I know not a ton of 2-7 and 1-8 games but this is more proof to give 7 and 8s a 9th game vs each other rather than playoffs.
I was happy to see them lose after that stunt. I would want a coach to teach the players to face all obstacles, not look for an advantage in this way. Every team was facing the same schedule. I have heard through the grapevine that many players and parents were not happy.
Examples: 2 seed St. James played Medelia on Wednesday and won by 60. They played again last night and St. James won by 60 again.
I saw St. Thomas Academy and Chaska do this a few years back. The seeding was set and they were in different sections. They sat players and played the bench in the second half. It's really no different than the NFL. It's the way the system is set up. I don't necessarily like it at the High School level, but those bench players now know what it takes to compete next year. There are +'s and -'s either way.
Just a waste of everyone’s time
Yeah, I think letting the two bottom seeds play an extra game vs each other is probably better for both programs. The higher seed and those bottom seeds aren't getting a lot out of those blowout games. Yeah, maybe the higher seed gets to play backups and back of roster kids but the lower seed team isn't likely getting anything out of the game. Another competitive game at the end of the season would likely benefit the low seeds the most.
8 is the low end for number of regular season games compared to other states
Signs of the apocalypse: use of "load management" when discussing high-school sports.
I guess the counter argument is a lot of playoff games involving higher seed teams aren't competitive either. Like Triton beating JWP by 59, Chatfield beating DE by like 40, Upsala beating Benson by 43, BBE over BEV by 54....ect
True. I think switching to 32 team playoffs per class would help make the competitiveness issue better but not fix it completely
I know I can't wait for Rosemount's Friday matchup with Park a team that went 1-7 with lone win over Eastview. Tough balancing act though as I bet if you left it up to the players on the bad teams they would still want a shot at the upset as opposed to a meaningless game against another bad team.
I know when I played that's how I would have wanted it but also if I'm the coach I might rather have a game the younger kids would gain something from for next year. But I'm sure the seniors would want a chance to go after the higher seed and try to get one more game. The old go out in a blaze of glory thing.
I do not think that’s necessarily true.
Can definitely see a case both ways. 32 teams, no bye games is cleanest for the division but it leads to the 1 seeds for sure and most of the 2 seeds having a de facto bye week against a team that really can't match-up with them at all.
I get your point and for the most part agree with it. But the Triton and Chatfield examples you mentioned were actually 1 seed vs 4 seed games last season. But it does also enforce the point of the difference between the top and bottom of most sections. The best policy for now (how it's currently done) is to let each individual section decide.
Yeah, but if your 4th seed isn't competitive vs the 1, in most sections the 3rd isn't going to be either. So now you're down to maybe the 2nd, might be competitive in some sections. The point is that usually there might be 1-2 competitive games in a lot of sections.
There are currently only 20 total 2v7 (18) and 1v8 (2) games in the state. going to 32 would be four sections of 8 would be ideal. Combine sections 1&4, 2&3, 5&8, 6&7. Have a north/south split for state. Schedule in cross over fashion like 6A does. S1(1)vS4(4); S1(2)vS4(3); S4(1)vS1(4); S4(2)vS1(3). Same for other 3 quads. First round, Second round, State Q, State Semi, Prep Bowl. This gets you 4 north teams and 4 south teams into state. Not every section is guaranteed state, but North/South would be represented.
This could be done by moving nothing except canceling Saturday scrimmage and playing a game the night before instead
I like this idea Maxy. I had brought up an earlier game and that got shot down becasue of the State Fair of all reasons.
Not sure if the big Schools dont play guys in the scrimages but in smaller schools that the best way to see if the tweener guys can play. A lot of questions get answered about if you can actually handle so physicality becasue in practice we arent going hard like you are against a different team
Not all 32 6a teams even participated in a scrimmage
It's truly a dumb factor in 2025. It's like telling Hockey they can't have tryouts for youth during the football season. Teams of all fall sports are already into full practice and season well before the state fair starts.
Agreed and the sections could already decide to do so. I’m surprised they don’t
Really hard to do on your own politically even though it’s best for kids