Bye Week Teams = Unfair Competitive Advantage

[Milk That Cow]

just my humble opinion...

[HEMOTOXIC]

Originally posted by Milk That Cow
just my humble opinion...

Take it up with the UIL:D

[IHStangFan]

My opinion is that it can be good or bad....depending on how the coaching staff plans and prepares. It does give you time to rest up and heal, practice and game plan for the upcoming match up, but I've seen too many times where complacency sets in w/ an entire week without competing. Also can allow for doubts to set in, especially if the upcoming opponent wins their game that week....and that again can be compounded by a decisive victory...etc. etc. etc. yada yada yada. (insert 10,000 other factors here).

It comes down to how you prepare, whether you have a game or not any given week.

[BullsFan]

I disagree. I hate having a bye. I think you lose a lot of momentum and intensity when you take a week off.

[Pendragon13]

From a injury free/scouting/coaching plan standpoint..yes. However, having a week off risks the kids losing a little focus and maybe the momentum built during the season. Having said that, I think most coaches would take a first round bye every time if given a choice..

[navscanmaster]

None of the teams in the state final games last year came from a "bye district.":thinking:

I am too lazy to investigate last years brackets, but I believe Navasota was the "bye district" team that advanced the farthest, and that was only the quarterfinals.

[trojandad]

if every team's goal is how many levels deep they go in the playoffs, then your right, bye weeks are unfair....

but if a team's goal is to win it all, a bye week is one less game a team has to win, increasing the teams chances just in the fact that 5 games in a row are easier to win than 6....

[Milk That Cow]

Originally posted by Pendragon13
From a injury free/scouting/coaching plan standpoint..yes. However, having a week off risks the kids losing a little focus and maybe the momentum built during the season. Having said that, I think most coaches would take a first round bye every time if given a choice..

Thank You


Originally posted by navscanmaster
None of the teams in the state final games last year came from a "bye district."

I am too lazy to investigate last years brackets, but I believe Navasota was the "bye district" team that advanced the farthest, and that was only the quarterfinals.[/B]

What you should check is the record of the "bye week teams" in their first playoff game, "not" how far they advanced, but "if" they advanced...

[navscanmaster]

Originally posted by Milk That Cow
Thank You



What you should check is the record of the "bye week teams" in their first playoff game, "not" how far they advanced, but "if" they advanced...

Last year, since I now feel obliged to dig:

Division One, Round Two:
Burkburnett 3 (bye)
China Spring 17

Pittsburgh 14 (bye)
Van 35

Navasota 48 (bye)
Silsbee 33

Bandera 14 (bye)
La Feria 31

Division Two, Round Two:
Bridgeport 41 (bye)
Llano 27

Vernon 7 (bye)
Liberty Hill 31

Pleasant Grove 37 (bye)
Kemp 13

New Boston 41 (bye)
Nevada Community 7

Caldwell 7 (bye)
West Orange-Stark 37

Rockdale 17 (bye)
Cleveland 8

Pearsall 14 (bye)
Sinton 49

Devine 43 (bye)
Rio Hondo 48

Five out of twelve teams with first round byes advanced. New Boston and Pleasant Grove played VERY weak winners from the 13-14 matchup, and Navasota and Bridgeport (both top 5) were much stronger teams than their first round competition. Rockdale is the only team to pull off an upset, beating Cleveland. I think the argument needs another year before we can make any conclusions. Personally, I hate a bye week. I hope that they go away next realignment. I just felt obliged to offer facts.

[WOS87]

You beat me to it.

Not a single team that had a first round BYE last season advanced out of their region

[Milk That Cow]

I can't argue with those 2008 results...

But, I think 2009 will be different...

[coachkiss]

Just looking at how far they advanced is not a fair assessment of how much the Bye factors into the probability of winning/losing.

If Carthage and Celina had the Bye, I have no doubt that they still would have advanced to the state finals. If Vernon had four Byes before they played Liberty Hill, they still would have lost, just the same as if they had no Bye at all.

The only way to see the difference the Bye makes is to play a matchup a significant number of times with the Bye, and then have them play the week before the game (and win), and then play a significant number of times so you can have a fair statistical analysis.

Maybe an easier way (but not as accurate) is to see how they performed relative a benchmark, i.e. Massey Ratings. If Massey showed they should lose by 28, but they only lost by 14 after the Bye, then I say that is a pretty big difference that they Bye made.

Instead of just saying "the Bye teams lost 7 out of 12 games, so the Bye doesn't work", I think it deserves a much closer inspection.

[Bullaholic]

I don't like the bye week, and the Bulls are in a bye week district, for most of the reasons stated earlier in this thread. Plus, it gives rise to speculation like this about an unfair advantage. Everybody should be playing somebody every week right up to the title game.

I would like to see an NCAA seeding type of playoff bracket, though. That way potential state champ teams would not meet too early.

[Johnny Utah]

I know in basketball it seems to hurt teams more than help. JMO

[Silsbee1989]

Originally posted by BullsFan
I disagree. I hate having a bye. I think you lose a lot of momentum and intensity when you take a week off. I agree 100% :clap: :clap:

[Phil C]

What it amounts to is Rest vs Rust and Rick. I would take the rest. It gives your players who have the nagging injuries time to recover. Also it gives you more time to prepare. The Rust may hurt you in the first half but if you can keep the game close at that time then you can have a big advantage. It is like the NBA playoffs where teams would rather have rest over rust and risk.

Sinton has to play Pearsall who had a bye week. I definitely think Pearsall has the advantage. For one thing they have had time to rest some injured players. Then all the coaches are free on Friday night to come and scout Sinton on Friday night when we played Rio Hondo. Also Sinton lost one of its' key players in that game due to injury and is out for Pearsall.

Pearsall has perhaps lost some momentum but I think the advantages by far outweight the disadvantages.

Overall if we (Sinton) could have had the bye and Pearsall had to play Rio Hondo I would have taken it.

[Johnny Utah]

Interesting that you have the injury report for Sinton and game status of players...do you coach?? Phil, your not a fair weather fan are you??

[bulldog82]

this year bandera welcomes the rest. last year the rust showed! so i think its a team situation on what you would prefer. the healthy teams want the momentum and play vs rest, injured teams welcome the rest vs playing and risking more injuries.

[LE Dad]

I will get back with you on that. I am still unsure:confused:

[bulldog82]

on another note, i dont have the stats, but after our loss last year statistics then showed majority of teams with bye lost.

[Texas Cougar]

I would much rather have a playoff game under my belt. Kinda like the first time you play in Texas Stadium, you are in awe. The 2nd time it is just another football game.

[ziggy29]

Originally posted by BullsFan
I disagree. I hate having a bye. I think you lose a lot of momentum and intensity when you take a week off.
Depends on the team's circumstances. If you're healthy and you have momentum at the end of the season you hate to break it with a bye, but if you have nagging injuries to important parts of your team that an extra week can heal it's a huge bonus.

[bulldog82]

didnt i just say that, or something similar?