Records making the playoffs..AT LEAST that was one of the complaints.

But yet in this "NEW SYSTEM" it's team under the .500 mark making the playoffs all over the place & there NOT even winning their own district.

But it's okay now tho right because some of these teams with losing Records are popular teams who we fill they should get in simply because they played a hard schedule and can beat half the state.

HOW I FEEL IF YOUR RECORD IS BELOW .500 & U DONT WIN YOUR DISTRICT U SHOULD NOT!!! BE PLAYOFF ELIGIBLE PERIOD.!!! 

secondly there should be NO WAY IN HELL!! A team should get more points losing to a Good or elite team then a team who won PERIOD I don't give a dam who it was against they Won Dammit.!! 

Currently for example we have 3-5 Miami northwestern & 3-5 Miami NORLAND both With playoff births if the season ended today all because they scheduled Tough!!! 

WTF!?? So a team can schedule tough lost most if not all of those games and still get rewarded!?!?  Sorry but 3-5 is 3-5 I don't give a dam how many 8-2 or 9-0 teams we feel they could beat if they played those teams 3-5 is 3-5 and should be ranked accordingly.!! For example district 6a 15 Boyd Anderson is 4-4 can possibly be 5-4 after tomorrow but is no where being eligible for the playoffs because they didn't schedule enough tough games but yet two teams with worser records are PLAYOFF eligible!!! That's STR8 foolishness they should go by records and records only for those who don't win their district tally up all the none district winners for 6a tally them up by record and send them that way with records 5-5 and below not being eligible.

@badbird @SPCjessica2004 @954gator I Kno I'm not the only one see the issue at hand here. Same with Booker t their 4-5 not even leading g their own classification but yet is the second seed. That's crazy and again I don't wanna here about who they played or how tough their schedule was they knew who and what they would be up against and they finalized the deal anyway so there for NO TEAM should be awarded for losing idc what's your past history or present reputation is PERIOD!!!

[DisabledAccount]

Let me ask you something @THIS_IS_DILLARD

 

Do you honestly think Boyd Anderson could actually beat those 2 teams

 

Not are they more deserving but could Boyd Anderson beat MNW or Norland on the field? 

 

I would take a 20 point spread for boyd against MNW and still pick MNW to win even with 20 point spread in Boyd favor

 

Do you feel Boyd should be in for having a better record or do you actually feel Boyd could beat MNW 

 

If you feel Boyd would beat them then i completely understand your argument but if you don't think Boyd can beat MNW then i can't understand why a team should be in there just for having a better record 

[DILLARDBOYZ954]

1 minute ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

Let me ask you something @THIS_IS_DILLARD

 

Do you honestly think Boyd Anderson could actually beat those 2 teams

 

Not are they more deserving but could Boyd Anderson beat MNW or Norland on the field? 

 

I would take a 20 point spread for boyd against MNW and still pick MNW to win even with 20 point spread in Boyd favor

 

Do you feel Boyd should be in for having a better record or do you actually feel Boyd could beat MNW 

 

If you feel Boyd would beat them then i completely understand your argument but if you don't think Boyd can beat MNW then i can't understand why a team should be in there just for having a better record 

U answerd your on question because they have a better record!! It shouldn't matter if mnw could beat them by 50 their record is subpar not even average therefore should not be rewarded.

[DisabledAccount]

Just now, THIS_IS_DILLARD said:

U answerd your on question because they have a better record!! It shouldn't matter if mnw could beat them by 50 their record is subpar not even average therefore should not be rewarded.

In other words you want the teams with best 8 records in not the 8 best teams? 

[DILLARDBOYZ954]

2 minutes ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

In other words you want the teams with best 8 records in not the 8 best teams? 

I would prefer that that's how it should be 

[badbird]

the point system sucks but I can't buy your argument Dillard.  Give me the best 8 teams regardless of record over the best 8 records.  If team A schedules all cup cakes and wins each of them close but team B schedules aLL hard games and goes 5-5 I want team B in over Team A.

[DILLARDBOYZ954]

32 minutes ago, badbird said:

the point system sucks but I can't buy your argument Dillard.  Give me the best 8 teams regardless of record over the best 8 records.  If team A schedules all cup cakes and wins each of them close but team B schedules aLL hard games and goes 5-5 I want team B in over Team A.

That's the thing who are we to say whose the best every team match's up with the next team diffrebtky then say another so if it's the best 8 records then obviously those are the best teams like the old saying say you are what your record say you are.

[SPCjessica2004]

Dillard,

I get what you're saying, and understand it in the big schools; however, the smaller schools in 1-4A have to create their own 10 game schedule. Booker T. is a known name, meaning, sisters of the poor aren't going to play them. They're forced into playing Chaminade-Madonna, Central, Carol City, Southridge etc.    I think you have to cut these guys some slack with their record. 

The bigger schools 5-8a I tend to feel a bit more empathy for since they get placed into districts. Some districts are tougher than others. I think the FHSAA was trying to avoid those super-districts where there is a 6 team district and 3 of the teams are elite superpowers but only 2 make the playoffs so they end up beating each other up and then in the sister district a 5-5 team playing joe nobody is a champion.

The question becomes, what's the best system to use? There probably isn't one everybody will agree on, but as Josh says the point system is here to stay.
 

[DILLARDBOYZ954]

6 minutes ago, SPCjessica2004 said:

Dillard,

I get what you're saying, and understand it in the big schools; however, the smaller schools in 1-4A have to create their own 10 game schedule. Booker T. is a known name, meaning, sisters of the poor aren't going to play them. They're forced into playing Chaminade-Madonna, Central, Carol City, Southridge etc.    I think you have to cut these guys some slack with their record. 

The bigger schools 5-8a I tend to feel a bit more empathy for since they get placed into districts. Some districts are tougher than others. I think the FHSAA was trying to avoid those super-districts where there is a 6 team district and 3 of the teams are elite superpowers but only 2 make the playoffs so they end up beating each other up and then in the sister district a 5-5 team playing joe nobody is a champion.

The question becomes, what's the best system to use? There probably isn't one everybody will agree on, but as Josh says the point system is here to stay.
 

There can only be one champion each class so either way someone is gonna b left out who we feel should or could have won if they were in a different class point is you are who your record says u are and by that you should be rewarded or concequented point blank 3-5 is 3-5 8-0 is 8-0 it does not matter who u play u still had to play the game 

[DarterBlue2]

5 minutes ago, SPCjessica2004 said:

Dillard,

I get what you're saying, and understand it in the big schools; however, the smaller schools in 1-4A have to create their own 10 game schedule. Booker T. is a known name, meaning, sisters of the poor aren't going to play them. They're forced into playing Chaminade-Madonna, Central, Carol City, Southridge etc.    I think you have to cut these guys some slack with their record. 

The bigger schools 5-8a I tend to feel a bit more empathy for since they get placed into districts. Some districts are tougher than others. I think the FHSAA was trying to avoid those super-districts where there is a 6 team district and 3 of the teams are elite superpowers but only 2 make the playoffs so they end up beating each other up and then in the sister district a 5-5 team playing joe nobody is a champion.

The question becomes, what's the best system to use? There probably isn't one everybody will agree on, but as Josh says the point system is here to stay.
 

A modified points system is probably fairest. However, there are still kinks that need to be worked out. 

At the end of the day, a perfect system does not exist. If a better job was done putting competitive districts together with at least 5 teams each in the larger classifications, and the various schools did not complain, bitch and moan and were willing to travel in cases where that was necessary to put together competitive districts, I would be for the old district winner and runner up making the playoffs. But the previous district qualification system was grossly unfair to a number of teams and should be buried forever unless a better effort was made to have competitive districts. 

A simple example of making districts more competitive would be to move two of: Central, Northwestern, Norland and Carol CIty to two other districts. One, of these teams, for example could be moved to Dillard's district and another to the next closest 6A district (even if that meant travel to the Collier County area up through Charlotte County). 

[OldSchoolLion]

At the end of the day, teams entering the playoffs with 3 or more losses have very low odds of advancing.  Last year, only 1 of the teams who made the Final 4 in Classes 4A-8A classes entered the playoffs with 3 losses(Bartram Trail).   Check out the post below.  

We're having all this debate over teams who makes the playoffs and the vast majority of these "contentious" teams are likely to get knocked out in the early rounds anyway.  There was time when 9-1 teams did not make the playoffs, and now we are concerned about teams with 4 losses not making it.  Those 9-1 and 8-2 teams who missed out found other meaningful ways to celebrate their seasonal accomplishments.   

Whether it's the old system or the current one, I think the playoffs satisfy their primary objective...to determine the best team in each class.  How many teams that never made the playoffs do you feel certain missed out on a state title because of it?  I doubt very many.   

     

 

[DarterBlue2]

25 minutes ago, OldSchoolLion said:

At the end of the day, teams entering the playoffs with 3 or more losses have very low odds of advancing.  Last year, only 1 of the teams who made the Final 4 in Classes 4A-8A classes entered the playoffs with 3 losses(Bartram Trail).   Check out the post below.  

We're having all this debate over teams who makes the playoffs and the vast majority of these "contentious" teams are likely to get knocked out in the early rounds anyway.  There was time when 9-1 teams did not make the playoffs, and now we are concerned about teams with 4 losses not making it.  Those 9-1 and 8-2 teams who missed out found other meaningful ways to celebrate their seasonal accomplishments.   

Whether it's the old system or the current one, I think the playoffs satisfy their primary objective...to determine the best team in each class.  How many teams that never made the playoffs do you feel certain missed out on a state title because of it?  I doubt very many.   

     

 

As you documented in another thread, Apopka has three titles from the runner up spot. And one of those was from a 6-4 regular season. Before the mid 1990s none of those Apopka teams would have won a state title as they would not have made the playoffs when only the district winner made. 

That said, I get your point. Apopka is an anomaly. It is very unusual for teams with more than 2 regular season losses to win a title. 

[badbird]

I like playoff teams decided by results on the field not some random point system.  Like darter said too many people complained about travel and being in with good teams.  I would love to see 6 classes again and large districts but probably won’t ever happen

[OldSchoolLion]

20 minutes ago, DarterBlue2 said:

As you documented in another thread, Apopka has three titles from the runner up spot. And one of those was from a 6-4 regular season. Before the mid 1990s none of those Apopka teams would have won a state title as they would not have made the playoffs when only the district winner made. 

That said, I get your point. Apopka is an anomaly. It is very unusual for teams with more than 2 regular season losses to win a title. 

On one hand, it's nice that a team can lose during the regular season and get redemption in the playoffs.  Apopka beat W Orange in 2014 and Edgewater in 2001 to avenge regular season losses.  One possible "cost" of this opportunity is a lack of intensity in some district games.  Back in the day, when two district favorites played, it often had the feeling of a playoff game (and accompanying large crowds) because the team that lost could be out of the playoffs.  I think some of that regular season intensity has been lost.  Some fans get more excited over an OOS game than they do a district rival.     

 

[Hwy17]

8 minutes ago, badbird said:

I like playoff teams decided by results on the field not some random point system.  Like darter said too many people complained about travel and being in with good teams.  I would love to see 6 classes again and large districts but probably won’t ever happen

Of all the playoff systems that I have seen the one in place 1999-2000 was the one I liked best: 6 classes,  3 districts per region. Districts were larger. District Champs and Runner-ups made the playoffs with two wildcard teams for the 7th & 8th spot. Those were determined first by overall record. A point system was used only to break a tie and the points were the sum of opponents wins and losses.

[DILLARDBOYZ954]

45 minutes ago, Hwy17 said:

Of all the playoff systems that I have seen the one in place 1999-2000 was the one I liked best: 6 classes,  3 districts per region. Districts were larger. District Champs and Runner-ups made the playoffs with two wildcard teams for the 7th & 8th spot. Those were determined first by overall record. A point system was used only to break a tie and the points were the sum of opponents wins and losses.

That's how it should be now 

[OldSchoolLion]

4 hours ago, THIS_IS_DILLARD said:

Currently for example we have 3-5 Miami northwestern & 3-5 Miami NORLAND both With playoff births if the season ended today all because they scheduled Tough!!! 

WTF!?? So a team can schedule tough lost most if not all of those games and still get rewarded!?!?  Sorry but 3-5 is 3-5 I don't give a dam how many 8-2 or 9-0 teams we feel they could beat if they played those teams 3-5 is 3-5 and should be ranked accordingly.!!

Were you at Traz Powell tonight telling all them folks what u think?    I would have paid to see that, but my first aid is a little rusty.

[DILLARDBOYZ954]

36 minutes ago, OldSchoolLion said:

Were you at Traz Powell tonight telling all them folks what u think?    I would have paid to see that, but my first aid is a little rusty.

Now is not the time to joke & to answer ya question ion give af wea I'm at ima always speak my MF mind like I SAID shouldn't no team with a under .500 record should be eligible for a playoff births I don't give a fu** who the team is

[DILLARDBOYZ954]

Just like in college 2 loses shit sometimes one depending on to who automatically disqualify u Tor a national championship bid

[OldSchoolLion]

3 hours ago, badbird said:

I like playoff teams decided by results on the field not some random point system.  Like darter said too many people complained about travel and being in with good teams.  I would love to see 6 classes again and large districts but probably won’t ever happen

Look at current seedings and result of Sandalwood(#12) v Deland(#3) game tonight.  Sandalwood 35 Deland 13

[Zoe Boy]

8 hours ago, THIS_IS_DILLARD said:

Just like in college 2 loses shit sometimes one depending on to who automatically disqualify u Tor a national championship bid

So then explain to me why UCF can go undefeated n not make the playoffs?

[DILLARDBOYZ954]

49 minutes ago, Zoe Boy said:

So then explain to me why UCF can go undefeated n not make the playoffs?

Thats something I don't agree with ucf should be eligible for a national championship at worst a bowl game 

[Zoe Boy]

1 hour ago, THIS_IS_DILLARD said:

Thats something I don't agree with ucf should be eligible for a national championship at worst a bowl game 

What? They are eligible for both but the reason they don’t get the nod is cause the schedule ain’t up to par... Now I do agree with you with the system was supposed to put the best teams In.. Which In the most part it did last year.. I do agree teams under .500 shouldn’t make it. BUT I do agree with teams that goes out and plays a challenging schedule year in and year out and don’t take the easy way out with a .500 record should go in instead of a team that plays trash all year and they could of schedule 1 or 2 teams that’s a good to great team.. All 4 teams ain’t making the playoffs from district 6a and Norland will be left out cause they gonna be at best 4-6 while Da West is gonna be .500 and will advance to the second round as long as they don’t get Carol City or Central in the first rd.. Now what I think they should do is take 2 teams from that district and move them to the other district with Dillard or with Naples ... 

[Coach]

15 hours ago, THIS_IS_DILLARD said:

I would prefer that that's how it should be 

Here's my argument against that. I was born in Sunrise and I'm a diehard Miami Dolphins fan. Let's pretend the NFL season was 4 games long. Miami was 3-0 playing the 1-2 NE Patriots a few weeks back. Miami got throttled. At the time, Miami was then 3-1 and NE 2-2. Which team was better? Which team would deserve to be in the playoffs? I'd say NE even with the worse record.

 

In HS football, coaches can manipulate their schedules to get 8 or 9 wins against worse competition. A good record isn't necessarily the mark of a great team. Testing yourself against stiff competition and going toe-to-toe with the "big boys" is what makes you playoff-ready. I would gladly rather see a 5-5 team that played a legit schedule in the playoffs over a 9-1 team that beat up on weak competition. Those teams tend to be one and done anyway. 

[Floridaatlantic1]

My issue with the current playoff systems is that it has two main flaws which has made it a joke. 

A) It rewards teams who lose wayyyyyyyy tooo much. How does a team who loses a game to a playoff team that is undefeated for the year and earn more points than the winning team. 35 points for a loss to a top tier team and a 3 point bonus if they were a playoff team gives them 38 while the winning team earns 35 if the team is a lower level tier. They raised the point total last year for losses and it was a mistake. in one of the regions, a 1-7 team has more points than a 5-3 teams and numerous 4-4 teams.    Solution - lower the points for a loss back to last years numbers. Or eliminate the bonus points. Giving more points to losing team than the winner is dumb.

b ) The increased points for losers crushes teams in large districts (not under teams control). Teams in 7 team districts have a tougher time winning the district and give more automatic losses to everyone's scheduled opponents, thus lowering the points for all teams in the district. Meanwhile a 4 team district can schedule more wins outside of the conference and have less automatic losses and raise the point totals for every team in the district.  

solution- go back to last years loss points. 

Agree with earlier posts- go back to old system with  fewer district and runner-up and points for wildcard teams using last years point totals