North Texas Soccer Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Log in

I forgot my password

Be An Athletic Supporter!
Donate and get this nifty tag!

LH Make-Over? - Page 2 Pixel
We have 15040 registered users
The newest registered user is Zoonwen

Our users have posted a total of 203400 messages in 30815 subjects

LH Make-Over?

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Go down

LH Make-Over? - Page 2 Empty Re: LH Make-Over?

Post by Guest 16/04/15, 11:52 am

O.K.  Here's the trade-off/debate about whether to have a 10 team, or 20 team D1 at U11...

The general QT format over the past 5 years (at least) has been that LHGCL does not restrict any team from signing up for the QT as long as they are officially registered as a competitive team with an NTSSA member association, meet the minimum roster size requirements, and pay the entry fee.  LHGCL also has not capped the # of teams that sign up for the QT.

So, typically, somewhere between 45-55 teams sign up to play in the QT, and the format going back at least 5 years, has been that teams play in 4 team brackets (with 3 team brackets if the total # of teams is not an even multiple of 4) on week 1, with the week 1 bracket winners automatically being placed into D1.

The problem is that if you go to a 10-team D1, if you keep the same QT format, now, being a bracket winner in week 1 does not guarantee you a spot in D1.  You would be deciding D1 teams based on points.  LHGCL has historically used the 10-point system for their scoring, so now, you open up the distinct possibility that top 5 team could totally dominate their competition, but get bumped out of D1 because of a single fluke wind-aided or wacky bounce goal scored by a 30-ish ranked team in a 7-1 game.

From what I remember based on discussion I saw when I first started paying attention to this forum 5 years ago, LHGCL went to the 20-team Supergroup at U11, specifically to minimize these types of vagaries from the QT process.  The thought process being that the 20-team Supergroup at U11 does a better job of sorting out who the D1 teams should be for U12 and beyond.

Of course, the downside is that you end up with more non-competitive games during U11, especially for the top 5 and bottom 5 of the 20 team Supergroup.

I'm not saying that one way is better than the other.  They both have their issues.

My point is that if LHGCL is going to go back to a 10-10-10 format at U11, then hopefully they are looking at modifying the QT format to remove some of the vagaries in results that could happen if the current format was used to populate a 10-10-10 league...

Possibilities in my mind:

1)  Change from the current 10-point scoring system to a 3-1-0 scoring system with GD as a tie-breaker.

Pros:  3-1-0 system using GD allows for teams to overcome the negative impact of giving up a fluke goal, moreso than the 10-point system does.

Cons:  3-1-0 system using GD will encourage the top teams to "keep the foot on the gas" and score as many goals as possible.  10-point system minimized running up the score by capping the benefit of the total number of goals scored.

2)  Go to a maximum of 10 5-team brackets for round 1 of the tournament

Pros:  10 Round 1 bracket winners get into D1.  Eliminates the problem of a bracket winner not making D1.  Adds 1 additional game to help sort out the bracket order to remove some of the randomness of the process.

Cons:  Additional round 1 games.  Odd # of teams in brackets results in an "unbalanced" serpentine seeding.  You have to cap the QT entries at 50 teams, meaning that LHGCL will now have to put in some kind of subjective selection process if more than 50 teams sign up to play.

3)  Stick with the current 4-team round 1 brackets with no limit on # of teams that can enter the QT.  After Round 1, only the top 30 teams advance to Round 2 (Top 2 finishers in each Week 1 bracket + 3rd place teams with highest point totals necessary to get to 30 total teams).  Round 2 is 10 3-team brackets seeded based on Round 1 performance.  Round 2 is simply played for D1-D2-D3 placement.  Round 2 bracket winners go to D1, 2nd place go to D2, 3rd place go to D3.

Pros:  Probably the most fair way to determine the top 10 teams for D1 using a limited QT format.  

Cons:  Top teams have to play both rounds.  Teams 30+ are much less likely to get their $800 worth because more teams that do NOT qualify for LHGCL will only have gotten 2-3 games for their $800.  This format places a higher importance on accurate seeding of teams outside the top 20 or so, which is typically more difficult to do than seeding top teams correctly.


Back to top Go down

LH Make-Over? - Page 2 Empty Re: LH Make-Over?

Post by Guest 16/04/15, 02:51 pm

Quick, who has the antibiotics!!! Gopher is trying to infect us with reasoning, logic and clearly articulated sentences. Has anyone checked recently to see if Gopher is a witch?


Back to top Go down

LH Make-Over? - Page 2 Empty Re: LH Make-Over?

Post by SickofStupidity 16/04/15, 03:04 pm

I like Gopher's option #3 - but close teams in the 25-35 range could eliminate some good teams the first weekend.

I would argue for the same - but 40 "finalists" - 10 brackets of 4 battling for D1 - D2 - D3 - PPL/APL.

Or the old LH qualifying method - first weekend identifies some (but not all) D1 teams, eliminates whose who wasted their money to begin with, and leaves a middle group vying for the final D1 and D3 spots.

TxSoccer Author
TxSoccer Author

Posts : 934
Points : 3668
Join date : 2014-06-30

Back to top Go down

LH Make-Over? - Page 2 Empty Re: LH Make-Over?

Post by Sponsored content

Sponsored content

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum