The Wyoming High School Activities Association’s eight-year experiment with power ratings came to a merciful close last fall. The 2009 season was a return to the past — using conference records to determine playoff qualifiers — but did it make any change?
Actually, if last year’s system was in place this year, only one of the playoff qualifiers would have changed: Powell would have made it in Class 3A and Riverton would have been bumped.
That’s the only change, but it’s interesting and important to note that the more common opponents teams have, the less relevant power ratings become. Such was the case this year — with nothing but common opponents in 4A and all but one week of common opponents in 2A and 1A 11-man.
For argument, though, here are this year’s WHSAA power ratings, class by class, with a little breakdown of how playoff qualifying would have broken down:
In Class 4A, it wouldn’t have mattered, since the power ratings can’t really influence anything if the teams only play each other round-robin style. The playoff pairings are exactly the same. For argument’s sake, though, here they are:
1. Sheridan 32.39
2. Cheyenne Central 31.28
3. Gillette 31.28
4. Green River 30.27
5. Kelly Walsh 29.06
6. Rock Springs 27.94
7. Laramie 26.83
8. Natrona 25.72
9. Cheyenne East 25.72
10. Evanston 24.03
In Class 3A…. There is the most room for change, because there are fewer common opponents in this division than in any other. With the East (Douglas) hosting the title game last year, the West top seed would have been No. 1 overall. (Note: All that’s missing is the result from Hardin, Mont., from Friday, which would bump Cody’s PR up or down a few decimals, but wouldn’t have affected playoff seeding anyway.)
1. Douglas 32.82
2. Buffalo 30.88
3. Star Valley 30.50
4. Cody 30.30
5. Worland 29.88
6. Torrington 29.07
7. Powell 28.50
8. Lander 28.38
9. Riverton 27.13
10. Jackson 25.75
11. Wheatland 24.44
12. Rawlins 23.25
Playoff Pairings: (8) Lander at (1W) Cody; (5) Star Valley at (2E) Buffalo; (6) Torrington at (2W) Worland; (7) Powell at (1E) Douglas
In both 2A and 1A 11-man, little would have changed because the systems, like the one in 4A, relies a ton on conference games….
In Class 2A… With both of last year’s hosts, Burns and Glenrock, in the East, the top seed would have gone to the West Conference champ… but little matter. Playoff pairings would have been exactly the same.
1. Glenrock 33.75
2. Kemmerer 32.63
3. Greybull 32.25
4. Thermopolis 31.88
5. Big Piney 30.88
6. Big Horn 30.00
7. Lovell 29.63
8. Wright 28.38
9. Burns 27.00
10. Moorcroft 26.88
11. Lyman 26.25
12. Pinedale 26.00
13. Mountain View 25.13
14. Wyoming Indian 25.00
15. Tongue River 24.63
16. Newcastle 23.75
Playoff pairings: (8) Wright at (1W) Kemmerer; (5) Big Piney at (2E) Thermopolis; (6) Big Horn at (2W) Greybull; (7) Lovell at (1E) Glenrock.
In 1A 11-man… A couple first-round matchups would have been flipped around, with Riverside and Pine Bluffs cutting their travel down to play teams closer to home in the first round. With Burlington hosting last year, the top seed would have gone to the East Conference winner… The Dubois-Shoshoni game scheduled for Tuesday is omitted here; neither one was in the playoff hunt, and the result of that game would have had a negligible effect on the power ratings and wouldn’t have changed the playoff pairings.
1. Cokeville 33.11
2. Lingle 32.25
3. Southeast 32.00
4. Wind River 31.86
5. Lusk 31.13
6. Pine Bluffs 29.56
7. Riverside 29.49
8. Rocky Mountain 29.36
9. Burlington 28.76
10. Hulett 28.38
11. Saratoga 26.39
12. Sundance 26.13
13. Upton 25.81
14. Normative Services 25.13
Dubois, Shoshoni NA
Playoff pairings: (8) Rocky Mountain at (1E) Southeast; (5) Lusk at (2W) Wind River; (6) Pine Bluffs at (2E) Lingle; (7) Riverside at (1W) Cokeville.
In 1A six-man… without a defending state champion, the conference that earned hosting duties would have been assigned by the WHSAA. I’ve presented both options below. Oddly enough, the four East Conference teams went 1-4 in the power ratings… In either case, the first-round pairings would have been different in both options.
1. Guernsey 33.97
2. Midwest 31.95
3. Hanna 30.17
4. Kaycee 29.34
5. Ten Sleep 28.25
6. Snake River 27.03
7. Meeteetse 24.56
8. Farson 23.50
Playoff pairings with East winner as top seed: (8) Farson at (1E) Guernsey; (5) Hanna at (2W) Snake River; (6) Kaycee at (2E) Midwest; (7) Meeteetse at (1W) Ten Sleep.
Playoff pairings with West winner as top seed: (8) Farson at (1W) Ten Sleep; (5) Hanna at (2E) Midwest; (6) Kaycee at (2W) Snake River; (7) Meeteetse at (1E) Guernsey.
Like I said earlier today, I haven’t heard anyone whining about the loss of power ratings. After seeing this, though, what do you think? Still glad to see it gone, or do you think there were instances this year that give it cause for coming back? Let me know your opinion; post a comment below.
–patrick
Good by power rankings. It’s about time they are gone.
Patrick,
Honestly, I think the power ratings had their place. A combination of new and old would be perfect. A system where the conference winners, or top two made it in then the next 6 by power rating. There is a place, but with a state as small as Wyoming what we have now is probably the best fit.
The old power rating formula didn’t really work. However, I do think that a power rating system with a substantially better formula is needed if the WHSAA ever wants to do a better job of reducing the distances that teams have to travel during the season.