Metro/Suburban Plan voted on. PASSED

[DisabledAccount]

1 hour ago, badbird said:

I didn't read it all but I'll comment on the first part.  The RPI was a failure, that's the only other thing I didn't support.  They are getting rid of it because it sucked.  I prefer the maxpreps rankings, Id rather have Pinkos (RIP).  So I like they are going to maxpreps over the RPI.  So there's one thing I support.    

 

Adding more classes is going to make smaller districts and more shittier teams will get into the playoffs.  Something you're against.  When more than 50% of the teams make the playoffs, up to 60% in the smaller classes, you get what we have.  Only going to be worse with another class added.  I was against the RPI(it sucked) but I wasn't against runner ups not getting in.  I was for smaller number of classes and more teams in a district.  Also meaning a less percentage of teams would make the playoffs creating more competitive classes.  Not hard to follow buddy.  

I've said several times I felt small classifications specifically 1a should be 2 regions not 4 especially with no districts 

 

I would have 2 regions with 8 teams in 1a making playoffs (so 16 teams in the class instead of 24) 

[badbird]

1 hour ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

Only because they recruited from 3 counties and on top of that went out of their way to intentionally try to injure our players but it won't stop us from scheduling teams like TCA or Bolles

 

When's the last time your program took on a private school of that level but our program is a whiny bitch? Until your stepping up your competition who the hell are you to talk shit about what my school does because most the metro teams in Jacksonville are still afraid of TCA and Bolles but Columbia has never been afraid to take them on 

 

Everyone on here thinks they are an expert but none of the clowns on here know a damn thing about 99% of the teams they talk about and no matter how much evidence is shown to prove it they gonna be right back next thread spreading the same bullshit again 

 

All because you all think STA and AHP are the problems but don't have a problem with Miami Central or Northwestern getting 20 transfers a season because you all think it's a one time thing WHEN IT HAPPENS EVERY SEASON 

 

Everyone accuses STA of recruiting when Dillard is getting as many transfers if not more than STA this year and nobody wants to talk about that 

 

Dillard has taken more players from DFB than STA and Cardinal Gibbons combined but Dillard the only school nobody thinks is recruiting in that conversation

 

Every damn thread on this board is like talking through a brick wall 

 

Oh and another thing my rankings are also better than anyone here considering I ranked all 8 state champs at highest in their classification in the preseason so I think I do a good job on evaluating the teams in this state but go ahead and keep believing everyone here's an expert but this board has tanked since guys like Broward and Zoe stopped posting because so many on here are either like Jesse where he jumps into conversations he knows nothing about or spread the same misinformation and lies in every thread and while debates used to be fun here now a days it's just embarrassing to even talk football here because nobody can even make the debates interesting

I got under your skin.  LEE IS YOUR DADDY.

 

I don't have a team.  I haven't had a team for 6 years.  I'm a fan of Florida high school football or I was.  It's hard to watch now and for the first time in I can't tell you how many years I didn't watch many playoff games or attend the state championships. I guess it's time for this old dawg to find a new sport. 

[DisabledAccount]

55 minutes ago, Nulli Secundus said:

You must be referring to that charter school known as Lake Wales High.

Careful you might get that one Polk county clown to come on here and defend them to the ends of the earth because LaKe WaLeS iS eLiTe 

[badbird]

4 minutes ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

I've said several times I felt small classifications specifically 1a should be 2 regions not 4 especially with no districts 

 

I would have 2 regions with 8 teams in 1a making playoffs (so 16 teams in the class instead of 24) 

when they went to 8 classes and 1A - 4A with half the teams that's when it got really watered down

[DisabledAccount]

1 minute ago, badbird said:

I got under your skin.  LEE IS YOUR DADDY.

 

I don't have a team.  I haven't had a team for 6 years.  I'm a fan of Florida high school football or I was.  It's hard to watch now and for the first time in I can't tell you how many years I didn't watch many playoff games or attend the state championships. I guess it's time for this old dawg to find a new sport. 

Riverside/Lee is about to be back to being Ed White's bitch and winning 3 games a year 

 

Elite programs sustain and they are just a flash in the pan who got short term respect but now they gonna return to losing while real programs will still make the playoffs like annual tradition

[DisabledAccount]

1 minute ago, badbird said:

when they went to 8 classes and 1A - 4A with half the teams that's when it got really watered down

The small classifications in general are way too small in terms of numbers and the moment they removed districts they should have went to 2 regions in those classes 

 

You have regions in 1a with 9-12 total teams and with 6 making the playoffs you have regions where 66% of the teams make the playoffs 

 

You guarantee teams with a losing record make it every year 

[badbird]

1 minute ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

The small classifications in general are way too small in terms of numbers and the moment they removed districts they should have went to 2 regions in those classes 

 

You have regions in 1a with 9-12 total teams and with 6 making the playoffs you have regions where 66% of the teams make the playoffs 

 

You guarantee teams with a losing record make it every year 

So you are agreeing it sucks.  Are they going to have Suburban 1 and Suburban 2 smaller than Suburban 3 and 4?  

[DisabledAccount]

2 minutes ago, badbird said:

So you are agreeing it sucks.  Are they going to have Suburban 1 and Suburban 2 smaller than Suburban 3 and 4?  

I'm not sure how they are doing it 

 

Personally if I was in charge of it I would have done metro/suburban split and then take it and divide it into 4 quadrants on both sides by winning percentage with 25% brackets from top to bottom and form the classifications on a 2 year cycle that way 

[DisabledAccount]

4 minutes ago, badbird said:

So you are agreeing it sucks.  Are they going to have Suburban 1 and Suburban 2 smaller than Suburban 3 and 4?  

I think they are missing the easy fix to one of the major problems for uniformity bullshit

 

2 regions for the smaller classes could have helped some of the issues but I guess it's pointless with the new change because we don't even know how the split will look 

[DisabledAccount]

50 minutes ago, Floridaatlantic1 said:

The Venice coach could be using it as a promo for Suburban but it has already been established that the Metro is the BIG BOY real state champs and the Suburban will be the scrub fake state championships even if the champ would have won the metro like Venice.  We will never know now. The suburban schools won their independence but they don't get to have it both ways. You cant say please FHSAA split the state into two because we cant compete with metro schools and then say they are the equivalent state champs. 

By that logic Sanford Seminole wasn't the true state champs in 2020 because they beat Osceola not Columbus for a state title 

 

 

[Floridaatlantic1]

That logic only applies to next year when the crybabies ran away from tough schools in Miami / Dade who win most of the state titles. Even the best Suburban school in the state knows it will be a devalued title. 

[Floridaatlantic1]

The state wont let Venice switch because they would have to let other teams do the same and I would bet you most would be metro teams trying to go to suburban and not vice versa. 

[DisabledAccount]

41 minutes ago, Floridaatlantic1 said:

That logic only applies to next year when the crybabies ran away from tough schools in Miami / Dade who win most of the state titles. Even the best Suburban school in the state knows it will be a devalued title. 

No it applies the same because your logic is beating a suburban team means they are talentless so unless someone is beating a metro team they aren't beating anyone good 

 

You don't get to pick and choose when it applies and because Columbus was apart of tri county (the 3 SFL counties) in 2020 then your logic would be Sanford Seminole didn't beat the the defending state champs and metro team Columbus so their championship is devalued

[DisabledAccount]

Since it's clear you think only metro teams have talent I guess we should say any championship that isn't a metro team playing another metro team isn't a real state championship because they "aren't playing real competition" 

 

I wonder how many examples of that I can find in the record books 

[Floridaatlantic1]

Its obvious that there are some awesome suburban teams and I  never said they were not great ones. In fact, if you look at my earlier posts, you would see that I can see a few teams dominating the suburban titles. Now many of them were getting to state or to the semi finals and meeting the Miami Dade Broward juggernaughts who are private or get a million transfers. My whole point is the suburban title will be seen as not real or fake because a lot of the suburban push was that they are not worthy of playing metro teams since they have won 88% of the title over a time period.  so we need a separate division. That means that even if a suburban team does win a suburban title, it is the minor league division of state titles. This is straight from the mouth of the people who pushed this crap system on the entire state.

[Floridaatlantic1]

Hey, there is nothing wrong being king of the dipsh@ts. 

[Dr. D]

2 hours ago, badbird said:

So you are agreeing it sucks.  Are they going to have Suburban 1 and Suburban 2 smaller than Suburban 3 and 4?  

What was presented at the Board of Directors meeting was:

    Metro 4A - 64 teams;    Metro 3A - 64 teams;    Metro 2A - 64 teams;    Metro 1A - 36 teams

    Suburban 4A - 68 teams;    Suburban 3A - 68 teams;    Suburban 2A - 68 teams;    Suburban 1A - 30 teams

    Jesse rural division - 33 teams

Actual class sizes will vary based on natural breaks enrollment.   

[Ray Icaza]

1 hour ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

By that logic Sanford Seminole wasn't the true state champs in 2020 because they beat Osceola not Columbus for a state title 

 

 

The Noles beat out an Osceola that beat a Palmetto in Miami that had beat out a Columbus.   We aren't the whiners albeit some exist in Suburban just like they do in Metro, just some folks not smart enough too figure this simple picture out. 

[Perspective]

I've got a couple of random thoughts in response to the last three or four pages of comments on this thread (and I'm too lazy to try to go back and forth copying and pasting from the comments to my response):

1.  A one-team district would be pretty cool.   Such teams would be guaranteed to win the district title every year, but it could get complicated if the FHSAA ever goes back to district winners and district runners-up both making the playoffs. 

2.  Badbird, this is high school football.  Not college and not pro.   So, I don't have a problem with a bunch of teams making the playoffs, even if it means a few blowouts in the opening round or two.   More kids get to play in a playoff game - perhaps for the one and only time of their life.  Home teams make a little more money from parking and concessions (maybe they should have to split the gate with the visiting team?).    Grandparents get one more chance to see their grandkids play.   The kids on bad teams get to play one more high school football game, albeit on the road against a better team.  If they're smart, the coaches of the good teams will use opening round games to iron out wrinkles, rest starters that might be a little banged up, and, most importantly, provide playing time to back-ups to give them experience for the next year or possibly putting them in position to contribute in the present season if a starter or two gets injured.   

3.  If we're concerned about too many blowouts, set up the high school football playoffs like the SEC does its basketball championship.    The worst four teams (seeds 11-14) play in the opening round for the chance to play in the second round, against the middle seeds (5-10).  The four second round winners then get to play in the third round against the top four seeds (1-4), who all got double-byes and who've been sitting around waiting to play their first game.   "On a roll" teams vs. rested teams.   Generally speaking, the cream rises to the top and the better teams prevail. 

4.  Personally, I don't like the metro/suburban split.   To be honest, if the FHSAA wanted to split up the teams across the state, I would rather have seen a public/private split (but I understand that may not have been something the FHSAA could do).  

5.  I do wonder why the metro 4A champ can't play the suburban 4A champ for the "state 4A championship."  Same with the other 3 classes.  Yeah, I get it . . . suburban teams wouldn't win very many state championships (well, other than MadCo), but they'd make the championship game and they'd have their shot. 

So, I may have to do like Moses and split my comments up over two tablets.   But this is what I have for now. 

[Jesse]

31 minutes ago, Perspective said:

I've got a couple of random thoughts in response to the last three or four pages of comments on this thread (and I'm too lazy to try to go back and forth copying and pasting from the comments to my response):

1.  A one-team district would be pretty cool.   Such teams would be guaranteed to win the district title every year, but it could get complicated if the FHSAA ever goes back to district winners and district runners-up both making the playoffs. 

2.  Badbird, this is high school football.  Not college and not pro.   So, I don't have a problem with a bunch of teams making the playoffs, even if it means a few blowouts in the opening round or two.   More kids get to play in a playoff game - perhaps for the one and only time of their life.  Home teams make a little more money from parking and concessions (maybe they should have to split the gate with the visiting team?).    Grandparents get one more chance to see their grandkids play.   The kids on bad teams get to play one more high school football game, albeit on the road against a better team.  If they're smart, the coaches of the good teams will use opening round games to iron out wrinkles, rest starters that might be a little banged up, and, most importantly, provide playing time to back-ups to give them experience for the next year or possibly putting them in position to contribute in the present season if a starter or two gets injured.   

3.  If we're concerned about too many blowouts, set up the high school football playoffs like the SEC does its basketball championship.    The worst four teams (seeds 11-14) play in the opening round for the chance to play in the second round, against the middle seeds (5-10).  The four second round winners then get to play in the third round against the top four seeds (1-4), who all got double-byes and who've been sitting around waiting to play their first game.   "On a roll" teams vs. rested teams.   Generally speaking, the cream rises to the top and the better teams prevail. 

4.  Personally, I don't like the metro/suburban split.   To be honest, if the FHSAA wanted to split up the teams across the state, I would rather have seen a public/private split (but I understand that may not have been something the FHSAA could do).  

5.  I do wonder why the metro 4A champ can't play the suburban 4A champ for the "state 4A championship."  Same with the other 3 classes.  Yeah, I get it . . . suburban teams would win very many state championships (well, other than MadCo), but they'd make the championship game and they'd have their shot. 

So, I may have to do like Moses and split my comments up over two tablets.   But this is what I have for now. 

We would see trinity christian vs blountstown in round 1 or 2. Any score predictions?

[DisabledAccount]

37 minutes ago, Perspective said:

I've got a couple of random thoughts in response to the last three or four pages of comments on this thread (and I'm too lazy to try to go back and forth copying and pasting from the comments to my response):

1.  A one-team district would be pretty cool.   Such teams would be guaranteed to win the district title every year, but it could get complicated if the FHSAA ever goes back to district winners and district runners-up both making the playoffs. 

2.  Badbird, this is high school football.  Not college and not pro.   So, I don't have a problem with a bunch of teams making the playoffs, even if it means a few blowouts in the opening round or two.   More kids get to play in a playoff game - perhaps for the one and only time of their life.  Home teams make a little more money from parking and concessions (maybe they should have to split the gate with the visiting team?).    Grandparents get one more chance to see their grandkids play.   The kids on bad teams get to play one more high school football game, albeit on the road against a better team.  If they're smart, the coaches of the good teams will use opening round games to iron out wrinkles, rest starters that might be a little banged up, and, most importantly, provide playing time to back-ups to give them experience for the next year or possibly putting them in position to contribute in the present season if a starter or two gets injured.   

3.  If we're concerned about too many blowouts, set up the high school football playoffs like the SEC does its basketball championship.    The worst four teams (seeds 11-14) play in the opening round for the chance to play in the second round, against the middle seeds (5-10).  The four second round winners then get to play in the third round against the top four seeds (1-4), who all got double-byes and who've been sitting around waiting to play their first game.   "On a roll" teams vs. rested teams.   Generally speaking, the cream rises to the top and the better teams prevail. 

4.  Personally, I don't like the metro/suburban split.   To be honest, if the FHSAA wanted to split up the teams across the state, I would rather have seen a public/private split (but I understand that may not have been something the FHSAA could do).  

5.  I do wonder why the metro 4A champ can't play the suburban 4A champ for the "state 4A championship."  Same with the other 3 classes.  Yeah, I get it . . . suburban teams would win very many state championships (well, other than MadCo), but they'd make the championship game and they'd have their shot. 

So, I may have to do like Moses and split my comments up over two tablets.   But this is what I have for now. 

[Jambun82]

9 hours ago, badbird said:

I got under your skin.  LEE IS YOUR DADDY.

 

I don't have a team.  I haven't had a team for 6 years.  I'm a fan of Florida high school football or I was.  It's hard to watch now and for the first time in I can't tell you how many years I didn't watch many playoff games or attend the state championships. I guess it's time for this old dawg to find a new sport. 

You could also buy a shirt with black and white stripes. 

[nolebull813]

Like I said. The terms metro, suburban and rural are words to describe areas of the state.

When you separate teams by area and say they can only play other specific areas exclusively then by definition that is not describing the entire state. 
 

By definition these will now be “area championships” not “state” championships. 

[DisabledAccount]

2 hours ago, nolebull813 said:

Like I said. The terms metro, suburban and rural are words to describe areas of the state.

When you separate teams by area and say they can only play other specific areas exclusively then by definition that is not describing the entire state. 
 

By definition these will now be “area championships” not “state” championships. 

Other states have used sectional championships as the official name with the similar idea I believe 

 

They could also go the CA route and allow open bowl season where winners of suburban and metro could choose to play after so some people are looking at this like it's the end of the world but they can always make changes but we can't just keep doing the same crap and expecting different results because what we had wasn't working and was NEVER going to fix blowouts nor the gap between metros and non metros which was the primary reason for those blowouts

[DisabledAccount]

20 hours ago, Ray Icaza said:

The Noles beat out an Osceola that beat a Palmetto in Miami that had beat out a Columbus.   We aren't the whiners albeit some exist in Suburban just like they do in Metro, just some folks not smart enough too figure this simple picture out. 

I get that but my point was more because that poster is basically saying that the only real teams are the metros so because they beat a "suburban" Osceola and not Miami Dade Columbus their championship is devalued by the posters own logic 

 

Is there some teams in suburban that are Afraid to play good teams? Yes 

 

There are also metro teams who are afraid of playing tough teams 

 

But to say the suburban teams are a minor league like varsity to JV is disrespectful to the programs in these suburban classes who for YEARS have stepped up to face good metro teams 

 

This change was needed but it doesn't mean the entire state was scared but what are we supposed to do? Sit back and continue to let the blowouts in the finals continue forever because nothing was ever going to change and the state knew this 

 

"The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results"