Knowing that there are advantages and disadvantages to any system, do you really think that this system is the best way to do it. It seems that between no calculation for SOS, and automatic berths for winning conferences, there are going to be some high seeds running into very good competition in round 2. Case in point would be if Prep loses their conference tourney, they are going to be seeded in the mid teens I believe a 14 which would have a 3 seed drawing them in the second round. Do we really think that there are 13 better teams than prep? Probably not, and whoever ends up being a 3 seed could feel the pain of this seeding process. Meanwhile Hiwasse Dam will be an 8 seed which will effectively give the 9 seed a free pass to the third round. Anything short of a panel that makes the seeding decisions will fall short, of course I might well say the same thing about the panels selection. And how do you get a panel together and where do they come from. In a time of more and more time being required for everything, could you get qualified people to sit on such a panel?
Does the current seeding model work
- Thread starter Alleghany84
- Start date
It's an interesting thought, but it wouldn't work, IMO. You'd have accusations of bias going around, it'd be tough to find people who knew enough about things statewide to do it, esp given the time turnaround from when conference tourneys end to when brackets have to come out. At least with the current system, if you set your sights on winning the conference, or the conference tourney, you know roughly what that will get you reward-wise for the playoffs, and there's something to be said for that. Does it create some mismatches, yes, but I guess you have to beat them all anyway. Personally, though, I'd prefer just to go back to the old system of giving each conference certain slots on the bracket before the season and filling it in from there. Considering the short time turnaround before playoffs, coaches can prepare a lot better under that system.
Opening a can of worms.......no this model don't work. There are always going to be some conferences in every sport that will be better top to bottom than others. This year, I feel that the Northwest Conference boys and girls have beat up on each other. Their records show it.
Their needs some element of ranking whether computer/human generated. All Regular Season Conference Champions qualify. All Conference Tournament Champions qualify. Then elect a special panel or committee to determine the other qualifying teams based on their schedule, record, etc.
Their needs some element of ranking whether computer/human generated. All Regular Season Conference Champions qualify. All Conference Tournament Champions qualify. Then elect a special panel or committee to determine the other qualifying teams based on their schedule, record, etc.
Personally the playoffs are suppose to be tough. Yeah it sucks to play a tough team in the second rd. But I like the way it looks this year. The parity is great and you have the lower seeded teams that will upset some top teams. Think about this. You could have prep Cherokee albemarle all in those 9-14 seeds lmao. Then Bishop as a 20 or something. I would be more upset if I was a high seed playing bishop the first rd than prep the second. The second rd you expect a tougher game not quite to that level but a tougher game.
A team like bishop or Atkins or MA in the first rd would be awhile as a top seed.
To answer your question I don't think there is a perfect system. Pros and cons each way. Just prepare your team the best you can and go for it.
A team like bishop or Atkins or MA in the first rd would be awhile as a top seed.
To answer your question I don't think there is a perfect system. Pros and cons each way. Just prepare your team the best you can and go for it.
Re: Does the current seeding model work[/URL]bulldog nation2014 posted on 2/10/2015...
Personally the playoffs are suppose to be tough. Yeah it sucks to play a tough team in the second rd. But I like the way it looks this year.
Is this the same guy that complained of the brutal Midwest bracket?
As for the process of seeding by a panel or group, I am opposed to it. Who gets out and sees all the different teams? Will it become a process of seeding teams based on reputation?
Personally the playoffs are suppose to be tough. Yeah it sucks to play a tough team in the second rd. But I like the way it looks this year.
Is this the same guy that complained of the brutal Midwest bracket?
As for the process of seeding by a panel or group, I am opposed to it. Who gets out and sees all the different teams? Will it become a process of seeding teams based on reputation?
You are exactly right, there would be accusations of bias as there always is. But my belief would be that there would be different panels for the East and West because it is impossible to know enough about everyone across the state. If there was a representative from each conference on the panel, as well as well deserving media members, and of course reps from the nchsaa on each panel I find it hard to believe that you could not come up with a system that would work better than HD boys being a 8 seed and Bishop being a 23-24-25. Everyone looks for a system that takes the human element out of things, and I am just not sure how that works. I know there is a lot of basketball to be played and it will not necessarily happen, but prep could end up easily being a 14 which matches them up potentially in the second round with Hayesville. I realize that you have to beat them all to win the state championship, but only one team can do that. There are schools that making the regionals would matter to, and potentially getting knocked out in the second round by a 14 seed who is not a 14 seed would seem very unfair to me. Let me clarify my statement as saying that I am not even sure that prep would beat Hayesville, but it just does not feel right to me that they should have to play that game that early.
It just seems to me that it is a one size fits all system and it does not have to be. Again, I just don't see how you can do it without having a human element involved. I realize that over time, the good breaks will even out the bad, but you have traditional boundary schools that might only get the opportunity once or twice in 20 years, and to have them ousted early due to an EASY seeding system just seems a little wrong to me.
Before I create confusion. This post as with every post that I will ever put on here is using 1a boys not girls.
It just seems to me that it is a one size fits all system and it does not have to be. Again, I just don't see how you can do it without having a human element involved. I realize that over time, the good breaks will even out the bad, but you have traditional boundary schools that might only get the opportunity once or twice in 20 years, and to have them ousted early due to an EASY seeding system just seems a little wrong to me.
Before I create confusion. This post as with every post that I will ever put on here is using 1a boys not girls.
Yessir I am sti happy the pods are gone. 
. West and east is all we need split the teams up accordingly and let them go at it. May the best team win. Lol. This is coming from a guy here the girls team could play prep the second rd.
. West and east is all we need split the teams up accordingly and let them go at it. May the best team win. Lol. This is coming from a guy here the girls team could play prep the second rd.That's very true. But the NCAA selection committee messes it up sometimes, too. Look at Wichita State-Kentucky in the second round last year, which in hindsight should have been a Final 4 matchup. It's hard to be 100% fair all the time, and putting a human element into it would just cause people to scream unfairness. Plus a panel for high school basketball would be a logistical nightmare, since you have 3-4 days from the conference finals to the playoff first round.
There will never be a perfect system. Atleast now you have 32 teams on each side who will be seeded out and go play. The travel could be fun but like I said no perfect system. There is parity this year so it will be a great playoff.
The only change I would like to see is games to be played at neutral sites. I think that would be great.
The only change I would like to see is games to be played at neutral sites. I think that would be great.
The absolute LAST thing you want to do is add a human element to seeding the playoffs. This isn't college or pro hoops where every game is available on tv or radio, so the rankings would be grossly inaccurate.
For evidence, take a look at the newest NCPreps polls:
Does anyone actually think there are ELEVEN teams better than W-S Prep on the boys side? Public vs. 'non traditional' nonsense aside, that poll is a joke (no disrespect Deanna).
Ditto on the girls side where Pamlico and Gates County are ranked ahead of Riverside? Please...
For evidence, take a look at the newest NCPreps polls:
Does anyone actually think there are ELEVEN teams better than W-S Prep on the boys side? Public vs. 'non traditional' nonsense aside, that poll is a joke (no disrespect Deanna).
Ditto on the girls side where Pamlico and Gates County are ranked ahead of Riverside? Please...
I know what your saying Dave, but Mount Airy and East Surry has done it. So who knows what some of this other teams can do. At the start of the year, someone stated that of all the WS Prep teams that they had over the years...this was the time that some could beat them.
North Stokes was still within 5 until WSP pulled away in the 4th Q last night, and they're 5th in that league, so yes this is a year when WSP is more on the level of other 1A teams. But I think their point wasn't that WSP is unbeatable, just that somebody with a very high seed is going to draw a very tough 2nd round matchup if WSP doesn't win the NW tournament. And I get that, but I don't think a selection committee would be a better alternative because it would be impossible to get a committee to watch every team, then to meet Saturday after the conference finals and decompress all their info in time to get a bracket out that afternoon so coaches could prepare for playoff games Monday or Tuesday. Then, even if you could get all that done, you'd still have people complaining about bias, etc. and it would diminish the incentive for winning your regular season title or tournament title.
I think everyone agrees that Prep is certainly more vulnerable then they've been in the last few years, but they're not so vulnerable that they'd lose to East Montgomery (the most glaring entry on that top 10 list). You could play that game on the moon and Prep would beat them by double figures. Preps "struggles" this season are largely the product of a monster schedule and a really strong league, arguably the strongest in the state (both boys and girls).
So, again, because pollsters wouldn't have access to tape of every game played in all corners of the state, if human elements were going to be included in the seeding process it would be even more flawed than it is in the college ranks.
The only change that needs to be made to the current system is to weight strength of schedule to some degree in the process.
So, again, because pollsters wouldn't have access to tape of every game played in all corners of the state, if human elements were going to be included in the seeding process it would be even more flawed than it is in the college ranks.
The only change that needs to be made to the current system is to weight strength of schedule to some degree in the process.
This model isn't perfect by any means, but it's better than old models where the #2 seed from Conf A opened v. the #3 seed from Conf. B and the #1 seed from Conf. C opened v. a Wild Card. In previous seasons, it was a crapshoot as to which conferences would be matched up against one another - often with 1st rd matchups pitting 2 teams with excellent records squaring off and 2 other teams with losing records facing one another (the same was true for baseball, soccer, softball, volleyball). There should be some reward for winning your conference...after that, everyone else should be seeded based on records (maybe factor in SOS if possible). This new model will still show some weak #2 teams from conference seeded higher than some 3rd place teams from other conferences (who happen to be better and have a better record). Again, it's not perfect but it is better than before.
Similar threads
