Perspective

Wait, I thought recruiting was illegal?  

So many factors at play here.   Are offenses game-planning around him?  Are opponent QB's not even throwing the ball down field because this kid is lurking back there waiting?  Is this kid's team loaded on defense and the D-line and LB'ers are making most of the tackles?
I'm curious how the kid is built:  is he 6'2", 185 with a frame that can hold the 15 pounds that he'll likely gain his first year of college?  Does he have good speed?   Does he play downhill?  Is he aggressive? 
In answer to your question, I'd say college recruit on a combination of potential and production.  You can't teach speed, size or instinct, so if a kid checks all of these boxes, even if his statistical numbers aren't all that impressive, he'll still get offers over the 5'8, 160 kid who has better numbers. 

OK, so I have reason to believe that Dr. D is actually "MaxPreps" in disguise and that he's testing out his Florida pre-season rankings on this highly educated audience before releasing them to the general public. 
Per MaxPrep's website (Under Florida high school rankings for 2023-24), it says:  "MaxPreps hasn't released rankings for football (2023) yet. Our rankings algorithm requires a minimum number of games played before we can accurately rank teams. Please check back soon."

Serious question:  how can you have a pre-season "Power Rating?"  What are each team's 'power rating' based upon?  How the team performed last year?  Particularly stupid for high school teams that lose  60-70% of the starters every year, on average.   Sports writers voting like in college?  Yeah, you've got a handful (if that) of season, grizzled veteran writers across the state that care enough to dig into how each team in the state should perform this season; the rest are lucky to know who the best team in their city is going to be and know very little about the rest of the state.  And, obviously, the power rating can't be based on how the teams have performed thus far because no one has played a single game.  
So, what's it based on? 

OK, so I have reason to believe that Dr. D is actually "MaxPreps" in disguise and that he's testing out his Florida pre-season rankings on this highly educated audience before releasing them to the general public. 
Per MaxPrep's website (Under Florida high school rankings for 2023-24), it says:  "MaxPreps hasn't released rankings for football (2023) yet. Our rankings algorithm requires a minimum number of games played before we can accurately rank teams. Please check back soon."

I posted this same thing in the "Suburban" thread, but I'll ask my questions here just in case someone skipped past it to get to the Metro teams:
Serious question:  how can you have a pre-season "Power Rating?"  What are each team's 'power rating' based upon?  How the team performed last year?  Particularly stupid for high school teams that lose  60-70% of the starters every year, on average.   Sports writers voting like in college?  Yeah, you've got a handful (if that) of season, grizzled veteran writers across the state that care enough to dig into how each team in the state should perform this season; the rest are lucky to know who the best team in their city is going to be and know very little about the rest of the state.  And, obviously, the power rating can't be based on how the teams have performed thus far because no one has played a single game.  
So, what's it based on? What information goes into the algorithm before the first game gets played?

I think most people have alot more in common than not, which is why some of my best friends that disagree with me on some social issues don't let those overshadow the "MOST IMPORTANT" issues.  There is a strong possibility that you fall into that category. 

OK, so I have reason to believe that Dr. D is actually "MaxPreps" in disguise and that he's testing out his Florida pre-season rankings on this highly educated audience before releasing them to the general public. 
Per MaxPrep's website (Under Florida high school rankings for 2023-24), it says:  "MaxPreps hasn't released rankings for football (2023) yet. Our rankings algorithm requires a minimum number of games played before we can accurately rank teams. Please check back soon."

My serious answer..... they simply should wait until 4 or 5 regular season games have been played before making any such pronouncements.  Even then, it isn't an exact science but at least they would have some DATA to answer some of the questions you pose.  

Serious question:  how can you have a pre-season "Power Rating?"  What are each team's 'power rating' based upon?  How the team performed last year?  Particularly stupid for high school teams that lose  60-70% of the starters every year, on average.   Sports writers voting like in college?  Yeah, you've got a handful (if that) of season, grizzled veteran writers across the state that care enough to dig into how each team in the state should perform this season; the rest are lucky to know who the best team in their city is going to be and know very little about the rest of the state.  And, obviously, the power rating can't be based on how the teams have performed thus far because no one has played a single game.  
So, what's it based on? 

I posted this same thing in the "Suburban" thread, but I'll ask my questions here just in case someone skipped past it to get to the Metro teams:
Serious question:  how can you have a pre-season "Power Rating?"  What are each team's 'power rating' based upon?  How the team performed last year?  Particularly stupid for high school teams that lose  60-70% of the starters every year, on average.   Sports writers voting like in college?  Yeah, you've got a handful (if that) of season, grizzled veteran writers across the state that care enough to dig into how each team in the state should perform this season; the rest are lucky to know who the best team in their city is going to be and know very little about the rest of the state.  And, obviously, the power rating can't be based on how the teams have performed thus far because no one has played a single game.  
So, what's it based on? What information goes into the algorithm before the first game gets played?

It would be nice to see some occasional new blood go on a run but not possible in the transfer era where the strong reload each year and the weak donate their best to the strong.  Tired of seeing the same teams every year.  

In other words, it's like the billboards say:  Size matters.    
My wife told me the same thing . . . but she married me anyway. 

But the problem here is (as with most pre-season polls), Mater Dei is preseason number 1.  Gorman is 2, St John Bosco 3 and IMG 4.  Central is 5.   If Central beats Gorman, and assuming all the other teams mentioned stay undefeated, I can see Central possibly jumping over Bosco and IMG, but probably not MD.  Only time will tell.

VIF, are you just trying to pump TBT up so that if Venice beats them in the KOC, the win is more impressive, and if Venice loses, the loss doesn't look so bad?   
Truth be told, TBT has always had the athletes (and may truly have their most loaded team in recent history), but in my humble opinion (and no disrespect intended), TBT has lacked the team discipline and the coaching to hang with the big boys and win a state title. 

Not pumping them up for the KOC. Just see that they have a lot of talent on paper and look primed to meet STA in the 3M finals. They have the talent to win 3M, or failing that, to lose to STA in the finals again. But of course, Jones, Armwood, and Edgewater all look powerful on paper as well so we will have to see how things shake out. But 3M is one of the more interesting classes this year for sure and I would love to see STA somehow get knocked off (hopefully at the hands of Dillard!) 

VIF, are you just trying to pump TBT up so that if Venice beats them in the KOC, the win is more impressive, and if Venice loses, the loss doesn't look so bad?   
Truth be told, TBT has always had the athletes (and may truly have their most loaded team in recent history), but in my humble opinion (and no disrespect intended), TBT has lacked the team discipline and the coaching to hang with the big boys and win a state title. 

VIF, are you just trying to pump TBT up so that if Venice beats them in the KOC, the win is more impressive, and if Venice loses, the loss doesn't look so bad?   
Truth be told, TBT has always had the athletes (and may truly have their most loaded team in recent history), but in my humble opinion (and no disrespect intended), TBT has lacked the team discipline and the coaching to hang with the big boys and win a state title. 

So many factors at play here.   Are offenses game-planning around him?  Are opponent QB's not even throwing the ball down field because this kid is lurking back there waiting?  Is this kid's team loaded on defense and the D-line and LB'ers are making most of the tackles?
I'm curious how the kid is built:  is he 6'2", 185 with a frame that can hold the 15 pounds that he'll likely gain his first year of college?  Does he have good speed?   Does he play downhill?  Is he aggressive? 
In answer to your question, I'd say college recruit on a combination of potential and production.  You can't teach speed, size or instinct, so if a kid checks all of these boxes, even if his statistical numbers aren't all that impressive, he'll still get offers over the 5'8, 160 kid who has better numbers. 

So many factors at play here.   Are offenses game-planning around him?  Are opponent QB's not even throwing the ball down field because this kid is lurking back there waiting?  Is this kid's team loaded on defense and the D-line and LB'ers are making most of the tackles?
I'm curious how the kid is built:  is he 6'2", 185 with a frame that can hold the 15 pounds that he'll likely gain his first year of college?  Does he have good speed?   Does he play downhill?  Is he aggressive? 
In answer to your question, I'd say college recruit on a combination of potential and production.  You can't teach speed, size or instinct, so if a kid checks all of these boxes, even if his statistical numbers aren't all that impressive, he'll still get offers over the 5'8, 160 kid who has better numbers. 

So many factors at play here.   Are offenses game-planning around him?  Are opponent QB's not even throwing the ball down field because this kid is lurking back there waiting?  Is this kid's team loaded on defense and the D-line and LB'ers are making most of the tackles?
I'm curious how the kid is built:  is he 6'2", 185 with a frame that can hold the 15 pounds that he'll likely gain his first year of college?  Does he have good speed?   Does he play downhill?  Is he aggressive? 
In answer to your question, I'd say college recruit on a combination of potential and production.  You can't teach speed, size or instinct, so if a kid checks all of these boxes, even if his statistical numbers aren't all that impressive, he'll still get offers over the 5'8, 160 kid who has better numbers. 

Pinellas FB, lucky you don't have ColumbiaFan lurking in the weeds.  He would be quite upset you are picking on "Private" schools for recruiting but not bashing the "Publics" that do the same.

I don't know about that Nolebull . . . I suspect the high school band and high school chess club message boards have been lighting up lately . . . filled will vigorous discussion and debate about this very topic. 
Oh, and be careful what you wish for . . . one of these days, the FHSAA may very well grow another pair. 

"LET IT BLEED"!!

It just sucks for the kid who was going to be the starter at the school where the "departing kid" transfers into.  
But such is life, I guess.