With the expanded playoffs is it time to use computer seeding?

[ClownBaby]

I noticed on the IHSA girls flag football page they are projecting seeds based off of computer rankings which don't go in order of best record. The expanded playoffs were supposed to help with scheduling but now teams are taking forfeits to help protect seeds, would a better system be to use wins and playoff points to determine the field then use computer rankings to build the brackets. It would incentivize teams to play tougher schedules knowing that a 4-5 schedule with high-quality wins and losses is worth more than 6-3 schedule with no quality wins.

Girls Flag Football Computer Seeding - IHSA

 

[sporthog_9er]

I believe volleyball is doing this too with maxpreps. Baseball and softball are supposed to follow soon. I think it is inevitable. Issue is making sure maxpreps is up to date (which isn't hard). It does take into account strength of schedule, which is a plus.

 

[1A Football Guy]

I noticed on the IHSA girls flag football page they are projecting seeds based off of computer rankings which don't go in order of best record. The expanded playoffs were supposed to help with scheduling but now teams are taking forfeits to help protect seeds, would a better system be to use wins and playoff points to determine the field then use computer rankings to build the brackets. It would incentivize teams to play tougher schedules knowing that a 4-5 schedule with high-quality wins and losses is worth more than 6-3 schedule with no quality wins.

Girls Flag Football Computer Seeding - IHSA

For the love of god USE HSRatings

 

[Cross Bones]

Terrible idea. A team would get more seeding credit for playing Lena Winslow than Benet.

 

[jha618]

I noticed on the IHSA girls flag football page they are projecting seeds based off of computer rankings which don't go in order of best record. The expanded playoffs were supposed to help with scheduling but now teams are taking forfeits to help protect seeds, would a better system be to use wins and playoff points to determine the field then use computer rankings to build the brackets. It would incentivize teams to play tougher schedules knowing that a 4-5 schedule with high-quality wins and losses is worth more than 6-3 schedule with no quality wins.

Girls Flag Football Computer Seeding - IHSA

I think they need to add some type of other metric to balance out the current system they use.

 

[PowerI66]

Much more data to use in those other sports

 

[AlabamaTimberwolf]

I noticed on the IHSA girls flag football page they are projecting seeds based off of computer rankings which don't go in order of best record. The expanded playoffs were supposed to help with scheduling but now teams are taking forfeits to help protect seeds, would a better system be to use wins and playoff points to determine the field then use computer rankings to build the brackets. It would incentivize teams to play tougher schedules knowing that a 4-5 schedule with high-quality wins and losses is worth more than 6-3 schedule with no quality wins.

Girls Flag Football Computer Seeding - IHSA

I shudder with flashbacks from the old BCS days in College football.... Computers are not perfect...

 

[SouthofI80Fan]

Once teams qualify, use an RPI rating system...(Wins x 1) + (Opponent Wins x .50) + (Defeated Opponent Wins x .75)

 

[SmallSchoolFan]

Once teams qualify, use an RPI rating system...(Wins x 1) + (Opponent Wins x .50) + (Defeated Opponent Wins x .75)

This doesnt fix closed conferences. The data points in RPI's only hold more value with more total games and against non-conference.

Similar argument with the current seeding process, ie. weak conferences with 9-0 teams and end up #1, and losing by 50+.

I'd argue more for strength of schedule, margin of victory, etc.. that are included in MaxPreps (which is also using Massey). There should be no historical component. New year, new data.

 

[Wassup13_rivals219252]

So many teams in the playoffs this year is making this playoff year just one big mess.

 

[4Afan]

So many teams in the playoffs this year is making this playoff year just one big mess.

Not really, it's the same process except more teams get added from the list of teams that wouldn't have made it in previous years. I'm not a fan, but it doesn't make it any harder to determine the teams or seeding.

 

[4Afan]

Why are we looking for ways to make things more complicated? We argue about plenty around here, why do you want to add subjective playoff seeding to the mix?

Computer rankings are used in other states and I could argue they do have their merit, but they're also not perfect. Using the current system, name a team that did not win a title based solely on the seed they got. No matter what system you use there will be blowouts throughout the playoffs, but currently in 7A and 8A the cream tends to rise to the top and the best teams end up playing on Thanksgiving weekend. Classes 1A-6A is a different story, but that's a north/south thing rather than seeding.

Seed the CPS teams at the bottom of their respective classes regardless of their records because that's basically what most of you are saying you want without saying it. All but 2-3 will still lose in the first round and the other teams continue to compete as they always have. So what's the point in changing the entire system?

Right now both Massey and the Rivals composite have Morris as the #9 team overall in the state, well above both Rochester and Montini. I'm the biggest Redskins fan there is, but I can still be objective and recognize they're not a top 10 team overall in the state. Is that the type of system you want to use to determine playoff seedings? And before some of you say it should be a mix between computers and humans, just stop right there. This is HS football and some of you get too excited watching the CFP shows when the college rankings get released and think that's how HS should work too.

In other sports the regional seeding is done weeks before the season ends and that wouldn't work for football, plus a lot of those coaches put minimal to no effort into their regional seedings. So no need to go down that road.

Here's the link to MaxPreps current 8A rankings. Do any of you 8A followers believe that a 3-4 Barrington or Naperville Central is a top 10 team in the class and should he seeded as such?

Division 8A Football (2026) Rankings

MaxPreps rankings for Division 8A football (2026). Every high school football team in the nation is ranked. Find out where your teams stands...

www.maxpreps.com

 

[Cross Bones]

Why are we looking for ways to make things more complicated? We argue about plenty around here, why do you want to add subjective playoff seeding to the mix?

Computer rankings are used in other states and I could argue they do have their merit, but they're also not perfect. Using the current system, name a team that did not win a title based solely on the seed they got. No matter what system you use there will be blowouts throughout the playoffs, but currently in 7A and 8A the cream tends to rise to the top and the best teams end up playing on Thanksgiving weekend. Classes 1A-6A is a different story, but that's a north/south thing rather than seeding.

Seed the CPS teams at the bottom of their respective classes regardless of their records because that's basically what most of you are saying you want without saying it. All but 2-3 will still lose in the first round and the other teams continue to compete as they always have. So what's the point in changing the entire system?

Right now both Massey and the Rivals composite have Morris as the #9 team overall in the state, well above both Rochester and Montini. I'm the biggest Redskins fan there is, but I can still be objective and recognize they're not a top 10 team overall in the state. Is that the type of system you want to use to determine playoff seedings? And before some of you say it should be a mix between computers and humans, just stop right there. This is HS football and some of you get too excited watching the CFP shows when the college rankings get released and think that's how HS should work too.

In other sports the regional seeding is done weeks before the season ends and that wouldn't work for football, plus a lot of those coaches put minimal to no effort into their regional seedings. So no need to go down that road.

Here's the link to MaxPreps current 8A rankings. Do any of you 8A followers believe that a 3-4 Barrington or Naperville Central is a top 10 team in the class and should he seeded as such?

Division 8A Football (2026) Rankings

MaxPreps rankings for Division 8A football (2026). Every high school football team in the nation is ranked. Find out where your teams stands...

www.maxpreps.com

Cooked

 

[SiuCubFan8]

I'll beat a dead horse but they have the top two teams in 5A that are not even in 5A. And it's not an "enrollment bubble" issue, they are success factored into 6A, they are 6A........done deal. If you are going to fancy yourself a computer ranking system, get the correct input data.

 

[Wassup13_rivals219252]

Not really, it's the same process except more teams get added from the list of teams that wouldn't have made it in previous years. I'm not a fan, but it doesn't make it any harder to determine the teams or seeding.

I am just saying now you have 3 or 4 weeks of playoff football which does not have to be played and wasting a month of football.

Go back to 32 teams per bracket. Put the rest of the teams in their own NIT Tournament and save us from watching blowout football for 3 or 4 weeks in the playoffs!

 

[SiuCubFan8]

I am just saying now you have 3 or 4 weeks of playoff football which does not have to be played and wasting a month of football.

Go back to 32 teams per bracket. Put the rest of the teams in their own NIT Tournament and save us from watching blowout football for 3 or 4 weeks in the playoffs!

What are you talking about? 3 or 4 weeks of playoff football that does not have to be played?

There is one extra "round" this year compared to previous years. It is essentially a play in round. After the "new round" you are back to your 32 team bracket. Pretend the play in round doesn't exist, do something else that weekend and then you get your precious 32 team per bracket.

 

[4Afan]

I am just saying now you have 3 or 4 weeks of playoff football which does not have to be played and wasting a month of football.

Go back to 32 teams per bracket. Put the rest of the teams in their own NIT Tournament and save us from watching blowout football for 3 or 4 weeks in the playoffs!

One, it's just one extra week of games.

 

[SmallSchoolFan]

I'll beat a dead horse but they have the top two teams in 5A that are not even in 5A. And it's not an "enrollment bubble" issue, they are success factored into 6A, they are 6A........done deal. If you are going to fancy yourself a computer ranking system, get the correct input data.

IHSA - Illinois High School Association

The official site for the Illinois High School Association, providing schedules, scores, and news for high school sports in Illinois.

www.ihsa.org

 

[SiuCubFan8]

IHSA - Illinois High School Association

The official site for the Illinois High School Association, providing schedules, scores, and news for high school sports in Illinois.

www.ihsa.org

Interesting....seems through IHSA it is correct but through maxpreps it is incorrect.

 

[mikeywoj]

So they tried this with boys volleyball as a pilot this past spring and it was...interesting. Example, a team went undefeated in conference play but those were the only games it played, no non-cons. So it got the 2 seed in the sectional, while teams that had more challenging schedules (i.e. more losses), finished considerably lower because of their record.

Boys soccer used it this fall and seems like they may have gotten rid of the bugs, or at least most of them. IHSA added the seed predictor for every sport, but it's just a small number of them using it so far.

 

[SmallSchoolFan]

Interesting....seems through IHSA it is correct but through maxpreps it is incorrect.

View attachment 1472916

I dont think MaxPreps has things like enrollments or classification cut offs. I'm guessing someone is keying / changing it..... sounds painful.

 

[SmallSchoolFan]

So they tried this with boys volleyball as a pilot this past spring and it was...interesting. Example, a team went undefeated in conference play but those were the only games it played, no non-cons. So it got the 2 seed in the sectional, while teams that had more challenging schedules (i.e. more losses), finished considerably lower because of their record.

Boys soccer used it this fall and seems like they may have gotten rid of the bugs, or at least most of them. IHSA added the seed predictor for every sport, but it's just a small number of them using it so far.

Boys Volleyball used the RPI Model RPI = (0.40 x Win%) + (0.40 x OWP) + (0.20 x OOWP), Soccer is using Rankings.

 

[Wassup13_rivals219252]

One, it's just one extra week of games.

Got it. But we already had 1 to 2 weeks of blowout football.

 

[SiuCubFan8]

Got it. But we already had 1 to 2 weeks of blowout football.

What is your point? That was under the 32 team bracket which you want.....
We have a play in round to determine the final 16 teams for the 32 team bracket in each class.

 

[4Afan]

Got it. But we already had 1 to 2 weeks of blowout football.

We have blowouts in state championship games as well, nothings gonna change that because there is no parity in HS football and there never will be. See numbers in link, the average margin of victory this season is over 26 points with 34% of games being a 35+ point margin of victory.

IHSA - Illinois High School Association

The official site for the Illinois High School Association, providing schedules, scores, and news for high school sports in Illinois.

www.ihsa.org

 

[jha618]

Why are we looking for ways to make things more complicated? We argue about plenty around here, why do you want to add subjective playoff seeding to the mix?

Computer rankings are used in other states and I could argue they do have their merit, but they're also not perfect. Using the current system, name a team that did not win a title based solely on the seed they got. No matter what system you use there will be blowouts throughout the playoffs, but currently in 7A and 8A the cream tends to rise to the top and the best teams end up playing on Thanksgiving weekend. Classes 1A-6A is a different story, but that's a north/south thing rather than seeding.

Seed the CPS teams at the bottom of their respective classes regardless of their records because that's basically what most of you are saying you want without saying it. All but 2-3 will still lose in the first round and the other teams continue to compete as they always have. So what's the point in changing the entire system?

Right now both Massey and the Rivals composite have Morris as the #9 team overall in the state, well above both Rochester and Montini. I'm the biggest Redskins fan there is, but I can still be objective and recognize they're not a top 10 team overall in the state. Is that the type of system you want to use to determine playoff seedings? And before some of you say it should be a mix between computers and humans, just stop right there. This is HS football and some of you get too excited watching the CFP shows when the college rankings get released and think that's how HS should work too.

In other sports the regional seeding is done weeks before the season ends and that wouldn't work for football, plus a lot of those coaches put minimal to no effort into their regional seedings. So no need to go down that road.

Here's the link to MaxPreps current 8A rankings. Do any of you 8A followers believe that a 3-4 Barrington or Naperville Central is a top 10 team in the class and should he seeded as such?

Division 8A Football (2026) Rankings

MaxPreps rankings for Division 8A football (2026). Every high school football team in the nation is ranked. Find out where your teams stands...

www.maxpreps.com

Whenever there is a rebuttal to using computer or rankings in seeding, the response is always assuming that people want to use computers as the sole method of determining seeds. I dont think I have ever seen anyone advocate on here for doing such a thing.

If there are 2 or 3 imperfect systems, why settle for using one? When you can almost assuredly get better results by finding a way to implement them all. Or atleast more than one. Whatever imperfections one system has, it may be mitigated with the use of data points from the other system.

 

[4Afan]

Whenever there is a rebuttal to using computer or rankings in seeding, the response is always assuming that people want to use computers as the sole method of determining seeds. I dont think I have ever seen anyone advocate on here for doing such a thing.

If there are 2 or 3 imperfect systems, why settle for using one? When you can almost assuredly get better results by finding a way to implement them all. Or atleast more than one. Whatever imperfections one system has, it may be mitigated with the use of data points from the other system.

They're all imperfect so why complicate things by combining more than 1 imperfect system?

Instead of saying the system is broken how about proposing a system that would work better.

 

[jha618]

They're all imperfect so why complicate things by combining more than 1 imperfect system?

Instead of saying the system is broken how about proposing a system that would work better.

I have on several occasions.

But also, that sounds kind of silly saying I know something has flaws. And instead of trying to fix them, or minimize, or mitigate, Ill just accept the flaws and reject alternative because it may also be flawed? We wouldnt normally apply the same problem solving process to anything else. Why is more data now a bad thing?

 

[4Afan]

I have on several occasions.

But also, that sounds kind of silly saying I know something has flaws. And instead of trying to fix them, or minimize, or mitigate, Ill just accept the flaws and reject alternative because it may also be flawed? We wouldnt normally apply the same problem solving process to anything else. Why is more data now a bad thing?

I have no issue with more data or a better system. One just has yet to be presented.

I'll ask again, what team has been hurt in the current system based solely on the seed they received?

 

[Alexander33]

I have no issue with more data or a better system. One just has yet to be presented.

I'll ask again, what team has been hurt in the current system based solely on the seed they received?

Teams are generally not hurt by the seeds they receive. When they are hurt, it is generally because of an inaccurate seed their opponent has been given.

Players generally want to play. That means they would like to play as many playoff games as their team's ability legitimately allows, while recognizing if they play below their potential on a given day their season may end. They, and their coaches and fans, want to see how far they can legitimately advance in the playoffs. When they are not given that opportunity solely because an opponent is improperly seeded, then they are hurt/harmed. This seems to happen at least once or twice every year.

I will provide three examples from the last two years. In 2025, unbeaten and #1 seed (5A northern bracket) Prairie Ridge played St. Francis in the second round and lost by three points. Had St. Francis been seeded according to its ability, that game would have likely taken place in the 5A semifinals. The inaccurate seeding of St. Francis cost Prairie Ridge two games that it otherwise would have played.

In 2024, unbeaten and #1 seed (3A northern bracket) Byron played Montini in the second round and lost by one point. Had Montini been seeded according to its ability, that game would have likely taken place in the 3A semifinals. The inaccurate seeding of Montini cost Byron two games that it otherwise would have played.

In 2024, (8-1) and #3 seed (7A bracket) St. Charles North played Mt. Carmel in the second round. Had Mt. Carmel been seeded according to its ability, that game would have likely taken place in either the 7A semifinals or championship game. The inaccurate seeding of Mt. Carmel cost St. Charles North two or three games that it otherwise would have played.

Those are three different teams that were hurt by inaccurate seeding in the last two years.