Gorman: WPIAL pairings meeting a tradition like no other |

Gorman: WPIAL pairings meeting a tradition like no other

Once a year, in a sight to behold, hundreds of oversized men pack a hotel ballroom to find out the WPIAL football playoffs pairings.

We all leave wondering how in the world the WPIAL came to its seedings, whether it’s just a blindfolded game of darts.

The answers don’t help.

“It was pick your poison,” said Gateway athletic director Randy Rovesti, chairman of the WPIAL football steering committee. “There was a lot of discussion. It wasn’t easy. I wish I could say it’s an exact science. It’s not.”

This isn’t as simple as slotting the conference champions into the top spots. The committee spends hours trying to get it right, yet no one leaves satisfied.

Sixty-four teams qualify for the WPIAL playoffs, and they all have a shot. Truth is, we tend to see the same dozen or so schools in the four finals over and over.

At least it’s not determined by point- or power-rating systems.

“Back in the day, when I was playing, it was pre-drawn,” WPIAL executive director Tim O’Malley said. “You try to make an honest attempt to arrive at a bracket to give teams the best chance to reach the semifinals.

“The merit of their work showed in years past: The Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 seeds reached the semifinals in every bracket last year, so it worked. I wouldn’t want to be the four-seed.”

Apologies to North Allegheny, Mars, Beaver Falls and Frazier, the No. 4 seeds in each class.

“Nah, that doesn’t bother me,” Mars coach Scott Heinauer said. “You can advance. Anybody can win. If it gets to that point, we’ll be happy we’re in there. You’ve got a chance. That’s all that matters. It’s single-elimination. You can’t make any mistakes.”

Unless, of course, you’re doing the seeding. Then all bets are off.

Kevin Gorman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at [email protected] or via Twitter @KGorman_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.