Which is more important---Winning Tournaments, Districts or 20 plus Games

[metro-dude]

Class 1-----------------------127 Teams
Class 2-----------------------126 Teams
Class 3-----------------------127 Teams
Class 4------------------------96 Teams
Class 5------------------------77 Teams

Totals high schools in Missouri playing for a state championship.---553

Winning Tournaments, Districts and winning 20 plus games are all important. Most High schools play a 16 game season plus three Tournaments and Districts. The high school coach and Athletic Director will set up a non league schedule. To me this non league schedule is important because some conferences are not as competitive as others. After checking with a few Conferences in St. Louis and picking on the Sub. West, This Conference has ten teams and 8 teams under a 500 record. The winner of this Conference won a district then received a " Running Clock " in the Sectionals. We have other Conferences across Missouri who do not prepare teams to win Districts and beyond so the non-league schedule is important to prepare for the second season.

To me it's important to play better teams then my team if winning Districts are more important then winning 20 plus games however when looking down the road ( 20 Years ) nobody ask about the schedule and how many cupcakes were on those 20 season wins.

Tournaments are also important. Some high schools play only in Tournaments they can win ( A few loses along the way can help in correcting mistakes ) but that might not prepare your teams for District and beyond.

I can but will not name a few strong teams who need a schedule and Tournament upgrade to have any chance to advance out of districts however try not to schedule teams who can put a running clock on you. How many " Running Clocks does it take for a team to turn off their coach?





This post was edited on 3/16 2:21 PM by metro-dude

 

[nwlions]

Two comments:

1. The best thing that could happen would be to abolish the running clock. It takes playing time away from the third string and just humiliates the team that is trailing. Perhaps make an exception for extreme farces like 75 or 100 point margins, but 30 is too narrow.

2. The districts are the most important thing. I just commented in another thread about winning a district title at DuBourg with Kyle Paulson in 1999. We were only 15-13 on the season and were turbo clocked by Borgia in the sectional, but I still wouldn't give that up for the "on top of the world" feeling that night after winning the district title.

 

[metro-dude]

Winning a class 4 and 5 district today is not a big deal. Winning a district is being better then 5 teams and that could be a weak district. NWLION, please explain why winning a class 4 or 5 district is a big deal?

Rolla put a clock on Borgia in the Sectional this year if that helps what the Borgia Knights did to your team in 1999.

This post was edited on 3/16 5:03 PM by metro-dude

 

[nwlions]

Originally posted by metro-dude:
Winning a class 4 and 5 district today is not a big deal. Winning a district is being better then 5 teams and that could be a weak district. NWLION, please explain why winning a class 4 or 5 district is a big deal?


This post was edited on 3/16 5:03 PM by metro-dude

Maybe I am more old-school in thinking that it's all about the postseason. The 1999 district at DuBourg had 8 teams--Cavaliers were #2 seed behind Windsor.

 

[nwlions]

I'll give you the ultimate example

Not basketball, but still a great example. One year (2000, I think) Crystal City went 6-14 in the baseball regular season, then rattled off seven straight wins in the playoffs. State champions, but were under .500 (13-14) overall. I doubt there is one person from Crystal City who would trade the state title for a winning record. It's about postseason play.

 

[msubearssuperfan1]

Glendale...


Several thoughts on this...

- Hillcrest is going to its fourth final four in school history. (Congrats to Coach Brock and his team). However, Hillcrest has an all-time winning percentage of 56% (versus Glendale's 69%) and are under water against Glendale all-time 38-73 (.34%). The Hornets do have two state titles (one runner-up), 56% winning percentage, 8 conference titles (Glendale has sixteen), 15 regional/district titles (Glendale has won the same amount), but they also have at least twenty-two .500 or below seasons. Glendale only has had five .500 or below seasons out of 53 total. Do you favor Glendale's consistency (at least until the past three seasons) or Hillcrest's more traditional win if you have talent, lose if you don't method? Glendale's had about two or three times the number of NCAA Div. 1 players as Hillcrest too.

- I've said this about thousand times on here, but out of the three toughest regular season schedules in Glendale history, only ONE of the those teams made it out of districts. So, I'm NOT in favor of lining up murders row to build towards the post-season or bust philosophy. I think two strong regular season opponents and then a few good teams in the three regular season tournaments (semis, 3rd, or 1st place games) is MORE THAN ENOUGH for most high school teams.

- If you line up a tough schedule (lose most, if not all of the big game matchups) and the parents want you fired & your players turn against you...um...Sorry, but you made your bed, now sleep in it!!!!!

- Glendale's currently on the longest streak without a regular season tournament title in program history. We've played in eight straight regular season tourneys without winning one of them.

- Our freshman 'A' team has a combined 134-20 (.87%) record since 2007-08. Congrats to Lee Squibb on his great run as our frosh head coach. That includes the longest winning streak for a boys team in Springfield Public Schools history (at any level) of 59 consecutive wins between 2009 and 2012. Too bad that didn't result in having successful varsity teams as we're coming off the second worst three-year run in program history. 40-39 '12-'15, we were 40-41 between '94-'97.

- Personally (and you knew I would take this position being a Glendale guy), I favor consistently winning over a period of time over winning big with some talent then falling back after they leave. Look at Republic, they win back-to-back state titles and I couldn't tell you what they did this past season. I think they were 14-13. I'd hate that!!! Kickapoo and Nixa have the type of programs that you'd like to support as a fan.

- Metro is right, years/decades later, people aren't going to know how tough your schedule was, they'll just see 24-5 and think "WOW, they were really good that year!" That's it!! I'd take a weak 20-7 season over a hard fought 16-12 year anytime and twice on Sunday!

- One final point, Glendale has defeated three of Hillcrest's four final four teams! Just wanted to add that fact.
This post was edited on 3/16 5:38 PM by msubearssuperfan1

 

[Rufus R. Jones]

Nothing matters except the post season. Nobody cares about 20 win seasons or tournament titles or conference titles. Coaches that tout that stuff probably don't have district or state titles to talk about. In any sport, the goal is to win state. In the long run, nobody cares about anything else.

 

[msubearssuperfan1]

Then, get rid of the regular season!

 

[metro-dude]

NWLION, Just having a little fun with the above post. Most people talk about winning a district as being successful while others say winning 20 plus games as being successful without a district championship. Districts are not created equal. Let's take class 4 district one, any one of three teams could be in the final four ( Cape Central, Sikeston or Cape Notre Dame ).

Take a look @ Class 5 district 3 between Webster and SLUH. Webster takes the clock down for one last shot with one and a half minutes remaining with the score tied. A defensive 5 sec. call was made with 7 seconds remaining. SLUH scores on a runner @ the buzzer. SLUH is now in the class 5 final four. Webster has hurt feeling but still talks about a successful season with 24 wins this season.

Class 3 district 3 went down to the wire between Madison Prep and Cardinal Ritter. Madison Prep won by 2 points but Ritter had a successful season with over 20 wins this season. Madison Prep started 4 sophomores and a junior but Ritter most likely will be the favorite in class 3 district 3 next season with their new 6'8' transfer playing the whole season. Ritter has their talented 6'7" center returning from this years team plus a " Get it done " guard. Ritter will have equal or better talent then Madison Prep next season and could challenge this year's class 3 champions who has everyone returning.

The Borgia Thanksgiving Tournament will be flat loaded next season. ( Ritter, CBC, McCluer North, Borgia, North Tech, Pacific and others. I'll take Ritter to win it all next November. If anyone wants in the Borgia Tournament next season, make the call and the competition will be waiting.

This post was edited on 3/16 8:31 PM by metro-dude

 

[WCS Coach]

I doubt that.

 

[oldroundballer]

I'd have to disagree with that.

You think only 5 teams think they had a good year? Many teams have no chance to win state and know that. But they do have chances to win tournament or conference titles along the way. Winning the games they should plus a surprise here and there is a pretty good year for most teams.

 

[wahoolives]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

The original question is which is the most important, not do you have to win a district or win state to have a successful year. In my opinion winning a district is the most important, and if you look at what is hanging on the wall in most gyms around the state it is banners for winning districts and going to the state playoffs much more than winning games, regular season tournaments or even conference titles.

 

[Expect2Win]

Originally posted by nwlions:


1. The best thing that could happen would be to abolish the running clock. It takes playing time away from the third string and just humiliates the team that is trailing. Perhaps make an exception for extreme farces like 75 or 100 point margins, but 30 is too narrow.


Great point! What about 50?

 

[oldroundballer]

Originally posted by Expect2Win:

Originally posted by nwlions:


1. The best thing that could happen would be to abolish the running clock. It takes playing time away from the third string and just humiliates the team that is trailing. Perhaps make an exception for extreme farces like 75 or 100 point margins, but 30 is too narrow.


Great point! What about 50?

I agree. I've never liked the 30 point running clock. I never understood what the problem is. Let the kids on the bench get some playing time. 50 might be a good number. If it gets that bad might as well just call it off.

 

[MFloyd]

I personally think turbo clock in both football and basketball is the greatest invention in high school sports history. I promise you, I've been on both sides of it. If you're on the losing end you're just ready to get through the agony. If you're on the winning end, you just want to get the game over as quick as possible with no injuries. Same goes for the 10-run rule in baseball. Get that sucker done. Gear up, get ready for the next game.

 

[nwlions]

Having lost lots of blowouts, here is what I've seen the running clock promote:
1. Schools letting their students chant "you suck" and other taunts
2. Teams with big leads deliberately fouling to run out the clock. The cheapest foul I've ever seen in a high school game was when I taught at Wright City and we were down 50+ and had our player fouled attempting a 3-pointer in the closing seconds. Very flagrant, deliberate, and cheap and our player didn't even get to shoot free throws
3. Teams with big leads keeping their starters in longer. I saw a star player dunk late in the game with a 40-point lead. Total lack of class.
.
Furthermore, it takes playing time away from the last players on the bench.

Although I don't favor the 10-run rule in principle, I do understand two factors there--protecting pitchers and finishing before dark. Those don't apply to basketball and football. The running clock is just about embarrassing teams.

 

[WCS Coach]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

Pretty sad when you have to win everything in order to be judged successful. I consider winning a conference title pretty dang difficult and quite rewarding.

 

[Trim78]

I guess it just depends on where you come from. At Valle we play football and baseball and yes only state titles will do. But the basketball team won their last district title in 1998. So when we won the district title this year and advance on to the quarterfinals against Scott County central it was a pretty big deal for us.

This post was edited on 3/18 6:36 AM by Trim78

 

[metro-dude]

Some small schools place " District Championship " banners on walls

Some schools also place 3rd and 4th place State Tournament finishes on walls. Schools like Scott County Central, Charleston and Borgia don't have wall space for districts and quarter finals banners.

Can we name schools who place ' District Championship " banners on walls? I believe Alton, Missouri does.

 

[fb_wj]

You know if you ask the parents or adults who played in the past I think you would hear it is all about post seaon play. And if you ask kids who went to state they will tell you that it is an incredible experience. But the basketball season is such a long season, and for many schools they practice 6-7 days a week. Because so many kids now play in the spring and summer too, I really don't think it bothers them if they win districts or not. I does some, but not like it used to. Because of the long season I think if you are losing throughout a lot of it, it wears you down a lot. These kids are just ready for the season to be done. They are ready to get to something different like spring sports, or getting on their club team and just break out of the same ole routine they been in for 4 months. Winning 20 games through out the year sure keeps their mind into the sport a bit more. I've Coached high school sports recently and you can just tell these kids are done with the sport in many cases by the end of the season. They are just to busy 24/7 365 days a year.

 

[Rufus R. Jones]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

You're re-framing my argument. I didn't say that only a state title constitutes a good year. Any coach, or most fans, for that matter, understand that, some years, a "good year" can be defined as a lot less. But to pretend that winning 21 games is any sort of substitute for winning your district or winning playoff games (and hopefully, a state title) is a definite lowering of the bar. And winning the Hillbilly Holiday Classic is no more of a feat than any other regular season win (or wins).

 

[oldroundballer]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

How am I re-framing your argument? You said the following:

Nothing matters except the post season. Nobody cares about 20 win seasons or tournament titles or conference titles. Coaches that tout that stuff probably don't have district or state titles to talk about. In any sport, the goal is to win state. In the long run, nobody cares about anything else.

I simply don't agree with that for reasons I posted and suspect others don't either. That's all.

 

[MFloyd]

Re: Some small schools place " District Championship " banners on walls

The measure of a district title isn't the same for every school. Heck some girls schools are given district titles because there is no other team in the district to compete with them. In many cases there is simply not a strong opponent and a team can win districts without breaking a sweat. This is way more common in the lower classes. But to win a district title in the larger classes, more often than not you better be pretty darn good or you're going home. As somebody stated earlier, nearly every year in Class 4 District 1 you have two or three teams that can make the final four and contend for state titles, but only one of the three gets to go. To me, those are hard earned district titles and something to be proud of which is why you usually have a pretty strong celebration after winning one. Other schools that usually coast through districts have no celebration at all because you don't feel you've had to work for anything yet. But to answer metro-dude's latest question, I'd say 95 percent of schools hang district banners or list their district titles on one banner. Only a very select few have "run out of wall space" with state title banners.

 

[dtowner]

Re: Some small schools place " District Championship " banners on walls

You are trying to answer two different questions. If you are asking what is most impressive, the answer is a 20 win season by far. All you have to do to win a district is win three (at the most) games. One of those games is usually against someone who is not very good (or you get a bye). Also keep in mind that anytime you are talking about one game deciding everything you get the crap shoot factor. Some throw out that it is possible to populate your schedule with very beatable teams, but to win 20 your are going to have to get 10-15 wins minimum against teams that are of similar quality to yourself. Most teams that win 20 are only playing poor teams at all because a) they play in an early round tournament game, b) they are in the same conference c) they are just in the same area.

If you are asking which one matters to program, I guess it depends. It's most fun to win a district title. The title game is always played to a packed house, and the winner goes on to a state playoff game which is a lot of fun. Plus it is very neat and tidy to just say "we were district champs." There are a lot of conference titles that are harder to win than some district titles, but a conference title might be clinched in a half empty gym in mid February, there just isn't the cache. The easy answer of course is to say that districts are more important because they give you a chance to win a state title. However, most coaches could tell you in January about far they have a chance to go. For most of them, getting out of sectionals would be a big deal.

I feel like some of these post suggest that a lot more teams would be competing for state titles if they made it more of a focus. As if being happy with just a district title is or a tournament title is holding them back. I feel that this position is a bit simplistic to say the least. I know we as fans like to think that the championship teams are simply the teams that train harder, aim higher, play smarter, and push themselves more. It is a great narrative to follow. Unfortunately, we all know that a lot of what determines winning and losing are things like size, speed, quickness, and the like. These things are primarily the product of what God gave you and can be added to only to a certain extent. Natural talent just has a lot to do with it. For most schools, basketball season is realistically about trying to win tournaments, beat your rivals, win your conference, and trying to win districts. Also, it is about having fun playing and watching a game we all love. Is it my dream for De Soto to win a state title? Absolutely, but this year's Dragons were not going to get anywhere near there no matter who they played, what tournaments they entered, what they focused on, or how much they "wanted" it. If it were only about deep runs in March, most of us would have a pretty miserable existence as high school basketball fans. Of course, all of this is a fan's perspective. I suspect that a coach would want his players to take a very different approach. For fans however, it just seems weird to be mad at a few adults and a bunch of 16 year old kids just because they are not good enough at basketball.

 

[shamrock2011]

Re: Some small schools place " District Championship " banners on walls

i feel sorry for those of you who think in terms of "you're only successful if you win state title or even districts titles". Not everyone can be a Scott central, vashon, charleston, raytown south back in the day or whoever the school may be that has had unbelievable success. The regular season is important and those of you who say it's not are sheltered. Wake up and join the rest of us in the real world. Some schools will never have the opportunity to win a state title. It doesn't matter who you are, if you win 20 games you've had a successful season. That doesn't mean that you necessarily fulfill potential but to say some of the things that some are saying on here is self righteous and ignorant.

 

[msubearssuperfan1]

All SPS schools have district/conference titles on the same banner nm


nm

 

[Rufus R. Jones]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

"You think that only five teams think they had a good year?" was what you added. I did not say that you can't have a good year without winning state. Of course you can. Depends what is realistic, given the talent level. The original question was what is most important. Winning state is the most important. Nobody remembers who won 20 games or who won a given regular season tournament. They remember who won state. Because that is the goal.

 

[oldroundballer]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

Well you did say nothing matters except post season. I interpreted that to mean without post season success it wasn't a good year. Sorry if that's not what you meant.

You may not remember every team that wins 20 games or a conference championship but I can promise you most of the teams that accomplish that do.

I still disagree that every team's goal is to win state. All teams would LIKE to win state I'm sure but most are smart enough to realize it's not realistic and set goals that are more within their reach.

We obviously look at it a little differently and that's fine with me.

Have a great day.

 

[flyers50]

Chump coaches are often the reason for running clocks. But sometimes a team is just better. Play the game. Let the kids who show up everyday and work their butts off get game time. Sports is a learning experience, both good and bad. Let them learn.

 

[shamrock2011]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.


Those teams that I offered are just examples. Try to use some common sense.

If you think that there are programs and schools out there that don't remember or feel honored with teams that have won 20 games then you are living in a fantasy land.

Every teams goal isn't to win the state championship every year. If you think it is then you're out of touch with what all goes in to being a high school athlete.

 

[Rufus R. Jones]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

Takes more to make some people happy, I guess. No apologies offered for having high expectations.

 

[shamrock2011]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

It has nothing to do with needing more to make some happy. You're lumping everyone into the same category. Just like our government with regards to education.

 

[Rufus R. Jones]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

Huh?

 

[WCS Coach]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

There is a certain amount of luck that you need in tournament play. An injury to a key player, a tough match up early in the tournament, or you catch simply catch the wrong team on the wrong night and someone has the night of their life. That stuff happens every year.

 

[shamrock2011]

Re: I'd have to disagree with that.

High expectations? And just where does the line get drawn concerning these expectations? Not every school can win a district or state title. It's that simple. So insinuating that these things are the only things that matter is wrong and shortsighted.