1. I'm ok with how the WPIAL uses conference finishes to determine who gets in the playoffs. Obviously not all conferences are equal in strength- and that will sometimes lead to better teams not getting in the playoffs, but those are always going to be teams near the bottom of rankings. With reclassification every 2 years and natural variability in strength of teams, getting equal conferences is pretty much impossible especially if you want a semblance of geographical continuity. Down in Virginia they use a power rating system similar to Cal Preps and they use it to determine who makes the playoffs. I think it creates less interest.
2. Seeding is a bit more problematic in the WPIAL. It's entirely subjective. Do they give higher seeds to conference champions? Sometimes, but not always. Do they go by strength of schedule? Probably, but without a unbiased system like Cal Preps that is, yes, subjective. Do they look at close losses to good teams? Who knows? Bottom line, sitting in a smoke filled room debating your eye test doesn't always yield fair results. At times it seems off. Sometimes things make no sense at all. For instance, they give North Hills the #6 seed, but then give the #7 and #8 seeds vastly easier games. Does anyone really think Peters Township a weaker opponent than Fox Chapel and Woodland Hills?
2. Seeding is a bit more problematic in the WPIAL. It's entirely subjective. Do they give higher seeds to conference champions? Sometimes, but not always. Do they go by strength of schedule? Probably, but without a unbiased system like Cal Preps that is, yes, subjective. Do they look at close losses to good teams? Who knows? Bottom line, sitting in a smoke filled room debating your eye test doesn't always yield fair results. At times it seems off. Sometimes things make no sense at all. For instance, they give North Hills the #6 seed, but then give the #7 and #8 seeds vastly easier games. Does anyone really think Peters Township a weaker opponent than Fox Chapel and Woodland Hills?
