DKC Playoff System Proposal

All data on these pages Copyright © 1998--2008 Digital Knight Communications, including lists. You may not republish or rebroadcast this information without express written communication from Digital Knight Communications.

Note: This system can be modified for any number of regions in a division. Just change the number of guaranteed berths to # of regions, leaving the number of at-large berths to be 16 - # of guaranteed berths.
Power points were used for the first time in Arizona 2A football in 2007. The only guarantee is that winners in each region would be guaranteed a playoff spot, leaving 11 spots open. 50 points per win, 5 points for each win by opponents if the opponents are same division or higher.

The argument against power points is very simple - they don't take into account relevant factors like schedule strength or opponent quality. Also, power points will reward teams in large regions for losses more than they reward wins by teams from small regions against quality opponents, regardless of the opponent's region or division. In other words, instead of a team making the playoffs based on how well it plays on the field, teams are given "extra credit" (5 points) for the way OTHER teams play. I believe this to be inherently unfair - and isn't the AIA supposed to be all about fairness?

Note that the playoff rules the AIA currently uses must be tweaked every two years to accommodate the division realignments and the wishes of the most vocal opponents.

In 2007, the 2A division breakdown was thus:

In theory, this works great, but in practice it's a nightmare - if your team resides in a strong region, you will get the benefit of those region members' wins. This practice is unfair to the teams whose division is weaker.

Consider this problem: in 2007, Camp Verde (4-6) makes the playoffs as a #14 seed (!!) over four teams with better records. In addition, the two teams it was seeded higher than ALSO had better records.

How was this possible? Camp Verde plays in the Central region where its fellow region members went a combined 30-17. Sanders Valley, one of those left off the list, was 6-4, but it plays in the North region, a region who has 2 more members, and whose fellow members went a combined 28-37 - two LESS wins than the North region's members without Camp Verde! Camp Verde was the beneficiary of the "bonus points" rule within the AIA's Power Rankings. And therein lies the other pitfall - Sanders Valley was PENALIZED for playing out of state opponents, a necessity since Sanders is on the reservation in Northern Arizona and plays longtime and tribal rivals every season. Only wins over AIA opponents gain "win" points, so a win over a New Mexico school gains a team zero, and all the wins by THAT team also gain zero.

It's not hard to add that up quickly - Camp Verde gained another 150 points versus Sanders Valley gaining less than 140 points. Camp Verde's final tally? 50.6 points versus Sanders Valley's 45.75. If I were Sanders Valley, I'd be up in arms right now, and rightly so.

The other schools Camp Verde beat out? Greyhills Academy, also a North region school, and also in the same boat as Sanders (5-5, but had 44.65 points), Phoenix Christian (5-5, 48.0625, though they knocked themselves out of the playoffs with a loss in the final week), and Miami (5-4, 44.375).

Also interesting to note is that Morenci (3-6) ended up with 46.375 points. How does a team with only 3 wins come only two spots away (#18 in the power points that year) from qualifying for the playoffs? Again, not a good scenario at all.

Lastly, note that the NCAA does not utilize power points for its Division I schools - why on earth would any self-respecting sports-governing body use power points? Maybe because they've already figured out what is laid out here - that such a system is not fair.

This proposal tries to ensure fairness while also allowing for quality teams to receive playoff berths. It guarantees a seeding of 1-4 (or 1-5) based on region champions - while team #2 from each region is also guaranteed a playoff spot, said team is NOT guaranteed any seeding other than below 5 (or 6).

Questions? Comments? Send email.

Notes:

  1. Rules are numbered in order of precendence. (Rule #2 takes precendence over Rule #7, for example.)
  2. "Ranked teams" is to be understood as using a mutually-agreed upon ranking system.
  3. Teams on probation or playing an "independent" or "JV" schedule are ineligible for this playoff.
Rules:
  1. In the event of a tie for any berth, the tiebreaker procedure is as follows: head-to-head, overall record, record vs. division (last 6 divisional games), common opponents, strength of schedule, net points (last 6 games regardless of division), coin flip.
  2. For a team to be eligible for playoffs, it must have won 50% or more of its games against AIA or comparable opponents. This means that games against JV or Juniors squads do not count toward a team's eligibility. However, games against out of state squads count fully.
  3. The region champion and 2nd place team as determined by region record shall automatically receive playoff berths. The remaining berths shall be considered at-large.
  4. The region champions shall be seeded 1-4 (or 1-5).
  5. No region shall send more than four teams in total, even if more than four qualify under all Rules.
  6. In the event that more than four teams qualify for playoff berths, the region shall send the two highest ranked teams that are not already the region champion and runner-up team, so long as there are open slots for all such teams.
  7. Any remaining team that has not been eliminated from consideration by the playoff Rules shall receive an at-large berth should any still be available.
  8. Any remaining berths shall be filled in order of the highest ranked teams not already been eliminated from consideration by the playoff Rules by comparing the teams' final ranks.
  9. Playoff seeding after the region champions shall be determined by the teams' final ranks. The higher seed shall always be considered the home team.
As an example, use the 2A 2007 season results to determine the qualifying teams: Use standard bracketing for 16 team playoff.

An example bracket is below for your viewing pleasure.









#1 Yuma Catholic










#16 Greyhills Academy










#8 Arizona Lutheran










#9 Northwest Christian










#5 St. Johns










#12 Pusch Ridge Christian










#4 Benson










#13 Sanders Valley










#3 Scottsdale Christian


2A State





Champion

#14 Bisbee










#6 Valley Christian










#11 Antelope










#7 Red Mesa










#10 Thatcher










#2 Hayden










#15 Tonopah Valley










Back to main DKC HS Ratings page