Hwy17

Desoto coach resigned on Wednesday after a 0-10 season.

Who on here is familiar with the system used for the 1999 & 2000 seasons? I personally thought it was the best ever yet its been kicked to the curb and nearly forgotten about. Six classes (I would do seven now) with 3 districts per region. That meant districts typically had 5 or more teams. Districts Champions and runners-up automatically got in the playoffs. There were 2 at-large spots that the 2 with the best overall records but not a champ or runner-up got. Strength of schedule was used in event of a tie for the at large sports. Now of course I would probably go with 3 district Champs and 5 at large spots with more imphasis on strength of schedule. But still, that system worked well and produced some interesting playoff matches. As for open enrollment: It's gotten completely out of control and needs some rules. I personally don't have a problem with a legitimate move into a new school zone. I feel that if a parent or guardian can show proof they moved into a new school zone, their student athlete should be allowed to play no matter what. However if they haven't moved and just decided I want to go somewhere else for whatever reason, then the student athlete should only be allowed to play JV their first season at the new school. I would consider an exception for seniors.

The tops teams in the state during that time were small town programs.

What part? Larger districts or only district champion gets in the playoffs? Playoffs were only 3 rounds. The main reason for expanding the playoffs was because a lot of really good teams were left out so district runner-ups got added in the early 90s. There is certain rival of ours that hates being reminded of the 1988 season.

I was in 10th grade in 1989 and remember that season like it was yesterday. This was our district and records - 8 team district and only the district champ got to go to the playoffs. We had a 4 way tie that was determined by Kansas City tiebreaker. Hardee 8-2 Desoto 8-2 Okeechobee 8-2 Avon Park 7-3 Sebring 6-4 Lake Wales 4-6 Haines City 2-8 Mulberry 1-9 Avon Park ended up winning the tiebreaker.

Thank you! See my post in the thread pertaining to Bartow.

Exactly! Lake Wales benefited from the split. Now get this; if the current proposal goes through LW might benefit even more as maxpreps says they are #45 in the state meanwhile Mainland is in the top 32. LW would love that! Mainland, IMHO, gets screwed!

I don't disagree that in the above scenario that the 8-2 team shouldn't be the higher seed come playoffs. However my observation over the last several years would suggest that a team that plays that tough of a schedule and goes 8-2 most likely has something (a lot of transfers coming in) most other schools don't. Also they are likely one of those teams others avoid. Likewise, the 10-0 team, most likely didn't load up on easy teams for easy wins but rather has a traditional schedule playing neighboring schools that all happen to be lousy. I see it happening a lot. Lake Wales for example gets criticized for playing a "weak" schedule even though a lot of those games are neighboring schools and the understanding that who we play every year.

Under that system it would! Makes you want to ask your Dr for his transcripts before having surgery

And to your point. There really are only a few teams out there that "elite" or dominant every year. Most schools have a few good seasons followed by a down year or two. Likewise, most schools create their schedules for a two year cycle because that's how districts are done. When a school shows they're good most years,(this is especially true in the smaller classes), others don't want to play them. And the weaker teams usually stick to playing other weaker teams until they start winning. This makes for a catch 22. Here's some real examples: Clewiston, not really a weak team but because of past successes they find themselves playing a brutal schedule. North Port, years of being everyone's homecoming game has finally decided to play some teams they can actually win. Good for them! I suspect next season they'll have to schedule a little tougher. Same thing with Lemon Bay. Hardee, (my team) also playing a very weak schedule but as someone else pointed out to me, some of those weak teams had a winning season last year. The point I'm getting at is this: While a promotion or relegation system sounds good, unless there is some measure to show that a team is vastly superior than the rest of their class I don't believe a team should be forced up because of a couple good years. And those who consistently struggle have the ability to schedule accordingly now. Strength of schedule sounds good but when you schedule a team that had a winning season and now they are winless your stuck.

To both of your points, remember back a couple of seasons the system used awarded points based off strength of schedule, which sounded good. However as was pointed out, St. Pete Gibbs was awarded points for getting running clocked by Lakeland who in turned was penalized by the system for playing a winless team. As I said then, all that proved to me was Gibbs had no business playing Lakeland. Yet under that system it was better for a bad team to over schedule and get beat than to play teams along their own level. It's almost like telling a student who struggles with basic math to take calculus because an F in calculus is better than an A+ in basic math.

The next time I am having a bad day or just royally screw something up, I will replay the last seconds of this game to remind myself that whatever I've done can't be this dumb.

https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/2023-10-05/dick-butkus-chicago-bears-legend-dies-80-obit

Imagine this: Let's say a really good program has been coming close but hasn't won a championship in their respective class yet. Then finally they got the team that just might win it, but by chance the computer ranks then 32 in the state. I for one would find that unfair. Especially if my team was 5a or 4a.

That's how I read it