Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
tarheelg61581

Way Too Early Discussion of 2021 Realignment

Recommended Posts

The split conferences need to go imo in all possible situations. I know some situations its difficult but some can be avoided. I just always feel like split teams get the shaft in seeding or when they don't they give the shaft to someone else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant to say SC used to have he big 16. 

Largest 24 schools make up a 16 team bracket..1 champion

charter schools, private, etc...1 champion

I confused my self in the 1A-4A.   In my scenario the schools like bear Bear grass charter, community school of Davidson and mountain island charter etc  are already removed from the so when you do the 25% model you can do 2 champions for 1A.  My mistake...

Basically the biggest 24 need there own bracket.  If you look at the ADMs and take the top 24 out you look at about a 50% difference in the smallest 4A school and the remaining biggest 4A school which is close to what it is among the other classifications.

All non public N.C. schools need there own playoffs.  Cardinal Gibbons and Charlotte Catholic can “recruit” from a 50 mile radius of their school which makes the playing field uneven.  I don’t even want them playing 1 classification up...it is just not right IMO

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Split conferences are ok if they are done better.  If you have a 7 team split league (5 3As and 2 4As for example) the 4As should get 1 automatic bid and the 3As should get 2 regardless of overall finish since that is the playoff breakdown set by the state for conferences with all teams in the same classification.  Splits would also help ease the burden of travel in some areas too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dawg Dynasty said:

I meant to say SC used to have he big 16. 

Largest 24 schools make up a 16 team bracket..1 champion

charter schools, private, etc...1 champion

I confused my self in the 1A-4A.   In my scenario the schools like bear Bear grass charter, community school of Davidson and mountain island charter etc  are already removed from the so when you do the 25% model you can do 2 champions for 1A.  My mistake...

Basically the biggest 24 need there own bracket.  If you look at the ADMs and take the top 24 out you look at about a 50% difference in the smallest 4A school and the remaining biggest 4A school which is close to what it is among the other classifications.

All non public N.C. schools need there own playoffs.  Cardinal Gibbons and Charlotte Catholic can “recruit” from a 50 mile radius of their school which makes the playing field uneven.  I don’t even want them playing 1 classification up...it is just not right IMO

 

From being around Charlotte football for many years from youth league up I am pretty confident Catholic is not loaded up with recruited players.  From what I have seen their players come from the Catholic middle schools. They have some advantages but I do not consider it the 25 mile radius rule.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dawg Dynasty said:

Split conferences are ok if they are done better.  If you have a 7 team split league (5 3As and 2 4As for example) the 4As should get 1 automatic bid and the 3As should get 2 regardless of overall finish since that is the playoff breakdown set by the state for conferences with all teams in the same classification.  Splits would also help ease the burden of travel in some areas too. 

The problem with the split conferences isn't that they give automatic bids to each classification, it's HOW they seed them.  Look at the 1AA west bracket where a 5-6 Starmount team is seeded #2 overall only because they were the top 1A from their conference.  There needs to be some sort of rule in place that if you don't have a winning record you can't receive a #1 seed from the conference.  You can be an automatic qualifier, but not a #1 seed (which places you above teams with better records, including head-to-head wins).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BlueRam$00 said:

Why not split the 10 team conference of all the Davidson County Schools and stick Walkertown, North Forsyth if they drop, and West Stokes with them? Straight shot down 52 for West Stokes.

West Stokes

Walkertown

North Forsyth

North Davidson 

Oak Grove 

Ledford

Forbush-or MVAC

Atkins if they stay 2A

Then the other could be 

Central Davidson

Thomasville

East Davidson

West Davidson

Lexington 

Salisbury 

 

The MVAC

Ashe

West Wilkes

North Wilkes 

Wilkes Central

North Surry

Surry Central

Forbush maybe

 

Really like this idea...it makes solid 2A conferences with the MVC, WPAC, and Central Carolina.  This would also allow a solid NW1A Conference of MA, ES, Elkin, Starmount, East Wilkes, Alleghany, and probably Millennium Charter.  1A Stokes County schools (N.Stokes and S.Stokes) would get the shaft being stuck with Prep, Carver, Bishop, NCLA.  I don't see the Davidson Co. folks wanting to give up their County Conference, but you never know.  Over the past 10-15 years the state has tended not to break up conferences that were happy with their arrangements unless absolutely necessary, so if the Davidson folks protested then I doubt this would happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NWWatchdog said:

The problem with the split conferences isn't that they give automatic bids to each classification, it's HOW they seed them.  Look at the 1AA west bracket where a 5-6 Starmount team is seeded #2 overall only because they were the top 1A from their conference.  There needs to be some sort of rule in place that if you don't have a winning record you can't receive a #1 seed from the conference.  You can be an automatic qualifier, but not a #1 seed (which places you above teams with better records, including head-to-head wins).

I only agree with that for the first place finisher from the larger classification.  There is some type of rule that a team must win X amount of their games.  In some cases it is sensible and some it is not.  Once again there is more to it than record.  Starmount played Mt Airy, East Surry, West Stokes, and Forbush.  Their conference losses were to Ashe County (two losses:  Hibriten and Watauga = 2A and 3A undefeated teams) and East Wilkes.  I do not think many 1A teams would have wins over four of the teams they lost to.  One of the issues we had for years were coaches that would not play strong non conference competition in order to pad the record for playoff seeding.  

I personally think only first place teams (including first place for the smaller class in a split conference) should get an automatic qualifier.  The remainder teams (46 in 2A) would qualify from the power poll.  I would seed them all from the power poll with no guaranteed seed to the conference champion, runnerup, or third place as there is now.  First thing to do is ensure the power poll is not screwed up with the "adjustment."  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, NWWatchdog said:

Really like this idea...it makes solid 2A conferences with the MVC, WPAC, and Central Carolina.  This would also allow a solid NW1A Conference of MA, ES, Elkin, Starmount, East Wilkes, Alleghany, and probably Millennium Charter.  1A Stokes County schools (N.Stokes and S.Stokes) would get the shaft being stuck with Prep, Carver, Bishop, NCLA.  I don't see the Davidson Co. folks wanting to give up their County Conference, but you never know.  Over the past 10-15 years the state has tended not to break up conferences that were happy with their arrangements unless absolutely necessary, so if the Davidson folks protested then I doubt this would happen.

I've heard rumblings that some of the coaches down there don't like having to play so many conference games. So I think it's possible. I personally would hate having to play 9 conference football games and 18 in other sports. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To do away with another split conference I think you could do:

Avery

Mitchell

TJCA

Cherryville 

Polk

Draughn since it looks like they'll drop

 

I'll have to do some research to see where to put the 2As in the WHC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, btango said:

I only agree with that for the first place finisher from the larger classification.  There is some type of rule that a team must win X amount of their games.  In some cases it is sensible and some it is not.  Once again there is more to it than record.  Starmount played Mt Airy, East Surry, West Stokes, and Forbush.  Their conference losses were to Ashe County (two losses:  Hibriten and Watauga = 2A and 3A undefeated teams) and East Wilkes.  I do not think many 1A teams would have wins over four of the teams they lost to.  One of the issues we had for years were coaches that would not play strong non conference competition in order to pad the record for playoff seeding.  

I personally think only first place teams (including first place for the smaller class in a split conference) should get an automatic qualifier.  The remainder teams (46 in 2A) would qualify from the power poll.  I would seed them all from the power poll with no guaranteed seed to the conference champion, runnerup, or third place as there is now.  First thing to do is ensure the power poll is not screwed up with the "adjustment."  

I understand what you're trying to say, but if you don't have a winning record how can you legitimately be considered the #2 seed for the entire western bracket of the playoffs???  Starmount's losses to ES, MA, WS, and Ashe are legit...they shouldn't have lost to EW or Forbush.  Win both of those games and no one has an argument - you're 7-4 with your only conference loss to 2A Ashe (who is 10-2 and moving on to Round 2 in the 2A playoffs).  You bring up the Forbush loss - Forbush is bad.  East Wilkes also isn't very good.  Plain and simple, a team with a losing record should never be on the "1 seed" line hosting a home playoff game.  It makes the entire system look like a farce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NWWatchdog said:

The problem with the split conferences isn't that they give automatic bids to each classification, it's HOW they seed them.  Look at the 1AA west bracket where a 5-6 Starmount team is seeded #2 overall only because they were the top 1A from their conference.  There needs to be some sort of rule in place that if you don't have a winning record you can't receive a #1 seed from the conference.  You can be an automatic qualifier, but not a #1 seed (which places you above teams with better records, including head-to-head wins).

I agree.  I will go as far as to say that winning your conference should only guarantee you a spot in the playoffs.  It will vary from sport to sport but some conferences are more loaded then others.  Just cause you win a watered down conference or are the best team of 2 in a split league should place you at the top of the pecking order for playoff seeding.  UCF has not lost a game in almost 2 years but has not even cracked the top 5 and is ranked behind teams who have 1-2 losses and will not win a conference title.  We want the best teams to be seeded the highest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NWWatchdog said:

I understand what you're trying to say, but if you don't have a winning record how can you legitimately be considered the #2 seed for the entire western bracket of the playoffs???  Starmount's losses to ES, MA, WS, and Ashe are legit...they shouldn't have lost to EW or Forbush.  Win both of those games and no one has an argument - you're 7-4 with your only conference loss to 2A Ashe (who is 10-2 and moving on to Round 2 in the 2A playoffs).  You bring up the Forbush loss - Forbush is bad.  East Wilkes also isn't very good.  Plain and simple, a team with a losing record should never be on the "1 seed" line hosting a home playoff game.  It makes the entire system look like a farce.

I agree they had two bad losses.

The coaches / schools voted on conference finish being the seeding mechanism.  Just to clarify, I thought the rule for seeding a conference champion as a one seed was they had to have a winning record.  Not sure if there is an exception for the smaller classification team.  (This is known as the South Caldwell rule.)  Does anyone know?  Looks like the teams that did not get a bye had winning records (6-5) but may have been in multiple way ties for conference runnerup and down finish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, btango said:

I agree they had two bad losses.

The coaches / schools voted on conference finish being the seeding mechanism.  Just to clarify, I thought the rule for seeding a conference champion as a one seed was they had to have a winning record.  Not sure if there is an exception for the smaller classification team.  (This is known as the South Caldwell rule.)  Does anyone know?  Looks like the teams that did not get a bye had winning records (6-5) but may have been in multiple way ties for conference runnerup and down finish.

 

To be seeded as a 1 from a split, you have to either be .500 or better overall OR finish in the top 3 in the conference.  So if you are in a split and finish 3rd overall with a 4-7 record for example, but are the highest in your classification, you could be seeded as a 1 in theory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LarryRandolph said:

 

To be seeded as a 1 from a split, you have to either be .500 or better overall OR finish in the top 3 in the conference.  So if you are in a split and finish 3rd overall with a 4-7 record for example, but are the highest in your classification, you could be seeded as a 1 in theory. 

Thank you, sir!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the possibility of North Rowan closing. I'd like to see a Yadkin Valley that looked like this with divisions to try and reduce travel:

 

West

Albemarle

North Stanly

South Stanly

South Davidson

 

East

Chatham Central

Chatham Charter

North Moore

Uwharrie Charter

 

 

For everything but football of course,

 

Play within division three times for 9 conference games and play across divisions once, alternating site each year to add 3 more conference games, which would make a total of 12 conference games.

 

Then for conference tournament play across divisions

E#1 vs. W #4

E#2 vs.  W#3

W#1 vs. E#4

W#2 vs. E#3

 

Then re-seed in second round based on overall standings and play it out from there.  

 

Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, LarryRandolph said:

With the possibility of North Rowan closing. I'd like to see a Yadkin Valley that looked like this with divisions to try and reduce travel:

 

West

Albemarle

North Stanly

South Stanly

South Davidson

 

East

Chatham Central

Chatham Charter

North Moore

Uwharrie Charter

 

 

For everything but football of course,

 

Play within division three times for 9 conference games and play across divisions once, alternating site each year to add 3 more conference games, which would make a total of 12 conference games.

 

Then for conference tournament play across divisions

E#1 vs. W #4

E#2 vs.  W#3

W#1 vs. E#4

W#2 vs. E#3

 

Then re-seed in second round based on overall standings and play it out from there.  

 

Just a thought.

Chatham Central will try to move to the Yadkin Valley for all sports and get out of that charter league for sports other than football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RD28327 said:

Chatham Central will try to move to the Yadkin Valley for all sports and get out of that charter league for sports other than football.

Makes some sense from their perspective.  Doubt many of those Charter schools have JV teams in many sports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, smashmouth5 said:

Burns is moving to 2A next year.  Great news for them.  

Yep I did not expect us to appeal to move down early but I’m glad we did. We will be in the Southwestern 2A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not do it like this?

 

1A=up to 500 students.

2A=501-1000

3A=1001-1500

4A=1501 and up 

 

Depending on sport, bracket could be different.

No more subdividing.

 Top 50% make playoffs using the current seeding criteria and round up to next even number.

So for 1A you have,  for example,  94 baseball playing teams so 94*.50=47.

47 teams get in, round up to nearest even number and you get 48.

Say for football you have only 68 teams that play football, 68*.50=34.

34 get in and bracket and apply byes as needed, so two 17 team brackets, in this case the 17/16 could do a play in game.

 

It should be based on top half in each sport get in.

 

I needs to mean something to make the playoffs.  

 

 

And maybe, only top 40% making play offs.  

 

I would even favor pre-determined sites like it used to be for everything but football.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LarryRandolph said:

Why not do it like this?

1A=up to 500 students.

2A=501-1000

3A=1001-1500

4A=1501 and up 

Depending on sport, bracket could be different.

No more subdividing.

 Top 50% make playoffs using the current seeding criteria and round up to next even number.

So for 1A you have,  for example,  94 baseball playing teams so 94*.50=47.

47 teams get in, round up to nearest even number and you get 48.

Say for football you have only 68 teams that play football, 68*.50=34.

34 get in and bracket and apply byes as needed, so two 17 team brackets, in this case the 17/16 could do a play in game.

It should be based on top half in each sport get in.

I needs to mean something to make the playoffs.  

And maybe, only top 40% making play offs.  

I would even favor pre-determined sites like it used to be for everything but football.

Based on these numbers about 40 football playing schools in 1A.  About 105 in 4A.

Do not like byes in football and definitely there will not be play off game holding up the season a week for a couple of teams to get in the playoffs.

I totally agree making the playoffs should be earned based on regular season performance which not only means the best record but who the opponent is, also.  

Predetermined sites would be ok with me but never should they go back to predetermined playoffs slots which was a big argument for more playoff teams and subdividing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, LarryRandolph said:

All good points.

We could also look at moving to 5 classifications, rather than 4.  That might help some of the issues.

It may do the reverse.  It has been looked st fir every realignment since the 1990’s an will be on the table fir this upcoming one..  Sounds good until you see it mapped out.  

This option was presented to the schools four years ago as a potential setup for the current alignment.  At all eight region meetings one of, if not the first question was, “will we still subdivide football?!?”  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×