Perspective

Here is is folks.."Just ask RIPI" for up to the minute RPI numbers, guaranteed 50% or less margin of error.   And for a small fee you can get with one with your team logo.  
One can also pay extra to get the special "bitch and whine" feature.  When coach complains to RIPI about the numbers, RIPI will console you by making statements like "You're right , coach.  This new system sucks." 

In the past, preseason polls seemed to be based largely on a combination of the following:  past performance (over a period of time and, perhaps more importantly,  the prior year's record), the head coach, the returning/incoming QB and, on occasion,  a 4 or 5 star player on a particular team.   Prognosticators have a tougher job now, as they have to factor in players lost and players gained via the transfer process for each team and every team that team will be playing. 

Hmmm, that also means a kid could play 4 quarters in a JV game on Thursday night and then turn around and play 4 quarters in the varsity game the following night, since the "new week" starts on Friday, right?    Again, you wouldn't think a coach would go into the week thinking this, but what if the varsity team loses a couple of starters to injuries mid-way through the first quarter and the kid who played the JV game the night before is the proverbial 'next man up' at that position?
For anyone who ever coached Little League All-Stars, you know how hard it is to make sure that every kid gets their required defensive inning(s) and at-bats.  High school football coaches would be in the same position.  I can just see the finger-pointing that's going to go on when a varsity team has to forfeit a game because the JV coach told the varsity coach that James only played 2 quarters in the JV game because some parent volunteer got distracted at that JV game by a neighbor with some juicy gossip and forgot to mark down that James played in that one Jumbo package in the 3rd quarter when the team needed to pick up a crucial 4th down. 

And whichever one doesn't win the starting job by his junior year will transfer to Princeton.  

That 6-quarter rule is going to be an administrative nightmare for somebody.  Does one play in a quarter constitute playing in that quarter?  Who's going to keep track of how many plays and in which quarters a kid played?  I can't wait until the end of the year when some team comes forward claiming a kid played in more than 6 quarters in a week and that this should result in a forfeit for the kid's team, which then results in a loss for that team,  which then changes the Category a team is in, which then affects another teams  Power Ranking Average, which then determines who makes the playoffs (or, if the new rules are in place, affects a team's RPI, which then determines who gets into the playoffs and/or who gets to host and who has to travel). 
I can see it now.  "Uh, Mr. HUDL, there's a process server at the door with a subpoena who needs digital copies of all your varsity and JV game film on Random High School to determine if Johnny Jones played in more than 6 quarters in any week this past season."
Administrative nightmares aside, what's a reasonable recovery period?  In most counties, don't they play JV games on Thursdays and Varsity games on Fridays?  Playing in two games on back-to-back nights is going to be hard on kids.   Yeah, I understand that kids who play 4 quarters of a JV game one night aren't likely to get much playing time the next night in the varsity game.  And kids who are expected to play 4 quarters of a varsity game probably won't be asked to play much in the JV game the night before.  But, still...  coaches looking to gain an edge or win a game have been known to do things that aren't necessarily in every kids' best interests. 
By the way, how are OT's handled?  Are they considered an extra quarter? 

This is what you would get if the Hamburglar and the homeless lady from Home Alone 2 had a baby. 

 

Interesting stuff.   But forgive me if I don't choose to hold my breath waiting for the Ivy League to win a handful of consecutive national championships. 

I'd take a team of 'really good high school football players' over a team with one or two "undisputed FBS talents" every day of the week and twice on Friday nights.   Now, if you can put an FBS talent on a team with really good players, you've got a chance to have a very special year.  In my view, that's what Lakeland did this year.  The other thread shows how many players transferred into Lakeland over the last two years.  The list included the QB.  While he may not be an FBS talent (at least not at the QB position), he was perfect for their system.  And without trying to throw punches at a high school kid, and based purely on the eyeball test, the number 2 QB at Lakeland (who may only be a sophomore) would not have been able to do the things that the number 1 kid did or that Lakeland needed to be done in order for them to make their championship run.  That said, Lakeland probably could have lined Bowman up in the wildcat all season and still gone undefeated -- at least through the regular season. 
My point is this:  you don't necessarily need undisputed FBS talent to make a deep playoff run if you have good players and depth across the board.  But, certainly, if you can take a team that has good players, including a 4* TE and a potential 5* RB, and add in transfers that are better than what you've got (and/or allow players to play a position that is better suited for them), and throw in another undisputed FBS talent or two, that's when you've got a real shot at holding up the trophy in Orlando. 

I'd take a team of 'really good high school football players' over a team with one or two "undisputed FBS talents" every day of the week and twice on Friday nights.   Now, if you can put an FBS talent on a team with really good players, you've got a chance to have a very special year.  In my view, that's what Lakeland did this year.  The other thread shows how many players transferred into Lakeland over the last two years.  The list included the QB.  While he may not be an FBS talent (at least not at the QB position), he was perfect for their system.  And without trying to throw punches at a high school kid, and based purely on the eyeball test, the number 2 QB at Lakeland (who may only be a sophomore) would not have been able to do the things that the number 1 kid did or that Lakeland needed to be done in order for them to make their championship run.  That said, Lakeland probably could have lined Bowman up in the wildcat all season and still gone undefeated -- at least through the regular season. 
My point is this:  you don't necessarily need undisputed FBS talent to make a deep playoff run if you have good players and depth across the board.  But, certainly, if you can take a team that has good players, including a 4* TE and a potential 5* RB, and add in transfers that are better than what you've got (and/or allow players to play a position that is better suited for them), and throw in another undisputed FBS talent or two, that's when you've got a real shot at holding up the trophy in Orlando. 

Good points.  The devil is in the details.  Some folks out there simply point to sheer numbers of transfers as an indicator of potential.  That may or may not be the case, depending upon who a team gets. 
As you imply, a certain team with relatively few transfers could hit the jackpot if they get the "right" transfers.  Mandarin may be an example of this with Beck and his wr corps.  IMO, what's more important than how many transfers a team gets is "who" they get and how that player(s) complements the team's system and existing players.  ST Thomas Aquinas getting a 5-star db may not mean that much to them if their secondary is already loaded with 4-star db's...whereas a really good team whose achilles heal is their qb could benefit tremendously from getting "just" a 3-star player.
Every case is unique and it's difficult to say exactly how much transfers made a difference in a team's overall performance without delving into the details.  We had some teams vying for titles this year with vastly different circumstances.  We had St Thomas Aquinas, who got a bunch of transfers, but would still blow most teams away talent-wise even without those transfers.  We had some teams who needed lots of transfers to fill voids, even if some of those players were just "warm bodies," ie Armwood and Chaminade-Madonna.  We had some teams who seemed to get an average number of transfers with average talent, but got one or two key transfers to round out their team, ie Lakeland.  Then we have teams who didn't seem to rely much at all upon transfers, ie Cardinal Gibbons and North Marion.  
 

Broward County is also home to one the most volatile coaching scenes in the state.  Can you imagine the challenge of getting one of their lagging public school programs turned around under these circumstances?  There is no comparison between such an effort here and certain other parts of the state.  No other schools in the state face such intense competition for talent...not even close.  Who outside Broward County has to compete with 5 state/nationally ranked private schools for talent ever year?
I don't know the answer for these coaches, but "trying harder" alone is likely not going to cut it, especially when they are losing many of their best players every year to the Broward and Dade County powers. 
We focus a lot on those who "gain" from transfers.  IMO the focus should be on those who "lose," because the breadth of that impact is much greater.  Hating the "rich" is not going to make things better.  We need to figure out how to help those in the "lower and middle classes, " who are feeling the broadening gap in "wealth" of talent.  

Lakeland

Dang, I hate to come in here and start a fight with my second post, but maybe I just don't understand what's going on in Broward County.  I always thought high school all-star games are just for seniors.   For the very reason alluded to in the first post, it does not make sense to me to allow a current coach at one high school to be coaching kids from another high school who still have high school eligibility (how else would they end up on the Dillard sideline next year, unless they all plan to become coaches).  I'm assuming at least a week of practice leading up to the game itself during which time the head coach (and perhaps members of his staff) would get one-on-one instructional/bonding time with kids from other schools?  That's a recipe for disaster if you ask me.  Of course kids are going to like the coach who only has to coach them for one week and where discipline likely is not an issue.  What am I missing here?

I just needed a broader perspective.   ;-)

He forgot to add "Please respect my decision."  

I'm not 100% sure, but I believe Tampa Plant was 1-9 in 2003.  Robert Weiner became the coach in 2004 and the team went 3-7.  In 2005, Plant went 9-3.  And in 2006, in Coach Weiner's third year as head coach, Plant went 15-0 and won the State Championship. 

I'm not 100% sure, but I believe Tampa Plant was 1-9 in 2003.  Robert Weiner became the coach in 2004 and the team went 3-7.  In 2005, Plant went 9-3.  And in 2006, in Coach Weiner's third year as head coach, Plant went 15-0 and won the State Championship.