Photo contributed by Larry B. Littlejohn/ The Gaffney LedgerPublished: Oct. 23, 2009--The Gaffney Ledger
NOTE: At the time this editorial was written, Region V-AAAA was the only conference which was represented by four teams in the classification's postseason, leaving seven at-large bids. Since realignment took effect this year, Class AAAA's four programs from Region I and Region II qualify for the playoffs, leaving six at-large spots.
In addition, Phil Strickland was preparing Gaffney for another deep run through the postseason instead of taking a Newberry team on the road for the first round of the Class AA playoffs.
Even now, I remain a critic of the classification's method of deciding a champion -- or in its case, two. Now as the Class AAAA postseason prepares to begin, here is my argument for a system that does less crunching numbers, instead settling things out on the field.
Without a doubt, those who constructed the web called the Bowl Championship Series knew exactly what they were doing.
Every year before the football season starts, prognosticators look into their proverbial crystal ball hoping to predict the sport’s next champion. In no sport are the opinions of sports writers, coaches and other pundits (including computers) more important than college football, specifically the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS), where their thoughts actually hold weight — in fact, they go a long way toward deciding who’ll raise the trophy at season’s end.
And we all know that anything built or created by man can and often does fail.
The goal of the BCS was to create a true national champion.
Has it lived up to its mission statement? Not at all. True, in some years the BCS has gotten lucky, being bailed out by matchups like Miami (Fla.) - Ohio State in the 2002 Fiesta Bowl, or the Texas-Southern California classic at the Rose Bowl in 2006. But for each accomplishment, the next two years have created more turmoil than doing what the system was supposed to, and that is find the best team in the land.
However, BCS commissioners are likely laughing the controversy right to the bank, knowing despite the way us fans feel that we will still sell out their venues for such high-profile contests.
On a more local level, we have our own problem as the South Carolina High School League (SCHSL) does its own job of “crunching numbers.”
Through the years, I’ve been lucky to be on the field for several state championship games; my first at Legion Field in Birmingham, Ala., in 1996, one in Georgia, and of course, several at Williams-Brice Stadium in Columbia.
Walking onto the field for the contests in Alabama and Georgia, I knew these were the best teams the state had to offer. In each case, the schools beat out dozens of others in their half of the state for the right to play for a championships.
Here in the Palmetto State, you get the sense the best two teams in the state have arrived in Columbia (or sometimes Clemson) for the Class 3A & 2A title tilts, knowing that each of them have won their respective portions of the state — whether it be Upper State or Lower State.
A lot of people in-state, and likely many others outside of South Carolina, do not understand why we have two divisions that crown a champion for Class 4A. Furthermore, I do not understand the need for a points system.
Creating two divisions in Class 4A does little to figure out who the true champion is in what’s supposed to be this state’s elite level of high school football. To me, it’s almost like sharing; and championships are earned by one team, not two.
It doesn’t happen in basketball, baseball or softball, where one team walks away as champion.
Currently, Class 4A schools play 11 weeks of football, with 32 teams being invited to the postseason. Schools are seeded according to a points system devised by the SCHSL, which does reward winning teams, but also the effort of a program to schedule top-level competition.
Region champions and runners-up are awarded with home games the first round of the playoffs, with the third seed in each of Class 4A’s eight regions also earning a postseason berth (with the exception of Region V, which takes four teams due to its size). The final seven slots are decided by the points system.
From there, the schools are divided — the largest 16 to Division I, the smaller 16 to Division II.
Gaffney head coach Phil Strickland should be applauded for scheduling such opponents like Dorman, Greenville, Byrnes and others. Such foresight has enabled the Indians to rack up points whether they win or lose, every one of which come in handy at playoff time.
If you think I’m simply trying to stir the pot a little bit, you’re entitled to your opinion. But I’m simply not a fan of this points system.
As I said earlier, I believe the two best teams from their respective half of the state should clash at the end of season for the championship. In my opinion, that’s what makes regional rivalries like that between Gaffney and Summerville so special; usually playing in the title game, the matchup is one that fans of both teams look forward to and often expect.
But the points system puts matchups between the Upper State’s best against the Lower State’s elite team in danger each year. Scrapping the current playoff system would be a step in the right direction. Here’s what I would do:
— Make the Class 4A schedule 10 games, similar to that of all other classifications. This would allow the SCHSL to continue inviting 32 teams to the playoffs, with the first week of the playoffs beginning week 11, the final week of play for 4A schools.
— Invite the top 4 teams from each region. The top two seeds earn playoff berths, with the Nos. 3 and 4 teams going on the road the first round. From there, home teams will be determined upon their record during the season, or in the case of a tie-breaker, a coin flip.
Yes, at times you would have a team with an awful record fall through the cracks, but for the most part fans are getting what they want — competitive football.
The system has been pretty beneficial to states like Alabama and Georgia, where traditional powers reign supreme. With schools meeting in the playoffs on a yearly basis, rivalries decades long have been built, with fans and players knowing before the season what type of road they will have on the way to a title.
It’s probably wishful thinking on my part, but I’m all for championships being decided on the field. We’re already a society dependent on technology and computers are already necessary in most facets of our lives.
Let’s hope they don’t take football too.
.jpg)
0 comments:
Post a Comment