ADVERTISEMENT

D-2 Predictions

A

Antone13

Oct 4, 2013
99
31
18
Loomis wins easily
Cambridge over St. Marys in a tight game
Ainsworth win easily
Central Valley wins big
Hitchcock wins in a close TD game
Mullen wins by 2 scores
S-T wins easily
Archangels win easily
Riverside wins big
Wynot wins easily
B-R wins 90 to 80 vs. Fullerton the team that doesnt turn ball over wins
High plains wins in a low scoring game
BDS wins 60 to 20
 
  • Like
Reactions: OldManHBC and TwinsRRUs
Well, I agreed with most of your picks (Loomis, Cambridge, Ainsworth, CV, Mullen) and slightly disagreed with your correct pick of Hitchcock County (I thought a 2-3 TD win by HC).

The rest, I didn't really have an opinion on. I was surprised by a lot of these scores.

So I will run down the predictions with the results.


Loomis wins easily
- Loomis lost by 2 (huge surprise)
Cambridge over St. Marys in a tight game
- Cambridge was blown out 52-12 (big surprise)
Ainsworth win easily
- Ainsworth lost 68-42 (little surprised)
Central Valley wins big
- correct
Hitchcock wins in a close TD game
- correct, good job
Mullen wins by 2 scores
- Mullen lost by 3 scores
S-T wins easily
- correct
Archangels win easily
- correct
Riverside wins big
- correct
Wynot wins easily
- correct
B-R wins 90 to 80 vs. Fullerton the team that doesnt turn ball over wins
- correct (64-54)
High plains wins in a low scoring game
- correct, HP won 22-20
BDS wins 60 to 20
- correct BDS 42-20
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: C-Bearsfan
2nd Round predictions
Archangels over Twin Loup 52-14
Howells Dodge over BR 52-20
Central Valley over St.Marys 54-14
Wyont over Hitchcock 34-28
Sandhills over Axtell 58-20
Riverside over Creighton 58-24
Overton over High Plains 34-22
BDS over Kenesaw 44-22
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinsRRUs
253847 said:
2nd Round predictions
Archangels over Twin Loup 52-14
Howells Dodge over BR 52-20
Central Valley over St.Marys 54-14
Wyont over Hitchcock 34-28
Sandhills over Axtell 58-20
Riverside over Creighton 58-24
Overton over High Plains 34-22
BDS over Kenesaw 44-22
Click to expand...
The round 8 is going to be dang good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 253847
Is Loomis the first #1 SEED to lose first round (32 man playoffs)? I'm trying to find HOW big of an upset that was based on historical data. Anyone know?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinsRRUs
C8manfball said:
Is Loomis the first #1 SEED to lose first round (32 man playoffs)? I'm trying to find HOW big of an upset that was based on historical data. Anyone know?
Click to expand...
Since they have moved to this format, yes I believe so.

I wish the NSAA could update their playoff brackets online to show the seeds from previous years. I think that helps with historical data keeping.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinsRRUs
I know 2006 St Ed was barely 0.500 and had a few upsets in the playoffs. Don't think they were a 16 Seed though.
 
northeastNebraska said:
Since they have moved to this format, yes I believe so.

I wish the NSAA could update their playoff brackets online to show the seeds from previous years. I think that helps with historical data keeping.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree. I’m also not a fan of re-seeding in these situations. If a team pulls off an upset against a #1 seed in the first round, they shouldn’t immediately have to face the top-ranked team again as a “reward.” Just my opinion—I know some will say, “Win more games in the regular season.” I get that, but why not just seed it 1-32 and let things play out? Upsets are part of the game, so let them happen naturally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eagle3898, Football4281 and viewfromthebooth
C8manfball said:
Yes, I agree. I’m also not a fan of re-seeding in these situations. If a team pulls off an upset against a #1 seed in the first round, they shouldn’t immediately have to face the top-ranked team again as a “reward.” Just my opinion—I know some will say, “Win more games in the regular season.” I get that, but why not just seed it 1-32 and let things play out? Upsets are part of the game, so let them happen naturally.
Click to expand...
If you seed 1 to 32 the same thing will happen if a low seed upsets a team, They will still have to play a top team, and to get to the championship they will still have to beat a top 1 or 2 seeded team and you have just added a ton more travel for the same result
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinsRRUs
highschoolfootballnut said:
If you seed 1 to 32 the same thing will happen if a low seed upsets a team, They will still have to play a top team, and to get to the championship they will still have to beat a top 1 or 2 seeded team and you have just added a ton more travel for the same result
Click to expand...
For example twin loop would have player BDS at BDS in the first round probably
 
highschoolfootballnut said:
If you seed 1 to 32 the same thing will happen if a low seed upsets a team, They will still have to play a top team, and to get to the championship they will still have to beat a top 1 or 2 seeded team and you have just added a ton more travel for the same result
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand this. I just do not like it. We already have teams traveling on the western side 4 hours plus first round. Would it add travel yes, a ton? Eh I mean maybe? There is no perfect situation. Nebraska geographically and demographically is so unique it just adds all those difficulties.
 
C8manfball said:
Yes, I understand this. I just do not like it. We already have teams traveling on the western side 4 hours plus first round. Would it add travel yes, a ton? Eh I mean maybe? There is no perfect situation. Nebraska geographically and demographically is so unique it just adds all those difficulties.
Click to expand...
Twin loop would win the first round game if we used your system
 
northeastNebraska said:
I just can't believe 8 man coaches and AD's still vote to not have the high seed host throughout the playoffs. Will never get the logic behind that.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree. However like we have this stipulation in volleyball if it's more than 200 miles for a district final we need to find a central host. Even though we have a sub in C2 where 3 teams are driving 200 miles or so FOR A SUB.
 
C8manfball said:
Yes, I agree. However like we have this stipulation in volleyball if it's more than 200 miles for a district final we need to find a central host. Even though we have a sub in C2 where 3 teams are driving 200 miles or so FOR A SUB.
Click to expand...
yeah I dont think volleyball schools thought someone would do that to other teams but appears they will need a rule for subs due to a bad apple
 
northeastNebraska said:
I just can't believe 8 man coaches and AD's still vote to not have the high seed host throughout the playoffs. Will never get the logic behind that.
Click to expand...
I love it.

Seedings are good, but not perfect. Some teams play a harder schedule in the regular season and get losses.

Those same teams get to the post season and don't deserve a home game if they upset a team or two?

That's not fair to those teams that played a tougher schedule to never reward them for any upsets in the playoffs and making them have to travel 4+ hours week after week if they keep winning.

Just because a team had an easy regular season schedule doesn't mean they earned a home field advantage throughout the playoffs. Reward the upsets.

Having to play away game after away game after away game is dumb if you keep upsetting teams. 🤷🏾
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: jjbjacs18, Bubman86, ClkTwr2011 and 2 others
253847 said:
2nd Round predictions
Archangels over Twin Loup 52-14
Howells Dodge over BR 52-20
Central Valley over St.Marys 54-14
Wyont over Hitchcock 34-28
Sandhills over Axtell 58-20
Riverside over Creighton 58-24
Overton over High Plains 34-22
BDS over Kenesaw 44-22
Click to expand...
Archangels wins 46 to 6 over Twin Loup
Howells Dodge over BR 60 to 12
Central Valley over St. Mary's 56 to 6
Wynot Over Hitchcock 34 to 30 close game
Sandhills over Axtell 48 to 12
Riverside over Creighton 48 to 6
Overton over High Plains 42 to 20
BDS over Kenesaw 40 to 6
Not many close games in 2nd rnd besides Wynot Hitchcock and Overton High Plains Game.
We will see if there is a big difference between the top tier and the 2nd tier teams
 
  • Like
Reactions: highschoolfootballnut
TwinsRRUs said:
I love it.

Seedings are good, but not perfect. Some teams play a harder schedule in the regular season and get losses.

Those same teams get to the post season and don't deserve a home game if they upset a team or two?

That's not fair to those teams that played a tougher schedule to never reward them for any upsets in the playoffs and making them have to travel 4+ hours week after week if they keep winning.

Just because a team had an easy regular season schedule doesn't mean they earned a home field advantage throughout the playoffs. Reward the upsets.

Having to play away game after away game after away game is dumb. 🤷🏾
Click to expand...
I agree with you here, and your example is not uncommon. If I remember correctly, #1 Seed Cross County dropped a first round game to Weeping Water?? Weeping water played a tough schedule and one of their best players was injured for nearly half of the season. I think it is reasonable to give Weeping Water a home game or 2 through that playoff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinsRRUs
ClkTwr2011 said:
I agree with you here, and your example is not uncommon. If I remember correctly, #1 Seed Cross County dropped a first round game to Weeping Water?? Weeping water played a tough schedule and one of their best players was injured for nearly half of the season. I think it is reasonable to give Weeping Water a home game or 2 through that playoff.
Click to expand...
I believe that was a second round game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClkTwr2011
highschoolfootballnut said:
yeah I dont think volleyball schools thought someone would do that to other teams but appears they will need a rule for subs due to a bad apple
Click to expand...

I've seen this referenced a few times throughout threads on here...does anyone know if hosting outside of Maywood-Hayes Center was actually even an option? There's not a provision in the Volleyball Handbook for hosting at any site other than the high seed for sub districts, at least not that I can see.

The only clause I see that that kind of hints at that is "Note: A request for a modification of the above format must be approved through the NSAA Office with all participating schools agreeing. At any point in which a team would be confronted with playing matches back-to-back, a 30-minute break shall be implemented into the schedule." But that clause follows a section outlining what days are played for 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6- team subs. So that, to me, seems to imply a change to the number of games played in a night on page 14 of the manual.

Or am I mis-interpreting the "bad apple" comment, and they were actually a bad apple for being the "no" against scheduling the bunny-bracket and semi-finals on Monday, championship on Tuesday (like at least one 6-team subs did) to save some travel for the visitors?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinsRRUs
Yossarian23 said:
I've seen this referenced a few times throughout threads on here...does anyone know if hosting outside of Maywood-Hayes Center was actually even an option? There's not a provision in the Volleyball Handbook for hosting at any site other than the high seed for sub districts, at least not that I can see.

The only clause I see that that kind of hints at that is "Note: A request for a modification of the above format must be approved through the NSAA Office with all participating schools agreeing. At any point in which a team would be confronted with playing matches back-to-back, a 30-minute break shall be implemented into the schedule." But that clause follows a section outlining what days are played for 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6- team subs. So that, to me, seems to imply a change to the number of games played in a night on page 14 of the manual.

Or am I mis-interpreting the "bad apple" comment, and they were actually a bad apple for being the "no" against scheduling the bunny-bracket and semi-finals on Monday, championship on Tuesday (like at least one 6-team subs did) to save some travel for the visitors?
Click to expand...
I was told all teams did agree except Maywood
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinsRRUs
Yossarian23 said:
I've seen this referenced a few times throughout threads on here...does anyone know if hosting outside of Maywood-Hayes Center was actually even an option? There's not a provision in the Volleyball Handbook for hosting at any site other than the high seed for sub districts, at least not that I can see.

The only clause I see that that kind of hints at that is "Note: A request for a modification of the above format must be approved through the NSAA Office with all participating schools agreeing. At any point in which a team would be confronted with playing matches back-to-back, a 30-minute break shall be implemented into the schedule." But that clause follows a section outlining what days are played for 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6- team subs. So that, to me, seems to imply a change to the number of games played in a night on page 14 of the manual.

Or am I mis-interpreting the "bad apple" comment, and they were actually a bad apple for being the "no" against scheduling the bunny-bracket and semi-finals on Monday, championship on Tuesday (like at least one 6-team subs did) to save some travel for the visitors?
Click to expand...
Not a clue on your questions.

The new format might've made sense in theory, but IMO, that was ridiculous for all those teams to travel that far over 3 days.

What if the #1 seed MayHay would've lost their first game on Day 2 and the 2 remaining teams from 3-4 hrs away had to travel there on Day 3 for the subdistrict finals? smh
 
Here's the word I've heard:

*The 4 schools playing Monday night asked the NSAA and Maywood-Hayes Center if they could play at an alternate location because of travel.

*Maywood-Hayes Center said no. Their rationale was simple...............of the 6 teams in their sub-district, Maywood-Hayes Center voted no on the proposal for regionals in C1 and C2 volleyball. The other 5 schools all voted for the proposal to pass.

*At the bottom of this proposal, a "con" was that eastern teams may have more travel.


In the end, Maywood-Hayes Center sounds like they held the eastern schools to the vote they made last spring, knowing that this kind of thing could happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ruttingbuck and TwinsRRUs
ACICOD said:
Here's the word I've heard:

*The 4 schools playing Monday night asked the NSAA and Maywood-Hayes Center if they could play at an alternate location because of travel.

*Maywood-Hayes Center said no. Their rationale was simple...............of the 6 teams in their sub-district, Maywood-Hayes Center voted no on the proposal for regionals in C1 and C2 volleyball. The other 5 schools all voted for the proposal to pass.

*At the bottom of this proposal, a "con" was that eastern teams may have more travel.


In the end, Maywood-Hayes Center sounds like they held the eastern schools to the vote they made last spring, knowing that this kind of thing could happen.
Click to expand...
This is what I heard also, again Class B has had this for a longer period and they seem to have schools that do not pout about losing the vote and do whats best for the students in that situation. This was not the case with May Wood Hayes Center. So it appears a rule will have to be amended to make up for the fact that schools like Maywood and holding a grudge when they do not win the vote in a democratic processes that NSAA and our country operates. Grace, courtesy, common sense and a respect for fellow schools and the democratic processes are not held at the same value and every school.
 
I don't disagree that they could have given some ground on this..............but, let's not pretend all of the schools that voted for this didn't know this was a possibility. It was right in the proposal that this kind of thing could happen.

It seems as though the road only runs from west to east, but as soon as it flips the other way, people start having real problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alacyradio, HighPlainsCoach, Ruttingbuck and 4 others
ACICOD said:
I don't disagree that they could have given some ground on this..............but, let's not pretend all of the schools that voted for this didn't know this was a possibility. It was right in the proposal that this kind of thing could happen.

It seems as though the road only runs from west to east, but as soon as it flips the other way, people start having real problems.
Click to expand...
Eastern schools always seem to complain when it comes to traveling to the western schools for a game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yossarian23, Bubman86, TwinsRRUs and 1 other person
ACICOD said:
Here's the word I've heard:

*The 4 schools playing Monday night asked the NSAA and Maywood-Hayes Center if they could play at an alternate location because of travel.

*Maywood-Hayes Center said no. Their rationale was simple...............of the 6 teams in their sub-district, Maywood-Hayes Center voted no on the proposal for regionals in C1 and C2 volleyball. The other 5 schools all voted for the proposal to pass.

*At the bottom of this proposal, a "con" was that eastern teams may have more travel.


In the end, Maywood-Hayes Center sounds like they held the eastern schools to the vote they made last spring, knowing that this kind of thing could happen.
Click to expand...
If true, good for MayHay!

If the East doesn't like it, they can vote for things to go back the way they were.. 🤷🏾
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yossarian23, Bubman86, HighPlainsCoach and 2 others
northeastNebraska said:
The new format gets the best 8 to state. People are making way too big of a deal that Sutton had to go to MayHay and Maxwell had to go Hebron.
Click to expand...
I agree is not that much of a problem. The problem was just that Sandy Creek ad Sutton are 14 miles apart and could have played that first round at Sandy creek or Sutton BUT in the end who cares I like the system
 
  • Like
Reactions: northeastNebraska and GrizzzlyPanda
northeastNebraska said:
The new format gets the best 8 to state. People are making way too big of a deal that Sutton had to go to MayHay and Maxwell had to go Hebron.
Click to expand...
Hayes Center Location Travel times:

Arcadia 2hr 50m
Sandy Creek 3hr 11m
Sutton 3hr 20m
Cross County 3hrs 50m
Twins River 4hr 6m

It wasn't just Sutton. It was everyone except the home team in this subdistrict.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A

D 1 Predictions

Replies
14
Views
5K
Huskerland Prep Sports
saline76
S
L

D2 Playoff Projections

Replies
23
Views
6K
Huskerland Prep Sports
Antone13
A
A

D-1 predictions 1st Rnd

Replies
8
Views
4K
Huskerland Prep Sports
trackman77
T
A

D-2 Picks for Rnd 1 Playoffs

Replies
22
Views
8K
Huskerland Prep Sports
Bobcat4huskers
B
A

D-1 2nd round playoff pics

Replies
11
Views
4K
Huskerland Prep Sports
saline76
S
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back