SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Girls Varsity Soccer AAAA Upper State Bracket (Old School)

Being out of the playoffs and finding myself with some extra time, I have decided to see what the brackets would be should the old system of points be used. Below is the points system used by football, which will suffice. Tournaments and scrimmages do not count. Only 16 games may be used (some play 18 regular season games and those extra two cannot be used) so find the best ones. I'll take care of region 1 if someone else would volunteer to do 2, 3, and 4.

Win over a AAAA team with Winning record 4.5 pts
Loss 3.5

Win over a AAAA team with a losing record 4.0
Loss 3.0

Win over a AAA team with a winning record 4.0
loss 3.0

Win over a AAA team with a losing record 3.5
loss 2.5

Win over a AA team with a winning record 3.5
loss 2.5

Win over a AA team with a losing record 3.0
loss 2.0

Win over a SCISA/A team with a winning record 3.0
loss 2.0

Win over a SCISA/A team with a losing record 2.5
loss 1.5

I forgot, take the top four region teams as usual (finish). Finish means nothing for seeding, though, it's all about the schedule and performance once your in.

Region 1

Hanna 61 pts
Wren 60.5 pts
Greenwood 60.5 pts (loses tie breaker - head to head)
Easley 56 pts

Some teams (Dorman/Mauldin) only played 15. I'm thinking that 14 or 15 games would be more accurate in case of rain. Region finish handles tie breakers.

Region 2

Dorman 63 pts
Spartanburg 62 pts
Byrnes 62 pts (region finish tie breaker)
Mauldin 61.5

Region 3

Northwestern 59 pts
Fort Mill 53.5 pts (13 games)
Clover 47.5 (13 games)
Lancaster 42 (12 games)

Fort Mill obviously penalized for going "out of state".

No, Fort Mill punished for being poo boys and not playing a full regular season schedule.

Region 4

Lexington 65 pts
Irmo 62.5 pts
Aiken 58 pts
South Aiken 52.5 pts

Bracket 1

1 Lexington
16 Lancaster

8 Wren
9 Greenwood

4 Spartanburg
13 Fort Mill

5 Byrnes
12 Easley


Bracket 2

2 Dorman
15 Clover

7 Hanna
10 Northwestern

3 Irmo
14 South Aiken

6 Mauldin
11 Aiken

Negatives - could play region opponent a third time
Have to research out of state classifications and records (I did it and wasn't that hard)
Make up games are important! (probably should count 14 games)

Positives - rewarded for strength of schedule
Region of death alignment is negated
Stronger regions get higher seedings

I see where you are comin from. I was at the Irmo v Dorman game last night and the quality of the game got me to thinking, "That game should not have been a second round game". I think going back to a point system will reward teams for having a good season, not being in a weak region.

From the outside—not involved in AAAA—I know most of these teams and the revised brackets seem more balanced and "fair" in that the data show one region to be as powerful as they probably are/were—The coincidence of regions has always plagued soccer—

Wish we would go EPL (as I have stated before) with regions and A classifications in at least the girls side—

Good point. Same thing with the Mauldin vs Lexington match. W&E now all YOU need to do is push this up the line to SCHSL office for approval. With your status as a superior poster on the website you can have this done.

I'm afraid they don't recognize "superior posters" in the schsl, but I can try Thank YOU for the compliment.

W&E,

Thanks for making Fort Mill's upset victory over Spartanburg last night look even better.

Wow!.....a #13 taking down a #4.

http://www.schsl.org/2000/00gso4.htm

Check out the 2001 season and what Hillcrest did. Imagine finals with Hillcrest, Aiken, and RNE in them. Times have changed...

http://www.schsl.org/2002%20Brackets/02gso4.htm

This might be the worst upperstate final beating ever

http://www.schsl.org/2003%20Brackets/gso%20aaaa.htm

One of the worst beatings in a championship AAAA game

Also, when I met Deahler and toted a butt whoopin home.

W&E:

Did you forget you meds this morn?

I have no pratice, awards taken care of, goals put away, jersey's clean...sigh.

Way too much time on your hands now....

...and also when I heard stories about disgruntled fans that have since recovered

1) The page looks funny with so many of your avatar in a row

2) Isn't it weird when coaching seasons are over and you have TIME???

W&E if you can sell the SCHSL that this system would also work for boys football playoffs (and it would.) We could see it happen!

This is what we used to use in 2002 and before in soccer. Football currently uses it! I don't know why we got away from it, but I like it!

P&Y, yes it does look funny and yes I do feel funny. All this time...but I still refuse to mow the grass at home!

But, based on W&Es Old School formula, four teams from each region would not be guaranteed a place (As was calculated on this thread), only the top 16 teams in the upperstate would make the playoffs based on points. Meaning Westside, with 51 points, would be in, and schools not scheduling a full slate, would be out.

Just fun to watch people do the math, then add to it. There may be other teams, like North Augusta that would make it over a team included in the playoffs this year.

If you look real hard.....Fort Mill might be out!

But if the system was implemented i'm sure Fort Mill would adjust their schedule, which would change everything. I just think this is the best way to go. The best 16 from each half of the state get in. Period.
Maybe a compromise would be easier for the high school league to swallow.
1) All region champs get in and are seeded 1-4 in the upper state and lower state, then the best 12 remaining in each half of the state get seeded 5-16.
2) The top 2 teams from each region get in, then the rest get in on points.

Just some thoughts. But I think we all agree. Something needs to change, for the quality of the game.

Just curious... why was it changed?

No, top four make it! Check my 2nd post. No Worstside! No North Disgusta! All regions equally represented.

Keepcoach01 makes a good point, if the bracket was changed, a top tier team like Fort Mill would adjust. 4A teams would stop scheduling A and AA teams unless it were to sustain an instense inter-city rivalry, and I imagine the playoff picture would have started a tad different than this year, progressed only slightly differently, and ultimately, ended the same way. To which we can say, little would be changed but the process, with the end result in tact.

All a change to the system does in the end is create different criteria for seeding and making the playoffs. All teams would adjust and soon there would be complaints that "SCHOOL A" scheduled their games with a weak 4A school before "SCHOOL B" was able to, thus forcing "SCHOOL B" to pound a weak 3A school but receive less points. What a shame!

The system was flawed then, and lent more to coaches who were adept at selective scheduling, you could almost schedule your way into the playoffs. Whereas the current system allows some teams an inside track based on being in a Region that is not as strong from top to bottom.

Neither system is perfect. But they are different. And since we live in a world of 20 second attention spans, it only makes sense to change it back to the way it was, so that 5 years down the road, we can change it back to how it is now!

Of course, if the system were different, Westside girls would have made the playoffs, which has to make me think, hmmm.......

NO!!!! TOP FOUR, THEN ALL ARE SEEDED!!!

W&E, read your post, that's just not how the Old School system actually works. Look at 3A Girls this year: Daniel, Travelers Rest, Greenville, Seneca, and BHP all made playoffs.

You would be describing a NEW SCHOOL

CR, I was there when we had the old system in AAAA. Such is how #4 finishing T.L. Hanna got the #9 seed in the upper state. I understand this "New School" benefits you, but it's not what I described nor how it was.

AAA is different than AAAA which is why I entitled this "AAAA Upper State Bracket(Old School)".

Now, what is interesting is why several teams had a bye. Some of you who were not there are forgetting the larger sized, but fewer regions out there. Things would have to be changed to accomodate the increase now.

How many games are you allowed to schedule? 18 plus two tournaments? If you make championship game of the Viking Cup (5 games) and play in the Fort Mill Invitational (4 games), that's 27 games. Make it to the state championship (5 games) and that's 32 games. I'm not even counting the three scrimmages.

So, from February 23 - May 11, a team would play 32 games in 78 days. That's fairly demanding, no wonder we see ACL's snapping.

In that old system, there were only 3 Regions in the Upperstate in AAAA. Now there are 4 AAAA Upperstate regions, which makes AAAA different from the (Old School) Bracket. Also, Region champs received a bye in the 1st round. In the same year you mentioned, this was not the case in the Lowerstate, with 14 teams making the playoffs.

Happy enough to be out of the playoffs, facing Dorman with 10 players in the 1st round only had so many upsides.

Any answer as to why the systems were changed, like NeverPlayed asked?

Both arguments are valid, but look at what has happened this year. Dorman and Mauldin are already out of the playoffs after the 2nd round. They are both too good to be gone so soon in my opinion. Not to mention TLH which ran into a "hot" Byrnes team from a exceptionally strong region and they were out in the 1st round. I think these teams have worked too hard and played too good consistently throughout the year to be out of the playoffs so soon....

3 regions but only two byes. Not so fast...

Hurst, 18 and one tourney (23 games + 5) or 16 and two (26 + 5)...oh and it's four scrimmages. But only the best and deepest make it that far and so that's the minority, not the majority. A coach, who thinks his team has a chance, should be smart enough not to wear out his players with too much action. Take a tourney off or, like Ft. Mill was smart enough to do, a few reg season games. Under the top four then seeding, reg's would be more valuable so a break from a tourney might be best. You know, as I, that it's the maximum allowed, not the minimum required.

CR, I haven't found out why the change was made, other than it was introduced as the regions expanded. 10 play with 2 resting, but now 16 with no break.

LF,

I agree. The cream will always rise to the top, but I'm all in favor of prolonging the exits of the "also-rans" a little longer!

NCAA basketball.

Not perfect, but the success in the conferences are separate from seeding for the big dance (A strong conference such as the ACC, for ex, can have two or three # 1 and other high seeds). Both can matter in soccer.

Some modified transition from region success to state is needed, I think. As has been mused about here.

Double elimination, like softball and baseball.

Title IX!!!!

3 regions but only two byes. Not so fast...

W&E, go to SCHSL and check the records, there were 4 Byes in the Upperstate: Mauldin, Hillcrest, Spartanburg, and Irmo.

3 Regions - 4 Byes.

Where you get 2 from that, God only knows...

Having lost more girls playoff games than any other active coach I can gripe about all the systems but would prefer to just say that the current seems the best of all the systems that we have used. Having participated in not 2 systems in the playoffs but 4, I would have to say that the one we have seems to be the best to me b/c of the quality of teams that we have in all 4 regions in the upperstate. 1st round games are no longer a breeze for most top teams & I see the gap only getting smaller & smaller each year.

The first system was everyone was in if you applied for the playoffs & then you were seeded into the lower or upper state depending on who applied not where your school is located; hence, we played in the lower state one year against Sumter.

The 2nd system only had 8 teams make the playoffs by points & we were seeded #8 & had a first round game against Mauldin; even though, we were 16-5 in the reg season & ended up 6th in the state overall rankings we played #1 Mauldin (didn't like that scenario much either).

Third system was 4 teams from region made playoffs & then seedings by points (top 4 got a bye--region winners & highest pt total not region winner), which only exists in AAAA division II football as far as I know.

Don't most sports use the same brackets as we do now?

Ron, truly you have suffered the slings and arrows of despair far too many a time my brother.

I never even knew about some of those systems.

I think the one we have now makes sense. And I think when things happen the way we want them to, the system is fine, when they don't, it is flawed.

What I would like to know, and W&E hasn't addressed this, but I think it should be addressed also, is why did we have the exact same region pairings in 4A this year as last year?

Simply for the sake of making it exciting for the kids, the pairings should rotate each year. Which I thought they had until this year.

4 teams from each region got to go? Thats the way they did it back the in the OLD SCHOOL, like I said. It's good to be right...AHEM. If it weren't the top four, some yahoo would schedule all the Laurens, Hillcrest, Yorks, and other AAAA non powers in order to out point the next guy.

Football uses this point system, but others use the region vs. region format. Baseball is the most unique using seeds from all regions so that there is a double elim format and a 1, 2, 3, and 4 seed from each region (if I remember correctly).

That being said, I think points are the best way to go. I'm not a fan of byes, but love the 16 teams and 8 games in the 1st round for the upstate. We're pretty generous here in SC that the top four out of six (I realize not all regions have six) get to go. It's not like we're juuuuuust missing getting a dark horse in the field. The lowest seed to ever win was the memorable #3 West Ashley team that played every game on the road en route to the title. We could even cut it down to three teams per, 2 byes, and 5 games for the upstate. That would make the field very concentrated and the region race very uptight for some.

My two cents: Using points based on class is fairly arbitrary and puts smaller schools at a disadvantage not related to skill. On the boys side, Greenville and Bishop England are always strong, but teams with tough region schedules would steer clear of these teams to bolster their playoff chances. Basically, we sacrifice season competitiveness to try to make the playoffs match our setups more. If quality large schools avoid quality small schools then the season is filled with noncompetitive games at all levels and only the region matchups will be worth anything.
If the region seeding is a problem, go to a subjective seeding method like A/AA. Committees vote on seeding which makes the teams try to impress the committee by scheduling games that are competitive and scheduling head to head matches with teams that may be even with them in the seeding. Personally I think this has worked great in 1A where Lincoln, Academic Magnet and Christ Church have all played quality schedules and they have traveled long distances to play each other.

AAAA UPPERSTATE PLAYOFF RECORDS SINCE 2000-2001 SEASON (RV and SV omitted)

1. Mauldin 17-6
2. Irmo 10-6
3. Dorman 9-4
4. Fort Mill 9-5
5. Lexington 9-6
6. Aiken 6-6
7. HIllcrest 5-4
8a. South Aiken 5-6
8b. Spartanburg 5-6
10. Hanna 3-5
11. Greenwood 3-6
12. Wren 2-2
13. NorthWestern 2-6
14. Boiling Springs
15. Byrnes 1-2
16a.Gaffney 0-1
16b.Lancaster 0-1
16c.Westside 0-1

From memory, Fort Mill's five state playoff losses:

2001 @ South Aiken
2003 @ Lexington
2004 @ Mauldin
2005 @ USC (West Ashley)
2006 @ Lexington

I was in attendance for all of them.

I only made one of them and that was in lapf's company.