Re: CIF Rankings 1-5

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Mens Message Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Makes too much ¢ on December 19, 2024 at 22:28:27:

In Reply to: Re: CIF Rankings 1-5 posted by Coach on December 18, 2024 at 05:50:56:

: : : : : : : : Where can I find the current CIF SS Top 10 Rankings for 1, D2, D3, D4 and D5

: : : : : : : There are no divisions this year. Seeding will be pretty fun once regular season is done.

: : : : : : Wow. that is nonsense. CIF will be able to pick and choose schools they favor. Politics at its worst.

: : : : CIF should check on the transfers and put those teams in D1 or D2. Should not allowed teams with more than 2 transfers play in D4 and D5
: : : : : Here is something to give an idea of what the playoffs will be, although this differs from what CIF will use (Colley and Peter Wolfe’s computer rankings will also be used to seed teams)

: : : : : Excuse the advertisements, best viewed on desktop:

: : : : : https://masseyratings.com/hsbb/ca/ratings

: : : : : The teams will be ranked 1-8 in Open, then every group of 32 teams below that (who qualified through playoffs/at-larges) will fill out the next 9 divisions. So 296 teams at most, but the at-large berths get tricky, just ask Girls’ Volleyball coaches. It may be beneficial to lose intentionally in the last week, more on that later

: : :
: : : In football you hear about tanking a game more I think because there are so few games and only 16 team divisions. But for basketball with the Margin of Victory and strength of schedule factors. If you lost to a really bad team it wouldnt count and if you lost to a team you might lose to anyways then the chances it drops you 32 spots to the next lower division are slim. And again because teams are ranked in order the next division of 32 teams are not much worse. You'd have to try and drop like 3 or 4 divisions to see a difference. At that point you probably dont think much of your team anyways if you are trying to lose 7/8 games to have a better chance to "win" in playoffs.

:
: : Agree with most all of that, but it's mainly the at-larges in the lower divisions who may benefit from tanking.

: : Imagine it is February 1st and your team is projected to be in 3A. If the rankings that week have your team behind 2-3 (or more) at-larges in their projected division, losing 1-2 games badly that week could give you a chance to drop 5-10 spots into the division below, where you could be first in line for an at-large.

: : The lower divisions receive fewer at-large bids, some possibly just one. So if you're in 3A and ranked #27th out of all potential playoff teams, and there are multiple at-larges ahead of you in 3A, winning in the final week probably won't help.

: : At-larges are chosen by the computer ranking alone, and go to the highest ranked teams in the division before the lower. Could be 3-4 each for 2AA and 2A, maybe 2-3 each for 3AA/A, and one each for the lowest four divisions. That's the tricky part, a 5A/5AA team may receive an at-large bid while a better program like Loyola is left out for being in the middle of 2AA, behind several at-large applicants.

: : (Just basing that off of volleyball brackets, the different placement of teams in basketball leagues may affect the number of auto bids and thus add/subtract from the available at-large spots)

: There should be about 288 auto qualifiers so that will only leave about 8 at large bids across all divisions. Previous years you'd have a few divisions with too many qualifiers and wild cards and that would mean more at large would get in. That won't be the case now. It's all based on the computers but would be very surprised if all those bids aren't given to the top 3/4 divisions.

I initially figured the at-larges would come from the highest divisions only, but the volleyball brackets showed otherwise. Chaminade volleyball was sent home while Division 10 had an at large team make playoffs.

I was told by a coach that CIF would try to limit the at-larges to one or two per division, I didn’t believe it until I saw the volleyball brackets. Seems like higher divisions should be rewarded? It would also solve the potential issue of tanking, to a degree.

Maybe teams should also be locked into their divisions with a week or two left in the season, with the final two weeks determining seeding only.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:

E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments: : : : : : : : : : Where can I find the current CIF SS Top 10 Rankings for 1, D2, D3, D4 and D5 : : : : : : : : There are no divisions this year. Seeding will be pretty fun once regular season is done. : : : : : : : Wow. that is nonsense. CIF will be able to pick and choose schools they favor. Politics at its worst. : : : : : CIF should check on the transfers and put those teams in D1 or D2. Should not allowed teams with more than 2 transfers play in D4 and D5 : : : : : : Here is something to give an idea of what the playoffs will be, although this differs from what CIF will use (Colley and Peter Wolfe’s computer rankings will also be used to seed teams) : : : : : : Excuse the advertisements, best viewed on desktop: : : : : : : https://masseyratings.com/hsbb/ca/ratings : : : : : : The teams will be ranked 1-8 in Open, then every group of 32 teams below that (who qualified through playoffs/at-larges) will fill out the next 9 divisions. So 296 teams at most, but the at-large berths get tricky, just ask Girls’ Volleyball coaches. It may be beneficial to lose intentionally in the last week, more on that later : : : : : : : : In football you hear about tanking a game more I think because there are so few games and only 16 team divisions. But for basketball with the Margin of Victory and strength of schedule factors. If you lost to a really bad team it wouldnt count and if you lost to a team you might lose to anyways then the chances it drops you 32 spots to the next lower division are slim. And again because teams are ranked in order the next division of 32 teams are not much worse. You'd have to try and drop like 3 or 4 divisions to see a difference. At that point you probably dont think much of your team anyways if you are trying to lose 7/8 games to have a better chance to "win" in playoffs. : : : : : Agree with most all of that, but it's mainly the at-larges in the lower divisions who may benefit from tanking. : : : Imagine it is February 1st and your team is projected to be in 3A. If the rankings that week have your team behind 2-3 (or more) at-larges in their projected division, losing 1-2 games badly that week could give you a chance to drop 5-10 spots into the division below, where you could be first in line for an at-large. : : : The lower divisions receive fewer at-large bids, some possibly just one. So if you're in 3A and ranked #27th out of all potential playoff teams, and there are multiple at-larges ahead of you in 3A, winning in the final week probably won't help. : : : At-larges are chosen by the computer ranking alone, and go to the highest ranked teams in the division before the lower. Could be 3-4 each for 2AA and 2A, maybe 2-3 each for 3AA/A, and one each for the lowest four divisions. That's the tricky part, a 5A/5AA team may receive an at-large bid while a better program like Loyola is left out for being in the middle of 2AA, behind several at-large applicants. : : : (Just basing that off of volleyball brackets, the different placement of teams in basketball leagues may affect the number of auto bids and thus add/subtract from the available at-large spots) : : There should be about 288 auto qualifiers so that will only leave about 8 at large bids across all divisions. Previous years you'd have a few divisions with too many qualifiers and wild cards and that would mean more at large would get in. That won't be the case now. It's all based on the computers but would be very surprised if all those bids aren't given to the top 3/4 divisions. : I initially figured the at-larges would come from the highest divisions only, but the volleyball brackets showed otherwise. Chaminade volleyball was sent home while Division 10 had an at large team make playoffs. : I was told by a coach that CIF would try to limit the at-larges to one or two per division, I didn’t believe it until I saw the volleyball brackets. Seems like higher divisions should be rewarded? It would also solve the potential issue of tanking, to a degree. : Maybe teams should also be locked into their divisions with a week or two left in the season, with the final two weeks determining seeding only.

Optional Link URL:

Link Title:

Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Mens Message Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:	: : : : : : : : : Where can I find the current CIF SS Top 10 Rankings for 1, D2, D3, D4 and D5 : : : : : : : : There are no divisions this year. Seeding will be pretty fun once regular season is done. : : : : : : : Wow. that is nonsense. CIF will be able to pick and choose schools they favor. Politics at its worst. : : : : : CIF should check on the transfers and put those teams in D1 or D2. Should not allowed teams with more than 2 transfers play in D4 and D5 : : : : : : Here is something to give an idea of what the playoffs will be, although this differs from what CIF will use (Colley and Peter Wolfe’s computer rankings will also be used to seed teams) : : : : : : Excuse the advertisements, best viewed on desktop: : : : : : : https://masseyratings.com/hsbb/ca/ratings : : : : : : The teams will be ranked 1-8 in Open, then every group of 32 teams below that (who qualified through playoffs/at-larges) will fill out the next 9 divisions. So 296 teams at most, but the at-large berths get tricky, just ask Girls’ Volleyball coaches. It may be beneficial to lose intentionally in the last week, more on that later : : : : : : : : In football you hear about tanking a game more I think because there are so few games and only 16 team divisions. But for basketball with the Margin of Victory and strength of schedule factors. If you lost to a really bad team it wouldnt count and if you lost to a team you might lose to anyways then the chances it drops you 32 spots to the next lower division are slim. And again because teams are ranked in order the next division of 32 teams are not much worse. You'd have to try and drop like 3 or 4 divisions to see a difference. At that point you probably dont think much of your team anyways if you are trying to lose 7/8 games to have a better chance to "win" in playoffs. : : : : : Agree with most all of that, but it's mainly the at-larges in the lower divisions who may benefit from tanking. : : : Imagine it is February 1st and your team is projected to be in 3A. If the rankings that week have your team behind 2-3 (or more) at-larges in their projected division, losing 1-2 games badly that week could give you a chance to drop 5-10 spots into the division below, where you could be first in line for an at-large. : : : The lower divisions receive fewer at-large bids, some possibly just one. So if you're in 3A and ranked #27th out of all potential playoff teams, and there are multiple at-larges ahead of you in 3A, winning in the final week probably won't help. : : : At-larges are chosen by the computer ranking alone, and go to the highest ranked teams in the division before the lower. Could be 3-4 each for 2AA and 2A, maybe 2-3 each for 3AA/A, and one each for the lowest four divisions. That's the tricky part, a 5A/5AA team may receive an at-large bid while a better program like Loyola is left out for being in the middle of 2AA, behind several at-large applicants. : : : (Just basing that off of volleyball brackets, the different placement of teams in basketball leagues may affect the number of auto bids and thus add/subtract from the available at-large spots) : : There should be about 288 auto qualifiers so that will only leave about 8 at large bids across all divisions. Previous years you'd have a few divisions with too many qualifiers and wild cards and that would mean more at large would get in. That won't be the case now. It's all based on the computers but would be very surprised if all those bids aren't given to the top 3/4 divisions. : I initially figured the at-larges would come from the highest divisions only, but the volleyball brackets showed otherwise. Chaminade volleyball was sent home while Division 10 had an at large team make playoffs. : I was told by a coach that CIF would try to limit the at-larges to one or two per division, I didn’t believe it until I saw the volleyball brackets. Seems like higher divisions should be rewarded? It would also solve the potential issue of tanking, to a degree. : Maybe teams should also be locked into their divisions with a week or two left in the season, with the final two weeks determining seeding only.

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: