Week 6 Football Playoff Listing

September 26, 2012

Here is a list of Michigan High School Athletic Association football playing schools, displaying their win-loss records and playoff averages through the fifth week of the season. Schools on this list are in enrollment order. An asterisk (*) beside a record indicates that a team has eight or fewer games scheduled. A carrot (^) beside a school’s name indicates that a team is one win away from playoff qualification.

Those schools with 11-player teams with six or more wins playing nine-game schedules, or five or more wins playing eight games or fewer, will qualify for the MHSAA Football Playoffs beginning Oct. 26-27. Schools with 5-4, 4-3 or 4-4 records may qualify if the number of potential qualifiers by win total does not reach the 256 mark. Schools with six or more wins playing nine-game schedules or five or more wins playing eight games or fewer may be subtracted from the field based on playoff average if the number of potential qualifiers exceeds the 256 mark.

Once the 256 qualifying schools are determined, they will be divided by enrollment groups into eight equal divisions of 32 schools, and then drawn into regions of eight teams each and districts of four teams each.

Those schools with 8-player teams will be ranked by playoff average at season’s end, and the top 16 programs will be drawn into regions of eight teams each for the playoff in that division, which also begins Oct. 26-27.

To review a list of all football playoff schools, individual school playoff point details and to report errors, visit the Football page of the MHSAA Website.

The announcement of the qualifiers and first-round pairings for both the 11 and 8-player playoffs will take place at 7 p.m. on Oct. 21 on the Selection Sunday Show on FOX Sports Detroit. The playoff qualifiers and pairings will be posted to the MHSAA Website following the Selection Sunday Show.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11-Player Playoff Listing

1.	Utica Eisenhower	2772	3-2	62.000
2.	Sterling Heights Stevenson	2766	4-1	75.800
3.	Clarkston ^	2721	5-0	94.400
4.	Grand Blanc	2644	3-2	57.600
5.	Macomb Dakota	2608	4-1	80.600
6.	Lake Orion ^	2565	5-0	96.000
7.	Rockford	2526	3-2	57.400
8.	Troy	2502	3-2	57.400
9.	Clinton Township Chippewa Valley	2462	4-1	77.000
10.	Dearborn Fordson	2442	4-1	83.400
11.	Holland West Ottawa	2262	4-1	71.000
12.	Northville	2220	3-2	60.400
13.	Detroit Cass Tech	2200	4-1	77.400
14.	Canton	2166	3-2	51.200
15.	Monroe ^	2154	5-0	83.200
16.	Detroit Catholic Central	2060	3-2	47.800
17.	Plymouth	2050	4-1	71.200
18.	Salem	2039	4-1	75.600
19.	Livonia Stevenson	2005	4-1	77.200
20.	Holt	1992	3-2	57.200
21.	Hartland ^	1932	5-0	91.200
22.	Warren Mott ^	1879	5-0	86.400
23.	Livonia Churchill ^	1877	5-0	100.800
24.	Walled Lake Central	1857	3-2	52.200
25.	Macomb L'Anse Creuse North	1853	3-2	58.400
26.	Saline	1849	4-1	72.400
27.	Grandville	1846	3-2	53.600
28.	Flint Carman-Ainsworth ^	1772	5-0	88.000
29.	Grand Ledge	1743	4-1	70.600
30.	Rochester	1725	4-1	72.800
31.	Traverse City West	1720	4-1	72.200
32.	White Lake Lakeland	1700	4-1	72.400
33.	Harrison Township L'Anse Creuse	1680	3-2

Making Matters Worse

March 17, 2017

For many years there have been complaints that the MHSAA Football Playoffs make it difficult for some teams to schedule regular season football games. Teams that are too good are avoided because opponents fear losses, and teams that are too small are avoided by larger schools because they do not generate enough playoff point value for wins.

Recently the MHSAA has learned, only indirectly, that some among the state’s football coaches association are recycling an old plan that would make matters worse. It’s called the “Enhanced Strength of Schedule Playoff System.”

Among its features is doubling the number of different point value classifications from four (80 for Class A down to 32 for Class D) to eight (88 for Division 1 down to 32 for Division 8).

What this does is make the art of scheduling regular season games even more difficult; for the greater variety of values you assign to schools, the more difficult it is to align with like-sized schools.

The “Enhanced Strength of Schedule Playoff System” makes matters even worse by creating eight different multipliers depending on the size of opposing schools. Imagine having to consider all this when building a regular season football schedule.

When this proposal was discussed previously statewide in 2012, it was revealed that it would have caused 15 teams with six regular season wins to miss the playoffs that year, while two teams with losing records would have qualified. How do you explain that to people? It was also demonstrated in 2012 that larger schools in more isolated areas would have to travel far and wide across the state, week after week, to build a schedule with potential point value to match similar sized schools located in more heavily populated parts of our state and have many scheduling options nearby. How is that fair?

The proposal is seriously flawed, and by circumventing the MHSAA Football Committee, its proponents assure it is fatally flawed.

Search