Searcy awarded State, 6a South shunned again!!

[Bloodinthewater]

I truly hope the playing surface at the grass field in Searcy is improved over the last time they hosted state in 2013.  Seeing that both of the Searcy teams are scheduled at the Staduim for all their contests, I suspect not. Well we will again,  do what we can from the ditch of a place you call a field. Four years in a row, AAA has awarded the State tournament to a team not in the 6a South.  Mt Home 12, Searcy 13, Russellville 14, and Searcy, again 15. My child graduates and never once played a State game hosted by her own conference. The one common factor in all three of these places, their second fields were horrible.  Would like to think AAA would check into this before awarding State to these schools. With Searcy getting it twice in two years, proof they do not. (note: at least in Russellville, the college kinda pulled one over on them, by allowing then disallowing them to use their field.)

[fourfourtwo]

Where are you finding the field assignments?

[Bloodinthewater]

the topic that starts out Links to brackets

[6aSoccer]

Saw the fields at searcy last time and one was ok but the back field was the worst I'd ever seen. Absolutely terrible

[MDXPHD]

Saw the fields at searcy last time and one was ok but the back field was the worst I'd ever seen. Absolutely terrible

Must be a Jonesboro fan

[sevenof400]

Bloodinthewater,

Please take a look at this thread.

[Bloodinthewater]

El Dorado has 3 nice fields and is 6a south.  Just saying

[ricepig]

El Dorado has 3 nice fields and is 6a south.  Just saying

Then they should have made a better bid.

[sevenof400]

El Dorado has 3 nice fields and is 6a south.  Just saying

My point in directing you to the other thread was only to provide a bit more background on why the bid process needs serious revision - it was not (and is not) any attempt to downgrade El Dorado's facilities (which I have never seen by the way). 

My guess is the Searcy bid had higher financial guarantees to AAA and that alone is why AAA choose Searcy again.  I honestly don't think AAA cares about the quality of the field, travel times or any other consideration other than $$.  That is sad for the players, coaches and fans of the various teams.  Unfortunately, as Ricepig said, a city wanting to host a state playoff has to put the biggest pot of gold at AAA's feet.  That's not how it should be, but until AAA answers to all parties it is supposed to serve this is the way it will be. 

[Sir Alex]

The AAA board that votes on that sites are school employees that represent the the schools in their general locale.  So they would be answering to themselves.  Don't disagree that the better bid usually gets the tourney but that is not always the case.  No bid no tourney though...

[Bloodinthewater]

I understood what you were saying and agree totally with you.  My point was not how it was decided, but that who was qualified to host.  If on game day, the city backs a truck up to the edge of your 2nd field on game day with a loaded of sand and starts filling all the pot holes on your field, (Mountain Home '12) then maybe you should start checking to see if they have a suitable field to host a tournament.

[GenesisGuzman16]

I will agree with everything that Bloodinthewater said. The only time the 6A South had the State tournament was in '11 (My freshman year) and I heard nothing negative about the tournament. Just positive things. I will also agree that the second fields of most sites were horrible  (Russellville's being the worst I ever played on). I saw a post on one of El Dorado's parents Facebook about the condition of Searcy's second field and it looked the same as the last time they played there. It's a shame AAA looks at how much money they'll get instead of the condition of the fields for the state bidders for 6A.

[ricepig]

So.....how was old soccer field #2?

[fourfourtwo]

So.....how was old soccer field #2?

Worst field conditions that I've seen and I've  seen a lot. Teams couldn't intentionally find a field of that quality to practice on to prepare for it.
It wasn't soccer being played on that field. Ball was floating in places and field looked more like a horse track than a soccer field. Teams could pass no further than about 10 yards and players slipping and falling all over. The entire field was soft and one would sink down when stepping on it.
The field was closed after the 2nd game was played in it the first day. Should have never been used.

[Bloodinthewater]

Field two was ok once they got the cows off of it   Kudos to Mountain Home girls.  They played a good physical game and those two girls up front #9 and #10 worked well together. I think if our leading scorer had not been injuried in the last game of the season and could not play, we would have had a better chance. But thought it was a pretty close ball game 2-0.

[ricepig]

So.....how was old soccer field #2?

Worst field conditions that I've seen and I've  seen a lot. Teams couldn't intentionally find a field of that quality to practice on to prepare for it.
It wasn't soccer being played on that field. Ball was floating in places and field looked more like a horse track than a soccer field. Teams could pass no further than about 10 yards and players slipping and falling all over. The entire field was soft and one would sink down when stepping on it.
The field was closed after the 2nd game was played in it the first day. Should have never been used.

So, El Do wasn't mudders, pretty sure it effected both teams equally.

[Bloodinthewater]

Exactly, the field as bad as it was, was bad for both teams. No excuses, Mountain Home has a nice team. Wish them well moving forward.

[ricepig]

Exactly, the field as bad as it was, was bad for both teams. No excuses, Mountain Home has a nice team. Wish them well moving forward.

And as far as the fields, I agree, they need to be playable. I suspect that a lot of grass fields are in pretty bad shape due to the weather this year.

[fourfourtwo]

Exactly, the field as bad as it was, was bad for both teams. No excuses, Mountain Home has a nice team. Wish them well moving forward.
[/quotes
That's an ignorant statement. If a team is used to playing on a bad surface and another team is not it hardly makes it fair.  A turf surface is the most equal surface to play on.  A field like #2 gives a team who plays on a poor quality field an unfair advantage. Mtn Home plays on turf.   Searcy aha in turf, this is why they gave themselves turf for all of playoffs because they understand what it does to their talent. It takes it away.

[Valleysports]

If the number of teams, in the 6a tournament, were cut by half - would a 2nd field be needed?  Problem solved 

[ricepig]

If the number of teams, in the 6a tournament, were cut by half - would a 2nd field be needed?  Problem solved 

Only 8 teams starting in 2016, but in soccer, you have both boys and girls. I suggest they have separate hosts, like the 7A does.

[Bloodinthewater]

Agree with Ricepig except no one really bids to host apparently. In Florida, my friend told me that its done by seeding. The #1 seeds host the first rounds. Seems like that would make the most sense to me.

[Valleysports]

If the number of teams, in the 6a tournament, were cut by half - would a 2nd field be needed?  Problem solved 

Only 8 teams starting in 2016, but in soccer, you have both boys and girls. I suggest they have separate hosts, like the 7A does.

So this problem is solved or do we need to drop it to 4 boy teams and 4 girls teams?  We certainly don't need to be using a #2 field...  8 out of 16 teams don't need to go to playoffs. 

[ricepig]

If the number of teams, in the 6a tournament, were cut by half - would a 2nd field be needed?  Problem solved 

Only 8 teams starting in 2016, but in soccer, you have both boys and girls. I suggest they have separate hosts, like the 7A does.

So this problem is solved or do we need to drop it to 4 boy teams and 4 girls teams?  We certainly don't need to be using a #2 field...  8 out of 16 teams don't need to go to playoffs. 

Or, we could just for away with championships and give everyone a ribbon. I don't see what difference it makes, have them start on Wednesdays, nobody is going to school anyways.

[Valleysports]

Kind of the way it is now - don't you think?  Nearly every team goes to playoffs - next year only 50% of the 6A will still go to Playoffs?  Only in Arkansas    Here you have all this complaining about having to play on a #2 field - and it's simply because teams, that have no business being in playoffs, are in the playoffs.  There are only 16, 6A teams, playoffs should be done on one Saturday - Finals the next.  You'd change your mind about starting on wed, if it were in Pine Bluff or ED, and your kid had to play on #2 field.  .

[GenesisGuzman16]

Kind of the way it is now - don't you think?  Nearly every team goes to playoffs - next year only 50% of the 6A will still go to Playoffs?  Only in Arkansas    Here you have all this complaining about having to play on a #2 field - and it's simply because teams, that have no business being in playoffs, are in the playoffs.  There are only 16, 6A teams, playoffs should be done on one Saturday - Finals the next.  You'd change your mind about starting on wed, if it were in Pine Bluff or ED, and your kid had to play on #2 field.  .

Valley, I don't know how to take that. What are you trying to say about El Dorado's fields? 

[Valleysports]

Oh nothing about the field - ricepig is just used to the best of everything.  Would be hard for him to find adequate accomadations south of I-40.  Now you know (sometimes) there might be a hint of harassment in my post.  Don't you think we should cut the teams down to Four, so we don't have this dreadful #2 field situation?

[fourfourtwo]

Oh nothing about the field - ricepig is just used to the best of everything.  Would be hard for him to find adequate accomadations south of I-40.  Now you know (sometimes) there might be a hint of harassment in my post.  Don't you think we should cut the teams down to Four, so we don't have this dreadful #2 field situation?

It is a shame AAA does not take more care and preparation in the 6A star playoff games.  There were only two teams that had to playboy the dreadful field #2. However, none of the three fields used were adequate for a state playoffs. AAA does. It host a playoff in which the field material changes from what most teams are used to play on. For individuals who know the game, the field can change the entire game. And sometimes the outcome of a game.
It is difficult to explain to peoeple who have'nt played the sport how much the field affects the game. So much so that when it rains good coaches change their strategy and formation to account for the major affects. However, when the field does not allow for fundamentals to be carried out (passing, dribbling) then soccer isn't being played and no adjustments in strategy or formation will make a difference.
The argument that both teams must play on the same field and endure the same affects is only true if neither team is accustomed to that type of field. However, I would argue that in this case a team with more skill and talent does not have the same advantage on these conditions as a team with less skill. It actually gives the lesser team a better advantage. For those who have played the sport and understand the game they know exactly what in talking about. There is a strategy of possession and ball movement and off the ball movement that makes a team better than another. When the field does not allow for passing or dribbling, this hurts the team that can do that. Less talented teams rely on kickball and running onto long balls. They are used to putting 9 guys behind the ball and kicking the ball out to their one good player. Poor field conditions like the ones found in Searcy benefited these teams.
Look at the scores of the teams that played on the grass/mud fields. Teams that would normally beat a team by a greater goal differential were winning by less of a margin and in some cases not winning at all (greenwood boys).
We saw this last year when the Siloam Springs boys were upset by Mountain Home. Siloam had a better team last year than this year.
6A does not need to play any playoff games on grass fields. 7A plays all their playoff games on turf. The state final is played on grass, but the grass is like carpet and plays very similar to turf.  The conditions at some of these playoff venues is Rediculous. It is a safety issue and takes away from the integrity of the game.

[MDXPHD]

Oh nothing about the field - ricepig is just used to the best of everything.  Would be hard for him to find adequate accomadations south of I-40.  Now you know (sometimes) there might be a hint of harassment in my post.  Don't you think we should cut the teams down to Four, so we don't have this dreadful #2 field situation?

It is a shame AAA does not take more care and preparation in the 6A star playoff games.  There were only two teams that had to playboy the dreadful field #2. However, none of the three fields used were adequate for a state playoffs. AAA does. It host a playoff in which the field material changes from what most teams are used to play on. For individuals who know the game, the field can change the entire game. And sometimes the outcome of a game.
It is difficult to explain to peoeple who have'nt played the sport how much the field affects the game. So much so that when it rains good coaches change their strategy and formation to account for the major affects. However, when the field does not allow for fundamentals to be carried out (passing, dribbling) then soccer isn't being played and no adjustments in strategy or formation will make a difference.
The argument that both teams must play on the same field and endure the same affects is only true if neither team is accustomed to that type of field. However, I would argue that in this case a team with more skill and talent does not have the same advantage on these conditions as a team with less skill. It actually gives the lesser team a better advantage. For those who have played the sport and understand the game they know exactly what in talking about. There is a strategy of possession and ball movement and off the ball movement that makes a team better than another. When the field does not allow for passing or dribbling, this hurts the team that can do that. Less talented teams rely on kickball and running onto long balls. They are used to putting 9 guys behind the ball and kicking the ball out to their one good player. Poor field conditions like the ones found in Searcy benefited these teams.
Look at the scores of the teams that played on the grass/mud fields. Teams that would normally beat a team by a greater goal differential were winning by less of a margin and in some cases not winning at all (greenwood boys).
We saw this last year when the Siloam Springs boys were upset by Mountain Home. Siloam had a better team last year than this year.
6A does not need to play any playoff games on grass fields. 7A plays all their playoff games on turf. The state final is played on grass, but the grass is like carpet and plays very similar to turf.  The conditions at some of these playoff venues is Rediculous. It is a safety issue and takes away from the integrity of the game.

It's not all about what "should" be done.  Only 1 to 2 teams bid to host the state soccer tournament in each classification, if any. What city has 4 turf fields to host the tournament? 7a was hosted by two different schools, so maybe that's why they were able to play on turf.  What about the lower classifications? 5A had grass fields and 4A had grass originally, though their fields got flooded.  Grass fields are not the problem, as long as they are properly maintained.  In fact, most players that actually know soccer (and fans that do as well) would rather play on a properly maintained grass field rather than play on turf.

In every tournament, some teams will have advantages over other teams.  Think about the smaller schools that don't get to play on turf year round, but then get to the tournament and have to play the teams that get the turf all year, how does that seem fair? There will never be an answer to remedy the situation, but instead of people whining and complaining about it all of the time, we should just enjoy the playoffs and let the kids play.

[fourfourtwo]

[/quote]

It's not all about what "should" be done.  Only 1 to 2 teams bid to host the state soccer tournament in each classification, if any. What city has 4 turf fields to host the tournament? 7a was hosted by two different schools, so maybe that's why they were able to play on turf.  What about the lower classifications? 5A had grass fields and 4A had grass originally, though their fields got flooded.  Grass fields are not the problem, as long as they are properly maintained.  In fact, most players that actually know soccer (and fans that do as well) would rather play on a properly maintained grass field rather than play on turf.

In every tournament, some teams will have advantages over other teams.  Think about the smaller schools that don't get to play on turf year round, but then get to the tournament and have to play the teams that get the turf all year, how does that seem fair? There will never be an answer to remedy the situation, but instead of people whining and complaining about it all of the time, we should just enjoy the playoffs and let the kids play.
[/quote]
First of all I'm only talking about 7A and 6A because they are the only classifications where most games, and in some cases all, are played on turf.  Most know that 5A and 4A schools play primarily on grass and therefore not a problem except for playoff games when fields are bad. But all but three teams in this years 6A playoffs play on turf only. And you are dead wrong about most players wanting to play on grass over turf. Unless its Razorback field quality than turf is the best surface to play on and produces the most fair playing surface. 
The other issue is there are very few properly maintained soccer fields in Arkansas.  That is not surprising considering Arkansas is 10-15 years behind the rest of the country in this sport.  There is not a lot of money to put into soccer fields at the club level. 
You do not need 4 turf fields to host the 6A playoffs, you only need 2.  There are only 12 teams that make the playoffs (same as 7A) and 4 teams have 1st round byes.  Therefore, 4 games for girls playoff and 4 for guys the first day, 4 the second day, and 2 semifinal games. 
This is why 7A has separate bids for boys and girls.  This year it was girls 7A in Bryant, and guys 7A in Cabot. 
As far as whining and complaining goes, I believe most of the complaints are warranted.  To call out someone for a valid complaint about poor field conditions and force teams to play on a surface they never play on is a valid complaint and not whining.  You only see this in soccer and not any other sport during playoffs.  There are plenty of 6A cities that have at least 2 turf fields to play on. 
The fact that only 2 teams bid on the 6A playoffs this year is a matter of politics than ability.  If you don't know that process of how its done than I suggest you look into it before you make ignorant comments. 
AAA needs to do a better job of making sure the playoffs are played on the best fields possible.  This is a warranted complaint and not whining. 

[ricepig]

What 6A cities have two turf fields? And, you realize that it would take co-operation bet"ween between these different schools to host. If you want to host, win the bid, it's really pretty simple.

[MDXPHD]

The fact that only 2 teams bid on the 6A playoffs this year is a matter of politics than ability.  If you don't know that process of how its done than I suggest you look into it before you make ignorant comments. 
AAA needs to do a better job of making sure the playoffs are played on the best fields possible. 

I know exactly how the process works, it's laid out pretty clear in the rules to submit a bid.  So, AAA should have automatically barred Searcy because they don't have two turf fields to play on? I'm hoping El Dorado has two turf fields that could accommodate your requests, since they are the only other team to bid.

Surely we can't really sit here and debate on what the most "fair" playing surface is; it would differ for every team right? Most turf is different, does that make it unfair for teams who play on slower turf than faster turf? Where is the line that you stop at when discussing fairness?

[fourfourtwo]

The fact that only 2 teams bid on the 6A playoffs this year is a matter of politics than ability.  If you don't know that process of how its done than I suggest you look into it before you make ignorant comments. 
AAA needs to do a better job of making sure the playoffs are played on the best fields possible. 

I know exactly how the process works, it's laid out pretty clear in the rules to submit a bid.  So, AAA should have automatically barred Searcy because they don't have two turf fields to play on? I'm hoping El Dorado has two turf fields that could accommodate your requests, since they are the only other team to bid.

Surely we can't really sit here and debate on what the most "fair" playing surface is; it would differ for every team right? Most turf is different, does that make it unfair for teams who play on slower turf than faster turf? Where is the line that you stop at when discussing fairness?

You are taking my quotes out of context. El Dorados fields are some of the best in the state. And I wonder if you really do understand the process. If you had read my posts than you would have understood I am arguing the grass fields are not adequate to play 6A playoff games on. Therefore two options remain: 1) play in an area that has adequate grass FIFA or 2) the more reasonable answer is to play on turf which would not be a problem.
You think that I am the lone voice in this debate? You must not be in the loop with coaches around the state who are tired of the poor quality fields.