are sub-.500 teams watering down the playoffs?

[Octfeb]

http://www.texasfootball.com/highschool-news/view/180361

[knows2much]

Yes.  But, how many teams enter the playoffs as a 3rd or 4th seed that would probably dominate other districts in the state.  There are also some 7-3 teams that didn't get in simply because of the district they play in.  Just depends on how you want to look at it. By having 3 or 4 teams get in you will have some that probably don't "deserve" to be there, but you also let in a few teams that are pretty good and happen to be in a really tough district.

[cougar14]

I don't think so. Ozen was 4-6 last year and I'm sure they could have beaten  a bunch of first round teams. In 2010 we were 4-6 and beat Ned in the first round. In some states like Minnesota they use the regular season for seeding and every team makes the playoffs. Playoffs, unlike bowl games or selection committees are supposed to allow for improvement meaning if you lost one of your horses for half the season and get off to a bad start you're not penalized if you can imrpove. More games/opportunities the better to me.

[PN-G bamatex]

Really, it depends on the district they're coming out of.

[dustoff03]

one could argue that teams with a legitimate shot at a title are being forced to play more games. more games = more opportunity for injuries. that one extra game in a sense could cost a D-1 recruit everything. jmo.

[NorthoftheBorder]

Yep! But for every 50 or so (or maybe more) that don't deserve to be in the playoffs, one sub-500 team makes some real noise.

[dustoff03]

[quote name="NorthoftheBorder" post="1394747" timestamp="1366124699"]
Yep! But for every 50 or so (or maybe more) that don't deserve to be in the playoffs, [b]one sub-500 team makes some real noise.[/b]
[/quote]
according to the article, 51 sub-500 teams made the playoffs in 2012. 43 were one and done getting beat by an avg. of 31 pts. of the 8 teams that won, some won against other sub-500 teams. the remaining 8 all lost in round 2.

[catfever]

How do 2 sub. .500 teams play each other in the 1st round.  One of them would have had to of done well in district.  That would be  rare occurence.  In 5A a few years back. Plugerville HS got 4th in dstrict and went all the way to the state championship game.  That instance makes it worth it right there.  Yes, most probably don't need to be in the playoffs, but there are some who will be competitive and win.  You are only adding one game.

[Peppermint Patty]

Maybe, but at least they feel better about themselves.

Isn't that what athletics is about? Feeling good.

[Guest BigCountry66]

I personally like having 4 teams from a district make the playoffs. I like that they get to experience the playoff environment and get to match up with a really good team from another district.  Seeing a smaller school barely get in the playoffs and then have the opportunity to upset a really good team in the first round is brings some extra excitement to that program.  BUT, I don't think you should get in with a sub-.500 record.  IMO, if a district only had 3 teams with a winning record, then you should just give the #1 seed from the neighboring district a first round bye.  Just a thought.

[CAL2TEX]

I'm old school.

It should be 2 teams.  District Champion and Runner up.

Period.

[knows2much]

[quote name="BigCountry66" post="1394786" timestamp="1366130990"]
I personally like having 4 teams from a district make the playoffs. I like that they get to experience the playoff environment and get to match up with a really good team from another district.  Seeing a smaller school barely get in the playoffs and then have the opportunity to upset a really good team in the first round is brings some extra excitement to that program. [b] BUT, I don't think you should get in with a sub-.500 record.  IMO, if a district only had 3 teams with a winning record, then you should just give the #1 seed from the neighboring district a first round bye.  Just a thought[/b].
[/quote]

Ok.  Let's say that you have a 5 team district, and the district champion wins every district game but lost every preseason game.  That would make you 4-6 and the district champion.  So that team doesn't deserve to get in because they are sub-500? It is possible for that to happen you know

[OldTimer]

My answer is a BIG YES!

I could see an argument over say the 2 and 3 team in a district being overlooked due to a tough district - but the 4 team sorry arguments for that place are very few and far between. 

[Peppermint Patty]

[quote name="knows2much" post="1394802" timestamp="1366134087"]
[quote author=BigCountry66 link=topic=111173.msg1394786#msg1394786 date=1366130990]
I personally like having 4 teams from a district make the playoffs. I like that they get to experience the playoff environment and get to match up with a really good team from another district.  Seeing a smaller school barely get in the playoffs and then have the opportunity to upset a really good team in the first round is brings some extra excitement to that program. [b] BUT, I don't think you should get in with a sub-.500 record.  IMO, if a district only had 3 teams with a winning record, then you should just give the #1 seed from the neighboring district a first round bye.  Just a thought[/b].
[/quote]

Ok.  Let's say that you have a 5 team district, and the district champion wins every district game but lost every preseason game.  That would make you 4-6 and the district champion.  So that team doesn't deserve to get in because they are sub-500? It is possible for that to happen you know
[/quote]

Then this sub .500 team would not be excluded because they are the District Champion. For the most part, this example is the exception and not the norm.

I like the top 2 teams in each district advancing.

[johnnyarm]

[quote name="CAL2TEX" post="1394788" timestamp="1366131296"]
I'm old school.

It should be 2 teams.  District Champion and Runner up.

Period.
[/quote]

+1, it's getting too much like "every kid gets a trophy these days" and it's all about the $$$$

[Guest ECBucFan]

[quote name="dustoff03" post="1394762" timestamp="1366127048"]
according to the article, 51 sub-500 teams made the playoffs in 2012. 43 were one and done getting beat by an avg. of 31 pts. of the 8 teams that won, some won against other sub-500 teams. the remaining 8 all lost in round 2.
[/quote]

Everyone should READ then REREAD this quote.

This quote absolutely, positively, irreversibly answer the question. No further discussion necessary. Socialized UIL football is a JOKE.

[aschom78]

I think a better question is, "If sub .500 teams were to be taken out of the playoffs, which teams would take their place (what criteria would the uil use to determine who gets those spots in the playoffs)?"

[Guest ECBucFan]

None. They don't belong, and there is no need to "replace" them. The playoffs should proceed with only the teams that [u]deserve[/u] to be there. 

[pinelandflash]

I can remember a time (in my lifetime) when only the district champ went to the playoffs(now THAT'S old school lol). But I remember several years ago West Sabine lost their first 7 games but won their last three to squeak in as the third place team in their district. Went three rounds deep that year and should have beaten Price Carlisle (WS finished 5-8 on the season.). IMO it all depends on a.) the district you play in, b.) your non-district strength of schedule( I've seen teams lose all their non-district games but go 5-0 in their district and win it outright at 5-5), and c.) the match-ups they would draw in the playoffs. That being said, however, I think it does water down the competition somewhat and the money factor from the extra games does come into play. 

[aschom78]

[quote name="ECBucFan" post="1394940" timestamp="1366158072"]
None. They don't belong, and there is no need to "replace" them. The playoffs should proceed with only the teams that [u]deserve[/u] to be there.
[/quote]
Without replacing those teams there is a structural issue with the brackets unless you give the teams that would have played them in the first round a bye. That would work too I suppose.

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

District Champs should get a first round bye IMO. And let 3 teams in the playoffs, not 4.

[BrenhamFan]

Yes, but it does mean more games, with the occasional upset.

[knows2much]

Honestly I don't see what the big deal is.  Yes...it does water it down a little bit. And yes... there will be some teams in the playoffs that probably don't have any business being there.  But, since the number of 4th place teams winning the 1st round is so low...cant you just think of it as a warm-up game.  No different than taking a week off.  Might be actually better for a team to not get out of their normal (prepare to win a game) week of practice and a game.  Since the odds are so overwhelming for the 4th place team to lose, it will give a team a chance to play some of their back-ups (just in case they're need down the road).  In this case at least they'll have some "playoff experience".

[Trocket]

Can you imagine a 1-9 or 0-10 team making the playoffs someday. ;) ;D ;D

[dustoff03]

[quote name="Trocket" post="1395246" timestamp="1366208100"]
Can you imagine a 1-9 or 0-10 team making the playoffs someday. ;) ;D ;D
[/quote]
hasn't there already been a 2-8 team go?