There were 120 first round games played in the 8 FHSAA classifications this weekend.  The median (50% higher/50% lower) margin of victory was 28 points.  52 games (43%) were decided by 35+ points (running clock).  Only 31 games (26%) were decided by 14 points or less.  Other than a handful of competitive games, it was another round of lopsided games and blowouts.  Yes, sign me up for more of the same in the next reclassification cycle.  Sheesh!  

Home field should always be earned and in that system you would have sub .500 teams hosting undefeated and 1 loss teams  The seeding has never been an issue, what has been the issue is the lack of a transparent and GOOD formula to use 

Regarding home field advantage, I always like the old system of alternating that benefit every other year.  Top of the bracket gets it on odd numbered years while bottom of the bracket has it on even numbered years.  Removes all conspiracy speculation as that protocol is laid out up front. 

Most who use 3 districts in a region typically seed 1-3 as district champions and the rest of the field would be wild cards so theoretically in that scenario you would have 1-3 be district champions and 4-8 would be wild cards 

Mathematician here.  There is no greater measure of strength than margin of victory/loss.  Now there are some valid criticisms people have posted here about big margins vs weak competition.  Any statistician would put in dampening factors such that running it up vs a weak opponent does not give you any more strength beyond a cutoff point, with a logical cutoff beginning at the running clock margin.  On the other side of coin, there should be significant bonus for a win or close loss to a strongly ranked opponent.  The one challenge to a power index like this is the small sample size (10 game season) makes it hard to drive out the preseason biases (i.e. initial weighting needed to start the season) which can be wildly incorrect due to teams changing strength one year to the next.  Nothing is perfect so I would adjust the algorithm to remove early season weighting once a significant number of teams have played each other, usually mid season.   Anyway, I work with statisticians who any single one of them could come up with something better, including myself.  That being said, I think the rankings are much better this year so it would appear to me that they did in fact include some sort of MoV into the algorithm.