North Bay football coaches talk about the new North Coast Section playoff lineup

There were varied reactions from all corners of the North Coast Section when this year’s play-offs were announced on Sunday.

Seven Division 2 teams in Division 4? Two Division 6 teams in the Open Division? Multiple teams making the playoffs with records of 4-6 or even 3-7? Only four Division 7 teams made it?

Welcome to the new era of competitive equality in the NCS.

In an effort to make the playoffs more competitive and give some new teams a chance at winning section titles, the NCS has implemented a new playoff model starting this school year. It was adopted by a majority vote of the member schools and is in effect for all team sports in the NCS.

Its consequences have been widely felt in volleyball, but have not been, and will remain, as well understood or analyzed as in football, where some things have become glaringly clear.

This format primarily hurts small schools, benefits larger schools, and in many ways rewards losing over winning.

Coaches from around the area, from both large and small schools, gave their opinions on the new system this week. Many pointed out a number of shortcomings that they hope will be addressed in the future, while others saw some positives in the change.

Most were also quick to point out that no system can address all the issues of inequality in high school sports, whether in terms of enrollment size or public versus private schools.

New system

Here’s a quick refresher on the new playoff format, which is similar to the one many other sections and the California Interscholastic Federation already use for the postseason.

The NCS has opted to no longer keep teams in their registration-based divisions. Teams are initially separated into those divisions at the beginning of the year, but are then reseeded for the playoffs based on their power rankings by CalPreps/MaxPreps.

If a team is ranked higher, it can move up from its base division, but not more than two divisions higher. So the highest a team can rise from Division 4 is Division 2 and the furthest it can fall is Division 6.

The exception applies to the Open/Division 1 bracket, reserved for the top eight teams regardless of their base division.

The way the NCS implemented this new system was essentially by taking the top 56 teams eligible for the sectional playoffs and then seeding them in descending order based on their rankings. The two-piece motion hood is then taken into account. For example, a Division 1 team that was ranked in the 40s is placed not in Division 5 (where teams would fall in the 40s), but in Division 3, because that is the lowest division to which it could fall.

Under this new system, many more large schools made the playoffs but were placed in lower divisions, eliminating many eligible smaller schools.

Of the 56 teams that made the playoffs, 40 are from schools in Division 1-4. Additionally, 34 schools dropped from their base division, while only 13 schools moved up and nine remained in place.

Small schools were not taken into account

Not surprisingly, some of the biggest critics of this new system were smaller schools, especially from the North Central League I. The league consists primarily of Division 6 and 7 schools from Lake Napa and Mendocino counties.

Six of the nine schools in the league qualified for the playoffs, but only one, Kelseyville, was selected.

Among the NCL I snaps was Willits, who finished the year 8-2 and finished in second place in league play at 7-1. Under the old system, Willits would certainly have been a high-flyer in his division. Under this new one, the Wolverines have now turned in their equipment for the season.

The response from NCL I schools was immediate. In a text message to The Press Democrat shortly after the brackets were released Sunday, St. Helena Athletic Director Brandon Farrell said “this is truly sad for our league” and called the new system a “complete failure of competitive equality .”

“An 8-2 NCL I team has to sit on the sidelines while larger enrollment schools infiltrate smaller school divisions and feel good about their mediocre or sub-.500 seasons,” Farrell said.

It’s clear what Farrell is talking about when he examines the brackets. Division 3 has five Division 1 schools, Division 4 has seven Division 2 schools, Division 5 has six Division 3 schools and Division 6 has six Division 4 schools.

So why do small schools feel the brunt of this system? Especially since this new system is heavily dependent on computer rankings. Larger schools usually play in leagues against other larger schools, and larger schools typically make up the majority of the top 20 schools in the NCS each year. By facing tougher competition, larger schools benefit – sometimes even lose – thanks to the strength of their class schedules, which is a key component of computer rankings.