heimer wrote:I had the seeding procedure explained to me yesterday.
The coaches are sent a ballot of the other seven teams (not yours) and you rank them 1 through 7.
One coach from the east seeded Kindred 2nd, two others see them 3rd.
That would mean the west coaches, in an attempt to angle for a 4 or 5, block ranked Kindred 7th, knowing they were a threat.
Lionsfan, Bison06, parents from Hettinger that took out loans for gas, they can all say what they want. There was collusion in the seeding process, pure and simple.
This system needs fixing. The NDHSAA should assign a committee of 5 Class A coaches to seed the B. Bring the finished in to make the case to the committee, and let the committee make the final choice.
Its clear those with skin in the game chose themselves over the process.
Not surprising. That's why we don't have three classes.
scc wrote:As long as we're getting exciting championship games, things will be status quo.
heimer wrote:I had the seeding procedure explained to me yesterday.
One coach from the east seeded Kindred 2nd, two others see them 3rd.
Bisonguy06 wrote:In the seeding process, the best and worst rankings are dropped. If your intel is correct, the #2 ranking given to Kindred was an outlier that wouldn’t have counted in its favor.
Very possible that the remaining coaches, having not seen Kindred, left Kindred outside the top five based on record alone.
Region champs would have roughly 12 hours after winning their championship game to “collude” before sending in seeding.
vikingman wrote:I wouldn't say that Kindred is 'definitely' the best team in the tournament. Yes, they won it, but with two 2-point victories (and one of those wins against the #14th ranked team in the state), I don't know that they would win it if they played it over again this week.
woodchuck10 wrote:The seeding before state is flawed. Doesn’t take into account what you had to get there. We should seed the regions 1-8 before regions start. Take the top 4 QRF or another formula before regionals and seed or rank the Regions and bracket them that way.
Using the boys right now as an example:
Region 1 - 345.4
Region 2 - 387.4
Region 3 - 312.4
Region 4 - 354.7
Region 5 - 322.4
Region 6 - 361.6
Region 7 - 342
Region 8 - 334.4
#1 Region 2 champ vs #8 Region 3 champ
#4 Region 1 champ vs #5 Region 7 champ
#2 Region 6 champ vs #7 Region 5 champ
#3 Region 4 champ vs #6 Region 8 champ
Now on Thursday night you know who you play when you play after winning the region.
Use some kind of formula, QRF or the like. Stop expecting coaches to rank teams they haven’t seen all year. Rank the regions not the teams that qualify.
sideliner wrote:I think you could say that about any team in the tournament but they did win every game. I don't know why you would try to diminish what they accomplished. # 14th in the state really?
woodchuck10 wrote:The seeding before state is flawed. Doesn’t take into account what you had to get there. We should seed the regions 1-8 before regions start. Take the top 4 QRF or another formula before regionals and seed or rank the Regions and bracket them that way.
Stop expecting coaches to rank teams they haven’t seen all year. Rank the regions not the teams that qualify.
vikingman wrote:sideliner wrote:I think you could say that about any team in the tournament but they did win every game. I don't know why you would try to diminish what they accomplished. # 14th in the state really?
Was just disagreeing with the wording of the poster who said Kindred was 'Definitely' (i.e. 'clearly') the best team at state. Kindred won it to be sure, but they certainly didn't dominate the field.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests