Should A School Ever Lose Intentionally?

bamajake · October 29th, 2008, 11:39 AM

As I looked at the potential playoff pairings, I noticed an oddity in the tiebreaker procedure that AHSAA uses. I will not give team names but this situation is occurring in Alabama in at least two regions.

Teams A, B & C are tied with 6-1 records. During the season, Team A beat Team B, Team B beat Team C and Team C beat Team A. All three beat their remaining region opponents.

According to the tiebreaker procedure, you follow the following steps:

1. Head to head. They were all 1-1. This one doesn't break the tie.
2. Head to head in non-region games (games played against each other in addition to their region games). They only played each other once. This doesn't break the tie.
3. Best record against other teams in their region that were non-region games. There were none. This doesn't break the tie.
4. Best record against non-region common opponents. They did not play any non-region opponent who was common to all three. This doesn't break the tie.
5. "The team whose defeated required (region) opponents have the most victories." This will take a little discussion.

Team A's defeated region opponents are all region opponents except Team C. Team B's defeated region opponents are all region opponents except Team A. Team C's defeated region opponents are all region opponents except Team B.

Team A's defeated region opponents combined record was 22-32.
Team B's defeated region opponents combined record was 21-33.
Team C's defeated region opponents combined record was 20-34.

If Team A wins this Friday, Team C adds one to its opponents' win column.
If Team B wins this Friday, Team A adds one to its opponents' win column.
If Team C wins this Friday, Team B adds one to its opponents' win column.

In other words, Team B needs the following to happen in order to tie Team A in this tie breaker: A win by Team C and a loss by Team B. If this happens, Team B adds a point for a win by Team C but Team A does not add a point due to Team B's loss.

As strange as it sounds, the only way that Team B can become region champion is to lose this Friday and then have Team C win its game as well. If this happens, you look at the next tie breaker (The team with the most victories. Team B would have 8 wins and Team A would have either 6 or 7 wins). Team C can't win the region but if Team A wins and Team C loses, it ties Team B for second in the region and you go on to the next tie breaker.

Is it just me or is there something wrong when there are a number of schools who need to lose in order to either win their region or to have a home game in the first round of the playoffs?

October 29th, 2008, 01:36 PM

	Quote:
	In other words, Team B needs the following to happen in order to tie Team A in this tie breaker: A win by Team C and a loss by Team B. If this happens, Team B adds a point for a win by Team C but Team A does not add a point due to Team B's loss.

Wow. Interesting question. One problem is that even if Team B loses on purpose, there is no guarantee that Team C will win.

It may be a poor tie-breaker senario, but if Team C has already played (maybe played on Thursday), then on Friday if I'm Team B, I have to consider losing on purpose.

NYBamaFan · October 29th, 2008, 02:40 PM

It depends on what you think the true goal of HS sports is. For me, the answer is simple - never - but I am not a HS coach who might get fired...

Jref · October 29th, 2008, 05:59 PM

My po' little ol' head's spinnin' from all that, but --

Any system that lets a team benefit from losing is seriously flawed.

aden · October 29th, 2008, 06:59 PM

I'm glad I don't have to figure that out,I might need 3 advil just reading that.

edwd58 · October 31st, 2008, 05:21 PM

Interesting question and scenario. While I don't think a team should lose intentionally, there is a way to increase the odds of not winning without playing to lose, if that makes sense. In the scenario presented, Team B needs to lose to ensure or improve its chances of advancing. By playing his reserves, 2nd stringers, the coach makes it potentially less likely his team will win. I'd rather see this than see the starters out there intentionally playing not to win. If my 2nd stringers beat them, then I'd just live with that.

November 1st, 2008, 11:29 AM

I saw where a coach in this scenario said he considered playing an ineligible player. That way his team could go ALL OUT to win, but this just 'report' himself (and be forced to forfeit) afterthe game. He said he decided against that approach.

silentsam74 · November 10th, 2008, 08:02 PM

	Quote:	NYBamaFan
	It depends on what you think the true goal of HS sports is. For me, the answer is simple - never - but I am not a HS coach who might get fired...

YouTube - Herm Edwards- Greatest Coach Ever!

bamajake · November 11th, 2008, 03:11 PM

Very well stated. Thanks for posting it Sam. For what it's worth, at least one of the teams that needed to lose to help itself out did not do so. I worked one of those games. The team in question played a heck of a game against a playoff team from a higher classification and scored with just under a minute to play to beat the larger school. As a result, they wound up with the 2 seed from their region.

Tide n True · November 16th, 2008, 07:38 PM

Honestly, if a HS team can't make it into the playoffs unless this particular situation arises, they aren't going past the first round in the playoffs to begin with. Why not just win the game and end the season with a higher W/L percentage? Seriously...a high school team that can't make the playoffs is a BAD team. I always chuckle when high school coaches tout their record of "making the playoffs," because there have been plenty of situations when two or three games needed to be won in order to get to the first round.

silentsam74 · November 20th, 2008, 10:19 PM

	Quote:	Tide n True
	Honestly, if a HS team can't make it into the playoffs unless this particular situation arises, they aren't going past the first round in the playoffs to begin with. Why not just win the game and end the season with a higher W/L percentage? Seriously...a high school team that can't make the playoffs is a BAD team. I always chuckle when high school coaches tout their record of "making the playoffs," because there have been plenty of situations when two or three games needed to be won in order to get to the first round.

Well, I agree and disagree.

I agree don't lose on purpose for any reason. But, really some regions are so loaded that all the playoff participants are going to be better than several regions champions. Hoover's region swept all their games a couple years ago and ended up as the last four teams in the northern 6A bracket. Now, with the restructuring of the brackets you aren't going to see that situation anymore. But, just to illustrate the point of some regions being loaded and teams better than their record might indicate I will point out Clay County and Lineville's region (2A - R5). Most seasons at least their top three seeds move on. This year Lineville entered the playoffs with a 3-7 record as a fourth seed and proceeded to eliminate the 2A - R6 champ and came within five points of eliminating that same regions three seed and moving to the third round. Also their three seed, Woodland, eliminated the two seed from 2A - R6.

Lineville season record 2008

ghickok234 · January 27th, 2009, 07:44 PM

I don't like the thought of losing to get an advantage but I can see why some team would do it. It really is not to different from teams winning their division and then "resting" the starters