Playoff Proposal Pauses
May 10, 2013
During the MHSAA Football Finals at Ford Field last November, I was approached by representatives of the Michigan High School Football Coaches Association with a request to have the MHSAA’s computing capabilities crunch the numbers for a concept that a couple of the coaches association’s members had for revising the MHSAA Football Playoff point system.
Within a few weeks the MHSAA hosted a meeting that brought together the coaches who introduced the concept with our numbers crunchers; and within a few days our staff had outlined the principles, revised the point system and retrofitted it to show how the system would have affected the 2012 playoffs.
There was initial excitement that we might be onto something, but that brief infatuation began to wane as we dug deeper and discussed the plan more widely.
The key ingredients of the proposal are (1) that a school would gain playoff points for every game its opponent wins, whether or not that school defeated that opponent, and (2) that the number of automatic qualifiers would be reduced in favor of a larger group of additional qualifiers based on a revised playoff points system that would favor schools which schedule larger and more successful opponents.
In spite of our staff’s helpfulness in bringing this proposal forward, we’ve lost optimism that it will accomplish what is hoped. Rather than making regular-season scheduling easier, it could make it harder as the “six-wins-and-in” mindset is replaced by the even worse “seven-wins-and-in” mindset. And any system that ignores a minimum number of wins and relies entirely on playoff points is even less fair than the current system to schools in the less densely populated areas of Michigan.
From our retrofitting of the proposed concept to the 2012 season, we know that teams with 6-3 records would be displaced in the playoffs by teams with 4-5 records, which is certain to go down badly and be difficult to explain to those communities. The revised point system would make it even more difficult than the current system for schools in less populated areas to find opponents of the size and strength to generate high playoff point averages without these schools driving 100, 200, 300 or more miles, one way, several times each season. For individual schools and some entire leagues, this will make football scheduling tougher, not easier. It is likely to add stress to those league affiliations, and to football scheduling generally.
In any event, there is no need to rush to 2013 or 2014 a proposal that’s called “Enhanced Strength of Schedule System” because schedules are 99 percent set for 2013 and nearly so for 2014. Even if adopted today, few schedules would be impacted before 2015. If a change like this one is to be implemented, schools must have ample notice, and our technology department must have enough time to program the new point system and then test it through an entire season.
The Representative Council acted wisely on May 6 when it paused the progress of this proposal. Some elements of it may be discussed at the MHSAA’s scheduled meetings this summer and fall.
Set, Ready, Challenge: 11-Player Football Finals Challenges New in 2022
By
Jon Ross
MHSAA Director of Broadcast Properties
November 25, 2022
New this year at the MHSAA 11-Player Football Finals is the opportunity for head coaches to challenge a call.
In previous years, all potential scoring plays and potential turnovers were automatically reviewed. That process will continue and now, under a limited set of circumstances, the head coach can challenge calls.
To do so, the head coach must first call a timeout. If a team has no timeouts remaining, they are not able to challenge a call. Challenges must be presented to the officials immediately after the timeout is granted. If the challenge is successful, the team will get its timeout back and have the ability to challenge one more call during regulation. A second successful challenge will not result in the ability to challenge a third call.
The following plays are reviewable by challenge:
- Complete/incomplete passes
- Runner/receiver in/out of bounds
- Runner ruled not down
- Forward progress spot as it relates to the yard to gain
- First touching of a kick
- Recovery of a ball in/out of bounds
- Forward/backward pass
- Penalties called on the field only for:
- Illegal forward pass
- Targeting or illegal helmet contact
- Pass interference only as it relates to the pass being previously tipped
NOTE: All other penalties called on the field are not reviewable. These include, but are not limited to: illegal formation, ineligible receivers downfield, illegal participation, illegal substitution or delay of game. If a penalty is not called by the officials on the field, the play can never be reviewed to retroactively call a penalty.
In overtime, challenges – like timeouts – reset. Each team has the ability to challenge one call for the entirety of overtime, but must have a timeout to use to do so. A successful challenge in overtime will not result in the ability to challenge a second call.
If a play is overturned in regulation or overtime, the replay officials will correct all aspects of the play including time, position of the ball and whether the clock will be started on the RFP or snap. The game clock or play clock may be reviewed only as it directly relates to the overturning of a call on the field.
There is no change to the review of potential scoring and potential turnover plays. Those plays are automatically looked at by the replay official and replay assistant. If the replay official can confirm the ruling on the field without stopping play, the official will do so. If more time is needed to review the play, the on-field referee will announce that and then will announce the replay official’s decision. For a play to be reversed, there must be indisputable video evidence that shows the original call was incorrect. Every attempt will be made to complete the review process in 90 seconds or less.
The addition of the coach’s challenge was approved by the MHSAA’s Representative Council at its May 2022 meeting.