Don’t dismiss idea of open tournaments

Without new ideas we’d all still be getting up to change channels. So I believe in giving creative thinkers a broad benefit of the doubt when they come up with a fresh angle.

That’s why, at first glance, I like the idea of open tournaments that was discussed Thursday at the Maine Interscholastic Athletic Directors Association’s spring conference in Rockport.

The concept is basically this: Let every high school team make the playoffs in every sport.

“It’s a subject that has come up a lot in the past, so we decided it was time to really take a look at it and see if it made sense for Maine,” said Cape Elizabeth High School AD Keith Weatherbie, who heads the 12-member committee studying the idea.

Weatherbie stressed that his group’s research is still on the ground floor. No vote by the MIADA on open tournaments is likely before next year. But here’s how it might work:

The state would probably still be divided into Eastern and Western Maine and feature Classes A, B, C and D. There would likely be Heal point standings in every sport possible, which would be necessary to determine playoff seedings – No. 16 vs. No. 1, No. 15 vs. No. 2, and so on.

Like most Mainers, my first inclination is to mentally test drive the idea using high school basketball. Instead of allowing only the top 50 percent of the state’s 277 boys and girls hoop teams in the tourney, they’d all be in.

What would be the effect?

It’s not as drastic as it sounds. One more round of postseason games would have to be added beyond what’s already in place. This would mean another game’s worth of travel for half the teams.

I know that sounds expensive, until you remember the extra gate receipts from those 138 or so games, which should more than pay for everything.

There are plenty of positives to open tournaments. No more disappointed teams that missed making the tourney by six 100ths of a point. For teams that needed most of the season to get their act together, it’s a second lease on life. Players injured in the regular season wouldn’t feel rushed to get back in the lineup.

“There would also be less pressure on coaches to win, so they could play more players in the regular season,” Weatherbie pointed out.

Of course, there are negatives. No more “must-win” games in the regular season could drive down attendance and revenue. And geographically isolated teams like Caribou and Presque Isle in Class A might have difficulty scheduling games.

If the whole idea was just for basketball, I would say it is workable right now with some fine-tuning. It already works in sports like cross country, track and wrestling, which have open postseasons.

Applying open tournaments to other sports is when more bugs become apparent.

Take football.

Because of the weekly nature of the game, that extra round of playoffs means either reducing the regular season or extending the postseason. The former, I believe, puts undue emphasis on the playoffs. The latter could mean running into further weather problems.

Beyond that, the opening round of playoffs where good or great teams are hosting poor teams sets up a lot more ugly blowouts in a sport where mismatches are less tolerable to participants and fans alike.

We’ve already seen such ugly games in the Pine Tree Conference, which allows all of its members into the postseason.

A lot of what pertains to football applies to hockey.

Then there’s baseball.

Take that opening-round game and pit a No. 16 baseball team against a No. 1 team. Suppose the No. 16 team has one very good pitcher and not much else. Undoubtedly that top pitcher is going to face the No. 1 team. Let’s say the pitcher from No. 16 beats No. 1.

What’s wrong with that, you ask?

Nothing. Except now No. 16’s top pitcher has been used, they’re easy pickings in the next round, and the best team is out of the tournament. I’m not sure this is the competitive ideal we want, rewarding the poor team with a great individual at the possible expense of the team that has proven itself better over the long haul. I realize you can extend that argument to virtually any sport, but it is particularly glaring in baseball.

These bugs might be worth the price if open tournaments turn a profit. Money is the final argument. While no one can guarantee the revenue-producing sports would make enough to float every sport’s postseason participation, doesn’t it make sense to at least examine the idea in these times of diminishing school funding?

Add it up and I think open tournaments is an idea that could work. It’s definitely worth looking into.