Jump to content

What’s up with Coach Wilk?


nolebull813
 Share

Recommended Posts

When he was at Cocoa he would play teams he had a zero percent chance of beating. He would schedule games he knew was an auto loss just to be able to take his team sight seeing. 
 

Now with New Smyrna Beach it’s the opposite. The non district schedule has got to be one of the worst in the state. 
 

Crystal River 

Sunlake 

Titusville

Central FL Christian Academy 

East River

Zephyrhills Christian 

 

WTF??? That’s horrible! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


8 hours ago, nolebull813 said:

When he was at Cocoa he would play teams he had a zero percent chance of beating. He would schedule games he knew was an auto loss just to be able to take his team sight seeing. 
 

Now with New Smyrna Beach it’s the opposite. The non district schedule has got to be one of the worst in the state. 
 

Crystal River 

Sunlake 

Titusville

Central FL Christian Academy 

East River

Zephyrhills Christian 

 

WTF??? That’s horrible! 

 

Definitely looks like they are taking a step back especially compared to how they scheduled in seasons past. This is also his first season coaching without his son on the team at NSB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The RPI formula rewards wins more than losses to good teams since a loss is only as good as a win if that loss was to an undefeated team. You will ensure you have a better chance of making the playoffs with a weaker schedule *but* you will also not be as ready for the competition you will meet early in the playoffs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nolebull813 said:

I’m not saying they should be scheduling STA. But maybe Mainland, Brevard powers, West Orange types etc. 

Hell their week 11 opponent on maxpreps is listed as “Varsity opponent” Lol. Like they have to unwrap it and see the team they get to play 

The only Brevard teams they've played since he's taken over has only been the North Brevard teams I believe Titusville and Astronaut. Possibly even Space Coast. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NHS Bob said:

I don't think the RPI is a factor this year, I believe that the MaxPreps rankings will be used for playoff seeding.

Do you have a link to the new at large selection rules?  FHSAA still has the 21-22 football publication linked.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NHS Bob said:

Thanks for sharing this article, as it has been highlighted before on the forum with some participants trashing the new plan partly because there wasn't a STRONG MANDATE (final vote 9-7).   However, in reading this article again it is clear the voting pretty much followed the "party line" with Metro reps against and Suburban reps for.  One Metro rep dissented because she didn't have enough information, missing data, not enough AD feedback and other non-sensical objections although the process clearly followed the 2 year requirement by FHSAA which did provide all of that.  Lastly, as I previously had pointed out the swing vote ended up being by a Metro rep out of Miami.   Looking at that DATA it is clear the Metro's that benefit from the geographical population advantage wanted to keep the status quo; who can blame them as this advantage has given them 5-7 titles annually in the different classifications with school enrollment the only criteria.  That number will now be cut in half as they will have to deal with like schools in the TRANSFER ERA, so the complaints are to be expected though without merit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

Thanks for sharing this article, as it has been highlighted before on the forum with some participants trashing the new plan partly because there wasn't a STRONG MANDATE (final vote 9-7).   However, in reading this article again it is clear the voting pretty much followed the "party line" with Metro reps against and Suburban reps for.  One Metro rep dissented because she didn't have enough information, missing data, not enough AD feedback and other non-sensical objections although the process clearly followed the 2 year requirement by FHSAA which did provide all of that.  Lastly, as I previously had pointed out the swing vote ended up being by a Metro rep out of Miami.   Looking at that DATA it is clear the Metro's that benefit from the geographical population advantage wanted to keep the status quo; who can blame them as this advantage has given them 5-7 titles annually in the different classifications with school enrollment the only criteria.  That number will now be cut in half as they will have to deal with like schools in the TRANSFER ERA, so the complaints are to be expected though without merit.  

It was more lopsided in the second vote in the beginning of May

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

Thanks for sharing this article, as it has been highlighted before on the forum with some participants trashing the new plan partly because there wasn't a STRONG MANDATE (final vote 9-7).   However, in reading this article again it is clear the voting pretty much followed the "party line" with Metro reps against and Suburban reps for.  One Metro rep dissented because she didn't have enough information, missing data, not enough AD feedback and other non-sensical objections although the process clearly followed the 2 year requirement by FHSAA which did provide all of that.  Lastly, as I previously had pointed out the swing vote ended up being by a Metro rep out of Miami.   Looking at that DATA it is clear the Metro's that benefit from the geographical population advantage wanted to keep the status quo; who can blame them as this advantage has given them 5-7 titles annually in the different classifications with school enrollment the only criteria.  That number will now be cut in half as they will have to deal with like schools in the TRANSFER ERA, so the complaints are to be expected though without merit.  

And you hit the nail on the head 

 

The biggest ones against the idea are the ones who now don't get to share districts and classifications with small rural schools who can't pull the same talent and they were able to fool people into supporting it with blanket claims of "this will water down the state" to try and Garner support when in reality they were only against the idea because they wouldn't be able to game the system now 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

It was more lopsided in the second vote in the beginning of May

If the reps representing each area were strictly studying the facts over the past decade or two it would have been more lopsided on the first vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

If the reps representing each area were strictly studying the facts over the past decade or two it would have been more lopsided on the first vote. 

They were looking out for their own schools interests not the interests of the state 

 

That's what happens when you put people on boards with agendas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NHS Bob said:

Reading that article I think they made the right decision to use a much more accurate formula from maxpreps than the overly simplistic RPI formula.  However, they still screwed it up by taking away margin of victory from the maxpreps power index, basically breaking the formula that has proven more accurate.  FHSAA just cant do anything right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, PinellasFB said:

Reading that article I think they made the right decision to use a much more accurate formula from maxpreps than the overly simplistic RPI formula.  However, they still screwed it up by taking away margin of victory from the maxpreps power index, basically breaking the formula that has proven more accurate.  FHSAA just cant do anything right.

If you leave that in than teams will intentionally run up the score on bad teams just to try and help their ranking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

If you leave that in than teams will intentionally run up the score on bad teams just to try and help their ranking

Yes thats the long held fear but there are so many ways to take that out of consideration mathematically without overcomplicating the formula.  You can diminish returns above a certain amount such that there's little benefit to running up the score.  A two score victory over a powerful team should be worth way more than a 40 point win vs a weak team, for example.  Also, the formula should cap all benefits of margin of victory at the running clock margin because mathematically all values over this are invalid due to the running clock.   As a mathematician, it bothers me that margin is always removed by those who fear running up the score since it makes the power index so much more correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PinellasFB said:

Yes thats the long held fear but there are so many ways to take that out of consideration mathematically without overcomplicating the formula.  You can diminish returns above a certain amount such that there's little benefit to running up the score.  A two score victory over a powerful team should be worth way more than a 40 point win vs a weak team, for example.  Also, the formula should cap all benefits of margin of victory at the running clock margin because mathematically all values over this are invalid due to the running clock.   As a mathematician, it bothers me that margin is always removed by those who fear running up the score since it makes the power index so much more correct.

One major issue with this is that it will at that point be impacted by preseason rankings (similar to how the college rankings and the starting point bias as I like to call it) 

 

That means the algorithm significantly hinges on how good MaxPreps is with their initial rankings which from experience of observing their Florida rankings early in the season are very inaccurate and will create problems 

 

I don't think their preseason rankings are good enough to apply something like that to properly combat the issue so removing it all together likely helps focus more on final results instead of crunching score numbers 

 

I do understand that margin of victory is important but I also think that the system has too many kinks for it to be used for this purpose especially when I barley trust MaxPreps rankings for what they do already 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, ColumbiaHighFan2017class said:

One major issue with this is that it will at that point be impacted by preseason rankings (similar to how the college rankings and the starting point bias as I like to call it) 

 

That means the algorithm significantly hinges on how good MaxPreps is with their initial rankings which from experience of observing their Florida rankings early in the season are very inaccurate and will create problems 

 

I don't think their preseason rankings are good enough to apply something like that to properly combat the issue so removing it all together likely helps focus more on final results instead of crunching score numbers 

 

I do understand that margin of victory is important but I also think that the system has too many kinks for it to be used for this purpose especially when I barley trust MaxPreps rankings for what they do already 

Maxpreps ratings suck because it all depends on schools putting in their official scores. In Florida, that isn't a big deal as the FHSAA mandates it, but if you are playing teams in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia, well schools might put in the pre-season games and it throws the whole thing off. I went through this last year as I tried to tally the RPI and FHSAA wasn't very helpful (it all came down to out of state teams and their opponents schedules). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gatorman-uf said:

Maxpreps ratings suck because it all depends on schools putting in their official scores. In Florida, that isn't a big deal as the FHSAA mandates it, but if you are playing teams in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia, well schools might put in the pre-season games and it throws the whole thing off. I went through this last year as I tried to tally the RPI and FHSAA wasn't very helpful (it all came down to out of state teams and their opponents schedules). 

Even some of the in-state games (especially for non football sports) aren't fully correct 

 

I saw several errors in the winter and spring with games being missing or preseason games getting listed as regular season games 

 

I also don't trust a ranking that won't actually tell anyone what their algorithm is 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...