seedings

[Nostalgic Nerd]

Sorry, for whatever reason I couldn't find the original post so I just made a new one.

Notice how during the tv coverage every time an announcer would say the way seedings are set up they benefit somebody, or they apply an opinion that ends up having its own bias. The reason you either seed all the teams (yes, that has its controversy too) or none of them is so no favoritism is allowed. They rate four, but no matter how kind its intentions it only partially does the job. Some team on the bottom four can or cannot benefit because they are not rated. If you're going to seed, teams rated at the top benefit because they've earned that position by having the best combination of record and schedule toughness. There's a whole point to being a Roseau who was undefeated going in. But you have to be consistent. Not because you hope the Top 4 teams meet in semis, and not because you hope upsets occur. None of that is objective. It's subjective, and it cannot be allowed. Seed, and the #1 team earned that spot because they were the best in regular season. Or seed none and have seeding matchups alternate yearly like in the past. All or nothing because a partial has a bias even if it's intentions weren't meant as bias. I know it's a difficult issue, but some of the announcers intentions are wrong for they favor in bias. And the bias doesn't matter. If you do full seeds, it's by what the team earned in regular season victories. Not on the hope of having certain outcomes. Yadda, yadda...

[Nostalgic Nerd]

However of course the seeding committee is an opinion too. Some years will be neck-and-neck, and oh boy! Tough! Or you do the random section alignments. If you seed, you do so because there's a reward for the team with the best record. They did something more special than any other team. But the old lottery works to for opinion doesn't even enter into the argument. Sections matchups just rotate.

[Cabela10]

Some team on the bottom four can or cannot benefit because they are not rated.

The bottom teams can benefit from this system. If a solid team can knock off the #1 seed in the first round, that means that team pretty much becomes the #1 seed. When you get to the state tournament, the teams should be evenly matched up, talentwise, except if your team name is Lakeville South.

[Nostalgic Nerd]

Some team on the bottom four can or cannot benefit because they are not rated.

The bottom teams can benefit from this system. If a solid team can knock off the #1 seed in the first round, that means that team pretty much becomes the #1 seed. When you get to the state tournament, the teams should be evenly matched up, talentwise, except if your team name is Lakeville South.

The idea with seedings isn't to evenly match up anyone. It's to benefit those with the best record for they earned that seeding. No other expectation is included for it hints some type of bias/favoritism. But maybe you weren't trying to say that.

[Cabela10]

Not what I was trying to say. I am trying to say, that if you make it to the state tournament, there should be 5 or 6 teams that are very competitive with eachother. So if you are the 5th or 6th potential best team in the tournament, you have a good shot of knocking off the so-called #1 ranked team, and carry on that rank if you beat them. The teams that don't get rank can benefit from this system as well. By being the underdog, which is a very small underdog at that.

[Nostalgic Nerd]

Not what I was trying to say. I am trying to say, that if you make it to the state tournament, there should be 5 or 6 teams that are very competitive with eachother. So if you are the 5th or 6th potential best team in the tournament, you have a good shot of knocking off the so-called #1 ranked team, and carry on that rank if you beat them. The teams that don't get rank can benefit from this system as well. By being the underdog, which is a very small underdog at that.

Yeah, like you said before, those bottom four are lotteried and can lose by drawing a #1, or win by drawing a #4. I don't believe that should even enter into the discussion. They also are scrutinized by record/schedule. Why Roseau faced Blaine, instead of Lakeville, I don't get.

[Cabela10]

Seed the top 2 and let the others fall into place.

[goldy313]

After watching Hill, Roseau would have had a much tougher time with South than they did with Blaine. Roseau would have won, but size gives them fits and South was big and strong. How you matchup matters more than percieved good team vs. bad team. Hill was seeded 4 and may have benefiited more from being 4 than they would have if they were 2 or 3.

[elliott70]

ttt