“Unbelievable.”
“Absurd.”
Those are words uttered by two different high school soccer coaches describing the Southern Section playoff pairings produced using a computer algorithm under the competitive equity system.
The Southern Section’s new way of putting together pairings continues to receive mixed reviews.
How do you explain that Harvard-Westlake’s boys’ soccer team won the Mission League championship, beat fourth-place Sherman Oaks Notre Dame twice by shutouts but ended up being ranked four spots below the Knights in computer rankings?
How do you explain Newbury Park’s girls’ soccer team with a 10-5-2 record and wins over No. 4 Oaks Christian, No. 12 Moorpark and No. 27 Camarillo failing to get an at-large playoff spot?
In reaction, Southern Section spokesman Thom Simmons said, “No system is perfect whether human or computer. Some will always believe their placement incorrect. I would simply point to the data showing competitive equity placement works.”
Competitive equity does work to produce closer playoff results, but lots of tweaking still needs to take place, including education.
“We want transparency what they value,” one athletic director said of trying to figure out algorithms. “They’re giving us a test, and we need to know the material.”
The problem for schools is once they approved the Southern Section’s use of competitive equity playoffs, there’s no way of going back. The decision on which algorithm to use rests solely with the Southern Section office, and no bylaw or new proposal can be passed to change that.
But if progress isn’t made to educate coaches and fans, commissioner Mike West will face a backlash.
