State Football Playoffs No Sure Thing

A proposal for a statewide playoff system for high school football will be discussed next month at the California Interscholastic Federation council meeting.

While there’s nothing wrong with debating the merits of an intriguing idea that would require radical restructuring of the present playoff system, no one should reserve the Rose Bowl, Edison Field or 3Com Park for a championship game.

There’s no clamoring for a state tournament in football. In fact, there are more reasons to keep the status quo of section championships than to enter a statewide playoff system that would surely widen the disparity between powerful programs and weak ones.

As long as the top schools keep playing each other, there’s no real need to hold a state playoff system. Concord De La Salle, which has won 129 consecutive games, and Long Beach Poly met last season and play again Saturday at Berkeley to determine the mythical Division I state champion.

With national and state polls, section and division championships, there are plenty of opportunities for football teams in California to receive recognition without having to add two more weeks to the schedule just so someone can hang a banner that reads, “State Champions.”

Yes, that great state of Texas, where people like to say they have two seasons--football and spring football--has had a state playoff system since 1910. Its football season begins the final week of August and lasts 16 games, ending the week before Christmas.

But Texas separates public and private schools for its playoffs and devises playoff brackets based on enrollment rather than strength of programs, making it difficult for California simply to copy the Texas model.

The San Diego Section, under Commissioner Dennis Ackerman, made the proposal for a state football

playoff system.

“I’m sure it will be a hotly debated idea,” Ackerman said. “It’s not a unanimous thing, but there is some interest in it.”

Among the obstacles to overcome are coaches, administrators and a whole lot of other folks who think the current football season is long enough at

14 weeks, plus another month of

practices.

One coach who understands the challenge of an extended season is Sylmar High’s Jeff Engilman. His team competed in the 1992 Reebok Bowl, a regional championship game matching the best of the City Section against the best of the Southern Section that was televised live from Edison Field.

From Engilman’s perspective, it turned out to be a negative experience as La Puente Bishop Amat won, 31-14, to finish 15-0. “The biggest problem we had was our whole focus was on beating Carson for the City [Section] title,” he said. “It was a tremendously long season for our kids. I’d vote against a state tournament because of the length of time.”

Another reason not to push for a state playoff system is that it would increase the pressure on football coaches to win, which, inevitably, would lead to the abuses so prevalent in basketball, where recruiting and player transfers run rampant.

However, CIF officials might be in favor of a state playoff system if it means adding money to their coffers. Still, there are no guarantees of sellout crowds in the middle of December, when the weather is unpredictable and the public’s focus begins to shift to basketball and other sports. The Reebok Bowl drew a crowd of only 8,132.

“You have to ask yourself what can you get out of it?” said Jim Staunton, commissioner of the Southern Section.

State championships are presently held in basketball, cross-country, track and field, wrestling and girls’ volleyball. There are also proposals for state championships in golf and softball.

Let the discussions begin on the value of a state playoff system for football. Perhaps someone can come up with a workable plan.

But remember, Californians are different from Texans.

Californians love high school football, but not so much that they will give up time for playing other sports or for pursuing other interests.

Eric Sondheimer can be reached at eric.sondheimer@latimes.com.