By Michael Letendre

It’s been a tough year for scholastic sports in Connecticut with cancellations, postponements, and limited postseason entanglements.

Starting with the fall campaign, the scholastic season was delayed and there was one point where we were all unsure if sports would ever return in 2020.

We all thought football would have its season – played over a five or six game slate.

There were rumors that volleyball was going to be played outside while any kind of playoffs were in question from the onset.

But after a pause, the green light was given for the fall scholastic campaign to commence – less football – and something called a ‘playoff experience’ was granted which allowed teams to play in a couple postseason games.

That ‘postseason experience’ was better than nothing as the top teams certainly got their due, earning regional championships in the Central Connecticut Conference.

Do you know what the problem was?

Every team was invited to play in the postseason, in spite of record.

That meant a squad like the Manchester boys soccer team, a program that did not win a match last season, played games in the ‘postseason experience’ bracket.

I don’t think a squad like that should be allowed to participate in the ‘playoffs’ because if there wasn’t a pandemic, a winless team wouldn’t be playing postseason ball in the first place.

One size does not fit all, nothing was truly earned, and the postseason is a privilege for teams that have – at least – a .400 record – just like at any other time.

And yes, the CIAC did a very good job in making two divisions for the fall ‘postseason experience’ with the teams who did not fare as well compete against each other.

But there wasn’t any need for that second division because teams with less than a .400 winning percentage shouldn’t be playing in the postseason.

Now, I’m I being too critical here?

I don’t think so and to prove my point, let’s break down CCC, Region B boys soccer division and our Bristol teams – Central and Eastern.

The Rams and Lancers ended the regular season by winning 54.5-percent of their games.

Central finished in third place at 5-4-2 while Eastern was one spot behind with a ledger of 4-3-4.

Farmington took the top seed with a 10-0-1 record (.955) while Plainville placed second at 8-4 (.667).

Those were the top four teams in Region B and each program deserved a ‘postseason experience’ appearance.

Maybe Southington (4-5-3) and Avon (4-6-2), the fifth and sixth place teams deserved a playoff slot but did Lewis Mills (2-6-4) or winless New Britain earn that same distinction?

That’s the problem with including everyone since there’s a huge difference between a top squad like Region C’s Glastonbury (10-0-1) and Manchester (0-9-1) at the bottom.

Perhaps Southington and Avon deserved a one-game showdown between each other because of record. I’d be in favor of that.

Pandemic or not, the postseason is simply not for everyone.

And it looks like that experience, or something similar, is coming down the pike for boys and girls basketball.

Again, why is every team getting an invitation to play in the postseason?

Even in girls scholastic basketball last year, which filled all thirty-two positions over the five brackets, there were teams that didn’t make the cut.

Yes, squads with three victories made up the field in Class S girls hoop but there was a limit in the end.

Bluntly, the playoffs aren’t for each and every program and the ‘postseason experience’ should be modified as such.

I’m extremely thankful that our student athletes are playing again but let’s establish some guidelines and minimum standards which would help make the ‘postseason experience’ legitimate instead of a wacky free-for-all where winning isn’t a requirement.