Jump to content

2023 CIF SS playoffs


Bodysurf

Recommended Posts

If the CiFSS divisions were based on Massey instead of CalPreps:

1. Mater Dei

2. St. John Bosco

3. Centennial

4. Sierra Canyon

5. Orange Lutheran

6. Los Alamitos

7. JSerra

8. Santa Margarita

---

9. Mission Viejo

10. San Clemente

11. Servite

12. Rancho Cucamonga

13. Serra Gardena

14. Long Beach Poly

 

 

 

Screenshot_20231029-214244.thumb.png.b26acaab56df041ec17e6c8f199ef492.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BB bos said:

So some arbitrary decision has been made that the top 15<< in said poll automatically make the playoffs. 

Which is the only explanation why all Trinity teams are in the playoffs regardless of record.

That's not how it works. Where did you get the top 15 from? Playoff eligibility and which division teams are placed into is covered in the CIFSS Playoff Bulletin.

Leagues still have Automatic Qualifiers. The Trinity League has 6 teams so they have 3 Automatic Qualifiers (St. John Bosco #1, Mater Dei #2, JSerra #3). If you are not an Automatic Qualifier you can be considered for an At-Large Selection. In order to qualify as an At-Large Selection a team must be at least .500. Orange Lutheran (Trinity #4), Servite (Trinity #5) and Santa Margarita (Trinity #6) all finished with a record of 5-5 so they are eligible as an At-Large Selection.

Now that we've established how each team in the Trinity is eligible to make the playoffs, there's the matter of which Division they are placed into. This is also covered in the CIFSS Playoff Bulletin below:

 

image.thumb.png.397867395dd386651501cb2153ddf0b4.png

 

 

image.thumb.png.938b2a911225778308cba1700cebe8e7.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, dntn31 said:

If the CiFSS divisions were based on Massey instead of CalPreps:

1. Mater Dei

2. St. John Bosco

3. Centennial

4. Sierra Canyon

5. Orange Lutheran

6. Los Alamitos

7. JSerra

8. Santa Margarita

---

9. Mission Viejo

10. San Clemente

11. Servite

12. Rancho Cucamonga

13. Serra Gardena

14. Long Beach Poly

 

 

 

Screenshot_20231029-214244.thumb.png.b26acaab56df041ec17e6c8f199ef492.png

These are hella different than calpreps. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that it's 8 teams 6 privates and 2 publics lol I mean we might as well separate it at this point. San Clemente has no chance in hell of beating Bosco and Cen10 has a slim chance in hell of beating them in the semis. Maybe next year it will need to be 7 privates and 1 public because change is definitely needed with this system. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SoCalFball said:

The fact that it's 8 teams 6 privates and 2 publics lol I mean we might as well separate it at this point. San Clemente has no chance in hell of beating Bosco and Cen10 has a slim chance in hell of beating them in the semis. Maybe next year it will need to be 7 privates and 1 public because change is definitely needed with this system. 

4 teams is all it should be.  6 if they want to give the top 2 byes

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, RedZone said:

Sierra Canyon has LOTS of big time football players......more than people realize.

The only thing interesting about these playoffs is can Canyon hang and make some legit noise.

They're like SJB was in the 90s and 00s. They have the Athletes to play with top programs,  but they lack the lineman to play with Bosco and MD.

Bosco didn't have the lineman to play with Loyola and Mater Dei prior to Negro.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/30/2023 at 12:46 AM, dntn31 said:

If the CiFSS divisions were based on Massey instead of CalPreps:

1. Mater Dei

2. St. John Bosco

3. Centennial

4. Sierra Canyon

5. Orange Lutheran

6. Los Alamitos

7. JSerra

8. Santa Margarita

---

9. Mission Viejo

10. San Clemente

11. Servite

12. Rancho Cucamonga

13. Serra Gardena

14. Long Beach Poly

All you've proven here is that Massey *also* weighs SOS far above what's reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

If it was only about competitive equity then why do they have the Open Bowl game?

2 distinct entities. I used "CIF" for brevity, when I should have said "the CIF Southern Section" and its commissioner want competitive equity. The CIFSS has nothing to do with the bowl games, that's CIF State.

That said, what about the Open Bowl game is at odds with competitive equity? They are attempting to have the best eligible team in the North play the best eligible team in the South.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

This is just a reflection on Poly's league schedule and nothing more.

Yep, you understood the assignment. Just like the Texas teams, going 9-0 against a bunch of slappies and losing to the only good team you play doesn't make you a good team by virtue of your 9-1 record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dntn31 said:

That said, what about the Open Bowl game is at odds with competitive equity? They are attempting to have the best eligible team in the North play the best eligible team in the South.

The games have been massive blowouts. You hand-waved this current crappy system because the games are "more competitive" than previous iterations. But the Open Bowl has pretty much never been competitive. At least in recent years.

The best eligible team in the North isn't close to the best one in the South. The point of the Open Bowl certainly isn't competitive equity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dntn31 said:

Yep, you understood the assignment. Just like the Texas teams, going 9-0 against a bunch of slappies and losing to the only good team you play doesn't make you a good team by virtue of your 9-1 record.

At the same time, going 5-5 as a Trinity League team *also* doesn't make you a good team by virtue of osmosis. 

But that seems to be what you and others say here on a regular basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

The games have been massive blowouts. You hand-waved this current crappy system because the games are "more competitive" than previous iterations. But the Open Bowl has pretty much never been competitive. At least in recent years.

The best eligible team in the North isn't close to the best one in the South. The point of the Open Bowl certainly isn't competitive equity.

I was SPECIFICALLY talking about the CIFSS divisional playoffs when I said they were more competitive than under the old system. That is a fact. Then you come in here and change the subject to the Open Bowl Game and try to put words in my mouth.

I know that attempting to implement a system where the having the best teams in the state play each other in the playoffs is a foreign and frightening concept for Floridians, so your fixation on that is understandable.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...