7 vs 10
8 vs 9. SK at Hendricken tomorrow
8 vs 9. SK at Hendricken tomorrow
-
-
anyone know the status from the meeting last night? are there two play in games? also how is the seeding? thanks.Comment
-
RIIL 2011 MetLife Boys Soccer Playoffs - Division I
(1)LaSalle
Gm 1: 11/5 3pm
at: LaSalle Academy
(8)SK/BH
(4)Barrington
Gm 2: 11/4 6pm
at: Barrington HS
(5)North Kingstown
(2)Central Falls
Gm 3: 11/5 1pm
at: Central Falls
(7)Cumberland
(3)Shea
Gm 4: 11/3 4pm
at: McKinnon Alves
(6)Portsmouth
Bracket Notes: South Kingstown at Bishop Hendricken 11/2/11 6pmComment
-
Interesting...thought there might have been a 7 vs 10 game. So clearly everyone over .500 qualifies and there seems to be some seperation between the last qualifier and the bubble team (EP), but it would have been much more appropriate to have the playoff qualification rules posted on the RIIL site. Not a EP parent/coach/player but I'd be a bit disappointed if I were them.Originally posted by Unregistered View PostComment
-
Not sure what you are referring to because EP finished at 39% so they didn't qualify.Comment
-
Therein lies the confusion with not having published playoff rules and qualifications. In any standings that use ties, you can't use winning percentage. A team that finishes at 7-8-3 can have a winning percentage of 7/15=0.467 or a winning percentage of 7/18=0.389. Based solely on the nomenclature "winning percentage" you would think the 7 wins out of 18 games would be appropriate. However, take the same example of a team that plays complete even for the year (6-6-6). This teams clearly finishes at 0.500. Same number of wins, losses and ties. Going by straight winning percentage 6/18, they would have a 0.333 winning percentage; that wouldn't be appropriate.Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
In the current playoff scoring qualification (win: 2 points, tie: 1 point), a 9-9-0 team would have the same number of playoff qualifying points as a 6-6-6 team. So if percentage was to be used based on who is "worthy" of being a playoff team, I would suggest it be based on the 6 wins / (6 wins + 6 loses). This would put EP at 0.467.
Frankly, I think it should have been done on the top 8, and neither SK or EP should be involved, but there's no published qualifications. If you're going to allow SK to participate, you should allow EP.Comment
-
S6ctg3
I agree with you that it should just be top 8. Why does SK get another chance? They didn't fall in the top 8 based on points (albeit only by 1 point), but they should not be in the playoffs.
However, there was a clear separateion between SK & EP by 4 points. I think this separation is too significant to allow EP into the playoffs. Just my random thoughts.Comment
-
Sounds like EP would have a legitimate gripe to me. As a #10 they should be playing #7 Cumberland in a preliminary round. Unless of course, it's getting too cold up Cumberland way and they opted out.Originally posted by Unregistered View PostComment
-
No way. Cumberland finished at 9-5-4 with 22 points & EP finished at 7-8-3 with 17 points. Why should EP get a shot at knocking Cumberland out of the playoffs that they won the right to participate in? That's just wrong. I don't agree with the SK/BH decision either. Top 8 is top 8 and that's it!Comment
-
The reason EP should have a shot, is the divisions and schedules are geographically based and not evenly distributed. Comparison of teams soley by the final TP is not fair in that schedules were only the same for teams within a division. The East division arguably had the strongest top end, the Southern Division was strongest top to bottom, and the North Division...well, they must have someone on the alignment board. ;)Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
Their is no clear seperator for the any of those teams in the low 20 TP range. The paradigm has been to take the top 8 or 10 based on some qualifications and then have a preliminary round for the bottom ranked teams. I do appreciate that Cumberland finished off quite strongly, but they still just squeaked in. Taking on the #10 ranked team in a play-in round shouldn't strike to much fear in a team expecting to win the state.Comment
-
In most cases - ties are converted to .5 loss and .5 win to calculate winning %. In the case above the (6-6-6) - they would end up with 9 wins against 18 games - .500%Originally posted by Unregistered View PostComment
-
Fair enough that makes sense, then EP with a 7-8-3 record would finish with an 8.5/18=0.472, higher than the stated 7/18=0.389.Originally posted by Unregistered View PostComment
-
Does anyone agree that the scoring system should be 3 points for a win and 1 point for a tie? It woudl certainly space out the points a bit more.Comment
-
I agree with 8 teams getting in thats how it should be no BS top 8 and thats it.Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
I also agree that EP got the short end of the stick when you use at divisional records in a 500% playoff format. EP's 500 is not Cumberlands 500. if you took away all teams second round of divisional games and only played 14 games I bet EP would be in. Im to lazy to do the math but it would change things and it would also make it clear cut.Comment
-
the divisions and schedules are geographically based and not evenly distributed.
Another reason to move to a single group in the Divisions and eliminate the sub-regions. Use the game savings for a true state championship playoff -- or schedule non-divisional rivalry/neighboring school games.Comment
Comment