Message From the Executive Director …

Click to view index of columns

The first few weeks of the fall sport seasons are in the books, and we are turning our thoughts to the upcoming tournaments.  My objective in this week’s column is to describe the process used by our staff in developing tournament assignments.  While there are some hard and fast rules, so much of this process comes down to subjectivity.  The bottom line objective is, based on the information at hand, to best distribute teams within their geographic areas to provide the opportunity for as many of the highest rated teams to advance to subsequent levels of the tournament. 

The assignment process is much different than it was in the early 1990s, when we didn’t have the internet to release tournament pairings, but rather relied on phone calls and word of mouth to get information out, as sites were determined only after the game participants were known.  Each and every site was on a home floor if the facility was large enough to handle the game.   Today, we release all tournament pairings through the IGHSAU web site.  In addition, we pre-assign all sites throughout the entire tournament.  Occasionally we are forced to change a late-round site during the tournament series if the pre-assigned site is not geographically suitable for both teams, or when attendance numbers indicate the assigned site may not be large enough to accommodate the crowd.

In basketball and volleyball all regional finals are on neutral sites.   Schools submit a “site availability form” to the State Office in advance of the tournament assignment determination.  We post a list of those schools offering their sites for use on our web site.  Schools that fail to submit this form are not considered for any assignment.  As a general rule, we get more offers to host than we have games to assign.  In almost all cases, schools are unwilling to host when/if their team is playing at another site.  In addition, many schools are willing to host only games involving its school, essentially rendering those schools useless for neutral site consideration.  There are also many local conflicts such as parent-teacher conferences and other school activities that limit the ability of schools to host.  Schools hosting a tournament are paid 20% of the total ticket revenue from each game as a “rental” fee.  In addition, the IGHSAU pays the cost of the officials, while the host retains any revenue from concessions, parking and program sales.

The physical facility itself is a consideration.  In volleyball, the ceiling height becomes an issue.  In basketball, we won’t play on a floor using restraining lines.  In both sports, we have to ensure the gym seats enough people to handle the anticipated crowds.

The subjective part of the assignment process is distributing school into the various regions.  As a rule, we wait a minimum of three weeks into the season before teams are assigned to particular regions.  Three weeks gives our staff a significant database of results and ratings history that will allow us to distribute the highest rated, highest performing teams in the early season into different regions.  While geography is the number one consideration in all assignments, the ideal situation would allow the top eight rated teams to be distributed to eight different regions.

Obviously, this doesn’t always work.  The top eight teams in week three are not necessarily the top eight teams come tournament time.  There may be three top-rated teams in a corner of the state which, due to the primary factor of geography, can not be distributed into different regions.  But, we do make every effort to “split strength.”   The priorities in this distribution may be best explained by looking at the ultimate state tournament field.  While everyone wants the best eight teams to qualify for the state tournament, the ultimate purpose of a state tournament is to match the best teams from the different areas of the state.  Eight teams representing different regions advance to the tournament.  If geography wasn’t a factor, the top-rated team would play the 64^th best team, and so on. 

We attempt to balance the desire of our membership to have the eight top teams at state vs. the demand of our membership to prioritize geography and minimize travel.  Bussing from Sioux City to Cedar Rapids on a school night in an attempt to have the so-called “top” teams in different regions is not an option.

The distribution of teams doesn’t stop at eight.  We try to balance out other rated teams in similar fashion, ensuring when possible that one region doesn’t have six rateds, while another region has one rated.  However, it can’t be stated often enough that geography will sometimes force a preponderance of rated teams in one region while leaving another regional without even one rated team. 

Once the highest rated teams are distributed among the eight regions, we then bracket the remainder of the field.  Again, recognizing geography is an overriding consideration, the top two teams are ideally placed into opposite sides of the bracket, allowing, in theory, the highest rated teams to avoid playing until the later rounds of the tournament.  We then draw the remainder of the field into the various lines of the bracket.  One last rule of thumb our staff has when making tournament assignments is to make every effort to ensure a school does not play the same school in the first round two consecutive years.  While we do not seed, per se, the entire tournament series is developed with what I call a subjective seed.  We look at ratings, we look at team records and analyze team strength in an attempt to keep potential match-ups of top teams in the latest possible round.

Once teams are placed on the lines of the region, early round sites are made based on 1) if only one team of the two in a particular game offered to host, it hosts the first round game.  2) if both teams offered, we look at records, ratings, facility and past history to determine who hosts the first game.  3) if neither team offered, that game becomes a part of a doubleheader at another site.  Later rounds sites are determined based on facility capacity, geography of the likely participants, and history of successful administration of previous tournaments.

My one overriding observation having worked with tournament assignments since 1989 is that no one really cares about 396 schools in the tournament, they care about their school.  There is nothing wrong with this either!  It isn’t the job of a coach, school administrator or fan to worry about the entire tournament field.  That job lies with our staff.  While we follow the philosophies and guidelines listed above, the bottom line is we are employed to keep provincialism out of consideration.  There hasn’t been a tournament series go by that we haven’t looked back four or five weeks after assignments were made and wished teams were distributed or paired differently.  With transportation arrangements and facility commitments and the need to assign nearly 1000 officials to work those tournament games, we wait as long as possible so we can make educated decisions.  The accountability our staff has is this: have a good reason for every decision that is made.  If site A is picked over site B, then have a reason why site A is preferable.  If the #2, 3 and 6 teams in the state are in the same region, then have a good reason why it was necessary.

I consider tournament assignments the most important job we have as a staff.  Our membership and the players and fans expect and rightfully demand a tournament that is well-balanced, rational, unbiased and provides the most level playing field for everyone involved.  While the distribution and pairing of teams is a small part of the work behind putting on a tournament, it is unquestionably the most public part of the tournament, and the most visible part of what the Athletic Union does.