gatorman-uf

Have to set your goals of the system before you can make the system: Is it to ensure equity? Is it to ensure equality? Do we base our assumptions that classifications based on similar school size ensures equity and equality? Are there any factors that can ensure equity/equality? Is it to ensure all the above average teams make the playoffs? It to ensure none of the below average teams make the playoffs? Right now, we assume that school size ensures fairness. Our current system is designed to keep out below average teams out of the playoffs. We also assume that because similar size schools are in the same classification that those state championships are equal to each other because it means you are the best of a particular size of school. +++++++++++++++ I think the easiest thing to do have done would have been to eliminate on classification and one district per region. Use district champions, runner-ups, and two wild cards. Determine the wild cards based on power points. Power Points need to stretch more. I am not sure the exact numbers, but something along the lines of.... Cat 1 = 80 points or 35 points Cat 2 = 60 points or 25 points Cat 3 = 45 points or 20 points Cat 4 = 35 points or 10 points Bonus Points (previous 2 years): 2 Points for playoff qualification per year (so 2015 and 2016 playoffs equals 4 points) 2 Points for regional finalist per year (so 2015 and 2016 regional finalist equals another 4 points) 2 Points for state finalist per year (so 2015 and 2016 state finalist equals another 4 points) So playing a back to back state finalist, earns you 12 additional points. Playing a state finalist adds 6 points. +++++++++++++++++ Long term, we need to create a system of promotion/relegation. Good teams move up, bad teams move down. This would lessen the state championships of a lower class though.

I agree, I think eliminating 1 district per region would have done more to solve the problems that the FHSAA and people on this board had than anything else. We have people arguing that a good loss should matter more than a bad win. That losing by 1 to IMG should get you more points than a win over a cupcake. My point is that eventually if you do that, teams can end up 1-9 or 0-10 and make the playoffs because they scheduled so tough. The very first playoff point system they rolled out did just that with a winless Creekside making it in the hypothetical playoffs.

District system was fine. The problem was we had a lack of competitive match-ups in district games. This made games unexciting and blowouts. You fix this by using a number of different factors (population size, success in the playoffs, heck, they could use the LAZindex ) to create better classifications and better districts. Take the top 64 teams in the state (put them in class 7A (remove one classification), require 8 teams districts and reimburse both schools $$$$ for any game where the district opponent is over 50 miles away. The rest of the classifications use the lazindex (separate out 1A and 2A) and rank teams. You would average 91 teams in 3A to 6A and 64 teams in 7A.

When coaches are making their schedules, they only have the past few seasons to look at. Trying to predict which teams will make the jump from below average to average or from average to good is nearly impossible. Again, the whole system stinks. The system rewards a team for something they cannot control. If a team played a whole bunch of 2A or 8A nobodies they can make the playoffs, why? The problem of what you guys are suggesting is how do you evaluate a good win vs a bad win vs a good loss vs a bad loss. Several of our good teams have had close losses to IMG Academy, should losing (even to a great team) matter more than winning against a cupcake? Ultimately, we judge teams based on wins and losses. Remember, you are the guys who have problems with 1-9 district runner-ups making the playoffs because they don't have enough wins. Now, you are questioning the strengths of the wins. Simply there is no good way to make this system work. Also I would encourage everyone to look at 5A-8A brackets once they are complete and see how many times it was the district champion and runner-up under the old system that made the playoffs, I am willing to bet over 75% of the district runner-ups and the wildcards are the same.

First, rewarding points on past performances is actually good. If you have two 5-5 teams, but one team made the playoffs recently, we would say they have a history and tradition. The whole system of rewarding points based on records to determine who makes the playoffs is silly, but even more silly to suggest that if the goal was to schedule tough that you shouldn't take into account playoff appearances (which is what we use to gauge success). Second, as I have said from the beginning, the entire problem of this system is that your points depend on something that you cannot control (the record of your opponent, which is why the district system was more fair). Again, imagine if Trinity Christian ended up "forfeiting" all of their games because of an ineligible player, CHS's win which looked good, all of a sudden becomes hurtful. Is that their fault? No, but they are the ones who are hurt by punishing a team. Third, Dillard, the problem is that the "good" teams that you scheduled also played good teams. So instead of an opponent going 10-0 and if you lost to them you would receive 30 points, they are now 7-3 and you are only receiving 25. Fourth, those bonus points mean a lot. If Columbia has no bonus points (21 points by end of season) than they lose 2.1 points. If you minus 2.1 points from CHS than you are down to 38.9. Ask some of these teams on the edge of making the playoffs if they would love to have 2.1 points. ----------------

I will also continue to say the old system was not a dumpster fire, the very best teams always made the playoffs. Did a team that today we might consider the 6th seed not make the playoffs in the old system? Yep. Did a team that would be ranked 16th in the new system be in the playoffs occasionally? Yep. But those sins are a lot smaller than the consensus best teams in the classifications not making it. And again, the really bad teams making the playoffs happens because of small districts, something that was easier to fix than the radical chance this untested was. In the old system, some of the best teams might have been on the road for 4 games, but they were in it. We have had numerous posts about how 2 top ranked teams might miss the playoffs all together for scheduling tough. The thing is that if those teams scheduled tough in the old system, they still make the playoffs. I will continually ask and nobody ever seems to answer, but how did the old system discourage teams from playing a tough schedule? If you lost against a good team, it didn't hurt your chances of ultimately achieving your goal of making the playoffs and winning a state championship. Now, if you schedule tough and lose a couple, you might not be in the playoffs. Teams are going to figure this out quickly. Again, the problem of blowouts is because we put teams of different quality in the same districts/classifications. Look at Bolles playing Westside (Jacksonville) or this Friday playing Terry Parker. Bolles is already playing up, but neither Parker not Westside should be competing against Bolles. The current system says 35 points for a Category 4 win vs 30 for a Category 1 loss. Some say that losing to a 10-0 by 1 point should mean more than beating an 0-10 by 50. They say decrease the Category 4 win points and increase Category 1 loss points. At that point, you will see teams schedule tougher, but to what end? One of the original proposals did something similar and an 0-10 Creekside would have made the playoffs that year because of the difficulty of their schedule. Again, if you want better games, eliminate one classification from 4A-8A. The longer a team goes without making the playoffs subtract students from their population, the more and deeper they make it, add more students. This will eventually even out. With bad schools moving down, good schools moving up. As bad schools move down they will become more competitive, learn to win, and able to move back up. As good schools move up, they will become less dominating and either become better or move back down to become competitive.

1A only has 35 teams not like they are swimming in teams. 2A is fine, but more of the independent schools should play in the classification. No, 2A isn't going to be competitive with many schools. It is why we place schools in classifications to ensure similar level schools (based on size face each other). 3A - there might be 6 public schools in 3A, moving them up to 4A is a little harsh. As for why we don't combine all the private schools into one classification, they pretty much are. Look at 2A and 3A, almost all private schools. Also when you look at the 2A vs 3A schools in terms of players, there is a huge difference in #. Once you get into 5A and above there aren't that many teams and can't make a whole classification. 8A - Columbus, Belen 7A - STA, 6A - Archbishop McCarthy 5A - Bolles, Bishop Kenny, Trinity Christian, Tampa Jesuit, Bishop Moore, John Carroll, American Heritage (Plantation), Cardinal Gibbons, -------------- Yes, we should go down one classification 4A-8A which would add about 20 teams per classification and maybe one team per district. ---------------- The whole reason 1A was created was to ensure fairness, basically 1A schools threatened to leave the FHSAA or all go independent because they were tired of playing the private schools like Trinity Christian, Trinity Catholic, University Christian and NFC (I like the fact people accuse the small private schools of complaining, but forget the rural public schools also whined). Heck, they even whined when some public schools were 7 student over the cap of 600. Even when these small public schools did make it the state championships (before the creation of the rural league), they did not perform well. So why would they ever combine 1A with anything. Additionally 1A football has one of the highest attendance in state championship despite the drive of at least one team from the Panhandle. --------------- As for 2A and 3A combining, again. Fairness, a 2A school is looking at most 290 students (most are a lot less), divide that by 2 for the number of boys and you are at 145, divide them by equal grade level and you are looking at 36 boys per grade level, and maybe 7-8 of those play football. Small private schools want to play other small private schools who are facing similar restrictions. Many of these schools do not take football seriously as it just one avenue for them. Their entire football staff might be 3-5 guys who are volunteers. Do not confuse all private schools with STA and Bolles. -------------- As for what does "keeping them in 2A do for anyone" maybe it is not about your ego, maybe it is about those kids. Maybe, every school doesn't want to compete for a mythical national championship but offer an extracurricular that encourages teamwork, leadership, and fellowship. Maybe, those schools don't give shit if it benefits anybody else, but their own players and communities. Let them play their football, you play yours, the two don't have to interfere. That is why you keep it. Additionally, the FHSAA benefits by making some money from their playoff games.

But you are the winningest program in North Florida... that has to count for something... I get it, you don't think of CHS as an elite school. Got it. So stop the chest thumping about your program. As for GHS, they had 1816 on their student population report and CHS had 1932 (in 2016). And I believe the CHS was the smallest or 2nd smallest school in 7A when the classifications were announced. Almost every other sport has classifications up to 9A and more teams playing the sport. Thus the small divide makes a big difference.

Generally, it is hard for two teams to tie as one would have the head-to-head, which is the first factor. So Team A beat Team B Team A gets beat by Team C (who has several district losses). As for how I know it won't fix the problems of blowouts, go look at the state championships, over the half of the games were won by more than 2 scores. The same problem exists. Additionally, you are now putting a #1 seed vs a #8 seed in the first round. Before you could have had a #1 facing a #5, a #2 facing an #8, #3, playing a #4, and #5 vs #7. The scrambledness of the playoffs actually led to their being less blowouts in the early rounds. And again out of 192 teams that made the playoffs, how many teams are we saying truly didn't belong in the old system or wouldn't make it in the new system. I am willing to say it is probably less than 10%. We were told we wanted all games to matter, but here is what happens, you now have two 3-6 squads finishing up unremarkable years, there will be coaches who aren't coaching either of those two teams who are rooting for one of them to go 4-6 so that they can get an extra 5 points. Talk about nonsense. I will continually say, I hate the idea that your playoff chances depends on something that you cannot control. We were told that the new system would reward teams for playing a tough schedule (it does if they win), but look at Oakleaf (who was probably way overrated), Pahokee, and Miami Booker T Washington. All teams that might not make the playoffs due to scheduling good teams and doing what the FHSAA encouraged. I continually asked how does the old system punish you for playing tough schedule (nobody ever answered). We were told the worst part of the job for the FHSAA is trying to balance districts based on class size and geographical conditions. The FHSAA would receive hundreds of complaints about why certain teams were in specific district when they should be in another district. For example, wouldn't it have made more sense for Columbia to be in the Tallahassee district (with 3 teams) than the Jacksonville district (with 4 teams already). The reality is the simplest thing to do was to eliminate one district in each region, allow 3 district champions and 5 wildcard or to eliminate one whole classification. The simplest answer in all sports is to move teams up and down based on their competitive play. Go watch the basketball state championships, the top 2A and above can easily compete in 9A. Some 9A teams have no chance before the season begins. Some of you talk about the district championships are settled before the season begins by looking at the district, isn't this also true in every other sport? So why, not use a promotion/relegation system. We were told there would be numerous "independent" teams that come back into the classification system if we changed our playoff system. In the FHSAA's defense, this did happen about 35 teams went from independent to classifications (out of nearly 100).

While I am not one to defend the system (let us see how it works out), In the FHSAA's defense, I think they did a good job of explaining it. They had several workshops, allowed coaches feedback through the internet poll, etc. Additionally, all FHSAA sports have an advisory committee that was allowed to make some changes. They had to make the change last year or you have to go to this season and next season to make the changes, because the schedules would have already been determined next year. The problem is that other than some numbers nerds like me, nobody was seeing how it worked out. Nobody ran the simulations. At the same time, they promised teams would be rewarded for playing good teams(and they are, if they win) so good teams scheduled other good teams. They also forgot to show that if all the good teams played each and beat up on each other than those "quality" wins wouldn't be quality wins anymore and thus you might not make the playoffs. The very first incantation of this idea I showed how a team who was 0-10 would have been very close to the playoffs (they scraped that idea). Long term, I think there are elements of this that would work, but the reality is that this doesn't fix the problem they were most upset about (blowouts in playoff games).

But why? Why should when a 7A school plays and beats a 1A school count towards if you make the playoffs? In the system you are defending, it does. No, if Columbia beats Madison County it shouldn't count towards them making the playoffs. The size difference alone makes it ridiculous. Columbia should beat them, they have 4 times as many students to pull from. But at the same time, Columbia should play them if for nothing else the gate. Why should only 4 games count instead of 10, because not all games are created equal. The idea that the district champion and runner-up make the playoff is fair, because those 5 teams all played the exact same opponents and have the same school size and are close geographically. You have an apples to apples comparison. In this new system, you have apples to cantaloupes to bananas comparison in terms of schedule and the value of your opponent's schedule. Let me type in smaller words. You said, only district games counted in the past... if so, why do you keep talking about the winningest football in North Florida history, if the only games that counted in the past were district games. Shouldn't you only care about the results of those? But no, you do care about the results of GHS, BHS, and SHS, because those games mattered to those players, coaches, and fans. Just not for the playoffs. You realize that even when Suwannee is good (like state championship level good), CHS still dominates. It isn't even a rivalry anymore other than the fact they are close, why is beating up on them worthy of playoffs... play the game because of history and tradition, but the game is stupid for the purpose of playoffs. Beating Suwannee should happen, rewarding points for it is stupid. Again, you can only control what happens on your field. Columbia beat a solid Trinity Christian team. Imagine though if the ineligible player didn't just play against Bolles, but in every game. The 48 or 53 points that CHS gains from beating TC goes down to 38 as TC is forced to forfeit every game. Is that fair to CHS? Absolutely not, and that is why we only used district games. The district games made sure the district champ and runner-up were all judged by the same exact criteria. ..... Again, FHSAA is trying to solve something that wasn't issue. The average fan does not care any more than they did previously. After next season, you are going to see a lot of good teams going back to trying to schedule weak teams to pad their schedule. As the risk of playing a tough team is not worth the risk. ----- Several moons ago, Miami Northwestern played at Southlake Carroll in a tremendous game at SMU stadium in Dallas. It was a great game, the game played a role in the mythical nation championship, but in reality had no bearing on the ability of Miami Northwestern to play in the state playoffs, which is good. If they lose the game, who knows. -----

Sigh, if I was talking to you, I would have labeled it as such. But fine... No, the district games meant who gets into the playoffs. Your games against Suwannee, Gainesville, and Buchholz still meant something as they go towards your record (unless you are saying that records mean nothing than take down that meaningless phrase at the end of your signature about "Most Winningest team in North Florida history" and stop touting your winning percentage). Heck, never bring up a streak against Suwannee or Buchholz or Gainesville as obviously those games did not matter before this year. Every other sport in Florida has non-district games, they use these games for various reason including getting better, better gates, cheaper travel. Football is no different. The reason why district games mattered is that you wanted the best teams from the district and your classification. The classification/district system is based on putting teams of the relative same size and relative geographical location into classes and district. It is thought that population is a more fair to ensure equity. 2) The old system had teams flip every year. So yes, one year the district champion on the top of the bracket one year would host and than the next year, it would be the district champion on the bottom of the bracket. The fact that Lincoln got to host was simply a reflection of that. 3) You haven't faced the same team in the playoffs for 5 straight years. You played: Lincoln: 3 times in the playoffs from 2009-2016. Bartram Trail: 4 times in the playoffs from 2011-1016 (6 years). And one of those times was in the regional finals, when 6 other teams had to be eliminated before you faced them. Also the reason under the old system you might play the same teams each time is travel. Coaches/Schools didn't want to have to have teams travel 2.5 hours for a 1st round game. 4) 3 team district still exist. This system did NOTHING to fix that. The only difference is that the runner-up from a 3 team district doesn't make. Heck, Fort White qualified for the playoffs one year in a TWO team district. This doesn't fix it. Again, all the problems you have with the old system aren't fixed in this new system that is the problem. ------------------------------- Again, you want more competitive weekly games. Move good teams up until they have to play other good teams, move bad teams down until they face other bad teams.

Josh, I asked the question from the very beginning (check the archives), how did the old system discourage playing a tough out of district opponent? Nobody has ever answered it, because simply the answer does not exist. If you lost the game, you lost, but than you focused on district play. Did all games matter, no. But now, things as a coach that you cannot control matter that shouldn't. Trinity Christian beat Bolles, but now with Trinity Christian having to forfeit the game, it not only affects Trinity, but now effects everyone else as well. Is that really fair to those teams that TC plays if that affects what bracket TC is in? This happened in basketball over 8 years ago, a boys basketball was very good. They were dominating for their classification. They ended up finding out that they had used an ineligible player for all of their games. They paid the fine, but were allowed to play in the district tournament (but having forfeited all the games). They went from a #1 seed to a #5 (in a 5 team district). They beat the #4 team. They then had to play the formerly #2 team in the semi-finals of district play. They won. Now, think of the #2 team, they are eliminated in the semi-finals instead of the finals (thus missing state playoffs if they had been the #2 seed). I don't like when things off the court affect the results on the court. I was told numerous times that the advantage of the "new" system was that teams would play a more challenging schedule and be rewarded for it. Let's be honest, the FHSAA screwed it up. You don't actually receive a reward for playing a "tough" schedule. If you play a tough schedule and go 6-4, it will not be better than play some barely above cupcake power teams, winning, and going 10-0. Sure, you aren't ready for the playoffs, but you are in the playoffs, play the easiest seed, and probably get a home game or 2. After that who cares. Again, we tried solving a problem that didn't exist. The best teams make it to the state championships, but they still had blowouts, this new playoff system won't fix that. The reality is that we have a bunch of teams that are just better than the classification they are in. We could have kept the old system, allowed good teams to move up until they are no longer dominating, but merely competitive. We should force bad teams down until they are competitive. Do I think there is a class that would make STA merely competitive? No, but we could try.

Trinity Christian Loses Appeal. http://firstcoastvarsity.com/news/2078/trinity-christian-loses-appeal-of-forfeit-for-ineligible-player/

My understanding (originally) they were going to be updating them after Week 5 (delayed due to hurricane games, so they did it Week 6), Week 7, Week 9, and than finally Week 11. I have suggested they should update them every week or especially after Week 10 so that teams are checking everything.

Sigh, I really wonder where you get information or is your view so narrow that you just look at the last 3 years. First Coast makes it to the playoffs for 10 straight years 2005-14 with the same coach for all 10 years and including 3 times into the regional championship and once more into the state finals. Columbia in the same time, makes it 7 times in those 10 years and only once to the regional finals. So is Columbia not making it during those years because of a lack of talent (which you continually say they have tons) of or lack of coaching? For the love of god, please calm down on the homerism. There is a lot of good football being played in Florida and even against Columbia, you just never seem to notice it.

FloridaTech, If the playoffs started today, Vero would host Rounds 1-3, but we still have 5 weeks left until football is done and anything can happen. Additionally, Vero runs into the issue that their schedule is frontloaded. As of writing this, they have played a Category 1, 2 Category 2's, and a Category 3. The future for them is 1 category 2, 1 category 3, and 2 category 4 teams. This makes it that even if they win big over those 4 teams their average could still drop because the points they earn will be below their current average. ----------------------- I think the issue of bonus points for playoff teams will work itself out in the long run. Yes, right now playing Leon gives you 3 points because Leon made the playoffs in a 3 team district (same thing for Eastside High). In the long run, if a team played like Eastside or Leon did in the past, they won't make the playoffs in the new system. The problem I have with the system is that it depends entirely too much on how a team does when I have no control of how good they are from season to season. Look how quickly First Coast declined after from being a state runner-up to now. Or if you have a team that decides to take on a challenging schedule that they go 6-4 instead of 9-1, you end up with less points. It is one of the reasons why I don't have a problem with rewarding points for making the playoffs the previous season, you based your schedule how you saw teams doing.

Panther, In the current system, you might host a great team in the first round (Carrol City, Norland, Northwestern, or Central) if Dillard is district champion. In the old system, you would play a great team in the first round (Carrol City, Norland, Northwestern, or Central) if Dillard district champion. If your concern is playing a great team in the first round, neither the old system nor the new system would fix your concerns. Honestly, I don't know of a system that would simply because your geographical location near Miami there is always going to be a good district with a state/national caliber team. -------------- ColumbiaFan, The system doesn't hurt Columbia any more than it hurts any other team. Columbia hasn't won a state championship in 50 years and hasn't played in a state championship since 1997 so it's not like the current system is helping them win either. At 2000 students, Columbia is on the small end of 7A schools. My system adds "population" to their 2000 student population, while it would "remove" population from poor performing football teams population. So yes, Columbia High might move up to 8A, or just become a large 7A school. This recognizes the fact that student population is not the only factor in determining competitiveness. At the same time, a school with a lack of success would move down to be more competitive and teams that dominant would move up. I look at Trinity Christian and Bolles moving up from 3A and 4A last year. They are still good teams and most likely will make the playoffs (Bolles is currently not in the playoffs if they started today), but the district is immensely better just because they play Bishop Kenny and Ponte Vedra. Could Trinity Christian/Bolles play against a lot of the average 6A-8A schools and win, yep. But it would be more competitive than when they were playing at the 3A level and never playing any good 3A schools until the 4th round of the playoffs. This is also a system that would work well in sports like Girls Volleyball, Baseball, Softball, Soccer, and Basketball. In theory, you could have a successful Boys Basketball team playing at 6A, while the girls program has struggled and is now a 3A. Again, if our goal is to put good games on the playing surface, competitive games (even if they are bad teams) will always be more fun than blowouts against overmatched teams. Also Columbia Fan, please note that you can answer multiple messages in one post. -------------- Josh, While I know you might not know, but can't we have district champions and a seeding. Why not allow 4 district champions to be automatically qualified, but use the point system as the seeding? So Suwannee qualifies, but they are the #8 seed. I get the idea that being a district champion matters, but just like the NCAA Basketball bracket, just because you win the conference tournament doesn't mean you get a top seed. ----

I said this from the beginning a lot of this before the system was ever implemented, but nothing is official in terms of who is in and out so let's see it through first before we say we should end it. One of the reasons why it was suggested that we should go to this system is that teams would schedule harder teams instead of sticking with the same old teams. I think we have seen some of that. But I asked a million times, but nobody ever answered, how did the old system discourage playing tougher teams? If you lost the out of district "tough" game, you still could make the playoffs with no harm done to your playoff chances. Now, if you play a tough team and lose, you actually hurt your chances on making the playoffs. As some have pointed out, it is better to play an 0-10 team and win than lose to an 10-0 team. I warned that the system is going to be very complicated and the average fan won't be able to understand in comparison to the district standings. I still think that is true. I was told every game would matter (they do), but the team's ranking will depend on something that a coach can't control (how a former opponent does for their other 9 games). I continue to argue that a system that moves up successful programs and moves down unsuccessful programs would make a better system overall (District champs/runner ups or current system) while using population as a base. I am concerned about seeding in this playoff bracket. If #1 vs #8 and #4 vs #5 (some of these #5 seeds the 2nd best team in the region, but play in the same district as the #1 seed). It would make more sense to me to re-seed after each round, so that the #1 seed always plays the lowest seed left.

I was just commenting that I knew that you were working on them earlier in the day when the FHSAA released and some of the changes in points that I suggested are likely from the FHSAA making updates later, which was when I was looking. So I was trying to explain why your numbers might have been correct when you did it, vs later in the evening when I did the same thing. As for Bishop Moore/Jones, I read your original comment (I even commented that), I just believe that if Jones already has the head-to-head match-up than they should be higher. Your way isn't wrong, these are just projections as we stated that will only get better as we get into the final 5 weeks. I do think I was being consistent in my suggestions that zero loss in district teams should be higher than teams with one or two (despite power points). As I said, I know the hours that go into doing something like this. So I appreciate it.

Class 5A Region 1 Trinity Christian (Jax) would be #3 seed (undefeated in district and higher point total) vs Bishop Kenny (1 district loss to PV) It would look like this #1 West Florida vs #8 Ponte Vedra #4 Suwannee vs #5 Rickards #2 Godby vs #7 Bishop Kenny #3 Trinity Christian Academy (Jacksonville) vs #6 Wakulla Class 5A Region 2 Zephyrhills is undefeated in district, Anclote and Wesley Chapel are not. This would slide Anclote into #5 and move everyone else down. #1 Baker County vs #8 Nature Coast #2 Hernando vs #7 Menendez #3 Zephyrhills vs #6 Wesley Chapel #4 Belleview vs #5 Anclote Region 4 You have already stated that Jones beat Bishop Moore, but you keep them as the District Champ. Wouldn't it be more consistent to put Jones as #3 seed and making Bishop Moore the #6 seed instead of projecting two Jones' losses. #1 Cardinal Gibbons vs #8 Coconut Creek #4 Fort Pierce Westwood vs #5 American Heritage (Plantation) #2 Palm Bay vs #7 Merrit Island #3 Jones vs #6 Bishop Moore Class 3A Region 2 Taylor (Pierson) has 37.60 points which makes them the #3 seed, pushes King's Academy off. Class 2A Region 2 Victory Christian has 42 points (#1 seed), you have it listed as 43.67 Zephyrhills Christian has 37. 67... they should be #2 seed Class 2A Region 3 Your points are off... SW Florida Christian 35 points Cambridge Christian 34.8 Admiral Farragut 32.67 Indian Rocks Christian 32.67 Class 2A Region 4 Champagnt has 41.8 points, not 40.8 Class 1A Region 4 Wildwood has the wrong point total. It would have the tiebreaker as they have one category 1 victory vs Hawthorne's zero. #1 Wildwood 38.75 #2 Hawthorne 38.75 #3 Crescent City 37.75 #4 Pahokee 36.33 Many of these things might have been changed as the FHSAA received information about mistakes in their totals.

Great Job... Class 7A Region 3 You have Pinellas Park listed twice (#4 should be East Bay, according to your data). I would argue it should be Tampa Bay Tech as TBT is undefeated currently in district while East Bay has 2 losses (despite being equal in power points). Class 8A Region 2 your points are messed up for Ridge Community. They have 35.80 points. #6 Gateway #7 Riverview (Sarasota) #8 Ridge Community

8A Region 1 Winter Park 46.4 Flagler Palm Coast 41.2 Seminole (Sanford) 41 Apopka 40.8 Lake Mary 39.8 Boone 39.67 Wekiva 39.4 University (Orange City) 38.67 Timber Creek 36.75 Spruce Creek 36.6 Evans 36.4 West Orange 34.4 Oviedo 33.8 Lyman 33.33 Mandarin 33.2 Colonial 32.25 University (Orlando) 32 Sandalwood 31.8 Lake Brantley 31.17 DeLand 28.5 Winter Springs 22 Class 8A Region 3 Seminole Ridge 40.5 Palm Beach Central 40 Atlantic (Delray Beach) 39 Miramar 39 Plantation 38.8 Western 38.8 Deerfield Beach 37.25 Palm Beach Gardens 34 Monarch 33.75 South Plantation 33.2 Wellington 32.8 Cypress Bay 32.75 Park Vista 32.2 Boca Raton 31 Douglas 31 Santaluces 30.75 Flanagan 30.4 Spanish River 29.8 Jupiter 29.25 Everglades 27.75 Taravella 27 John I. Leonard 26.33 Piper 23.67 Coral Springs 22 Lake Worth 19 Class 8A Region 2 Vero Beach 47.25 Osceola (Kissimmee) 44.67 Centennial 42.25 Dr. Phillips 42.25 Newsome 38.75 Gateway 38.4 Riverview (Sarasota) 37.67 Ridge Community 35.8 Olympia 35.4 Manatee 35.33 Treasure Coast 35 George Jenkins 34.5 Oak Ridge 33.4 George Steinbrenner 32.8 Haines City 32.25 Palm Harbor University 32 Cypress Creek 31.5 Alonso 31 Riverview (Riverview) 30.75 Fort Pierce Central 29.67 Freedom (Orlando) 27.8 Class 8A Region 4 South Dade 42.75 Columbus 41.4 Miami Palmetto 38.5 Miami 37.8 Homestead 37 North Miami Beach 36.67 Belen Jesuit 36 Hialeah 36 Miami Southridge 34.2 Braddock 32.67 Dr. Krop 32.2 North Miami 32 Coral Gables 31.8 Miami Killian 31 Southwest Miami 29.5 Miami Coral Park 29.33 Ferguson 28 Coral Reef 27.2 Hialeah Gardens 26.6 Miami Beach 26 American 21 Varela 18.75 #1-4 are currently undefeated and have the highest point totals in their district. As district play continues, teams might move up and down. #1 Winter Park vs #8 University (Orange City) #2 Flagler Palm Coast vs #7 Wekiva #3 Seminole vs #6 Boone #4 Apopka vs#5 Lake Mary Region 2 #1 Vero Beach vs #8 Ridge Community #2 Osceola vs #7 Riverview (Sarasota) #3 Dr. Phillips vs #6 Gateway #4 Newsome vs #5 Centennial Region 3 #1 Seminole Ridge vs #8 Palm Beach Gardens #2 Atlantic (Delray Beach) vs#7 Western #3 Miramar vs #6 Plantation #4 Deerfield Beach vs #5 Palm Beach Central Region 4 #1 South Dade vs #8 Hialeah # 2 Columbus vs #7 Miami Palmetto #3 North Miami Beach vs #6 Homestead #4 Belen Jesuit vs #5 Miami

It would be nice to see an up-to-date playoff rankings. It would be nice to see a follow-up interviews with Florida's Mr. Football from previous years (especially some of the old-timers). It would be nice to see a career stats leaderboard in Florida (maybe, Buddy Collings). It would be nice as well to have a listing of All-State teams from previous years. It would be nice to see 5-10 teams followed throughout the season of various quality. Maybe, a Stanton Prep, a Forest Hills (WPB), a Clewiston, a Plant, Lakeland, Niceville, Hialeah, and small private school. It would be nice to know the true cost of football (referees, ticket takers, security, travel, uniforms, helmets being re-conditioned, pads, footballs, HUDL) etc. and how school districts are dealing with rising costs.

Bishop Gorman shows class and helps cover food and hotels. http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/high-school/article172765846.html