Nolebull813 Top 25 Week 4

[nolebull813]

2 hours ago, cribboy305 said:

No Homestead is crazy business but I respect it. 

They were in week 1 but tumbled out after losing to Palmetto. 
 

If Palmetto beats Columbus this week, that might be enough to pull Homestead back in. If not, then Homestead is gonna have to beat Columbus on October 7th to jump back in. 

[Longtime Observer]

These rankings are yet another endorsement of playing a soft schedule. Lakeland beat Armwood by 15 points in a game both coaches said would be played to win, but losses to elite teams have somehow boosted Armwood. Is St. Joseph's donating any players to Armwood? Once a Hawk, always a Hawk? LOL. Lakeland was shown to not have the horses in the defensive front seven to stop Norland or St. Joseph's. Unless there's something brand new I'm now aware of, I don't believe playing those games will result in stud DLs magically showing up at Bryant Stadium. They are what they are in 2023: good enough to beat Armwood and win most of the classifications in Florida; not good enough to beat nationally elite teams...

[DarterBlue2]

11 minutes ago, Longtime Observer said:

These rankings are yet another endorsement of playing a soft schedule. Lakeland beat Armwood by 15 points in a game both coaches said would be played to win, but losses to elite teams have somehow boosted Armwood. Is St. Joseph's donating any players to Armwood? Once a Hawk, always a Hawk? LOL. Lakeland was shown to not have the horses in the defensive front seven to stop Norland or St. Joseph's. Unless there's something brand new I'm now aware of, I don't believe playing those games will result in stud DLs magically showing up at Bryant Stadium. They are what they are in 2023: good enough to beat Armwood and win most of the classifications in Florida; not good enough to beat nationally elite teams...

Lakeland was in both games (Norland and St. Joes) and could have pulled out wins had a few plays gone differently. So, I see no shame in their losses and in my opinion, they should remain highly ranked despite them. While a repeat as 4S champion is not guaranteed, they most certainly should be one of the favorites, if not the favorite.  

[Longtime Observer]

29 minutes ago, DarterBlue2 said:

Lakeland was in both games (Norland and St. Joes) and could have pulled out wins had a few plays gone differently. So, I see no shame in their losses and in my opinion, they should remain highly ranked despite them. While a repeat as 4S champion is not guaranteed, they most certainly should be one of the favorites, if not the favorite.  

IMO, Venice and Lakeland are still the clear top two in 4S. Treasure Coast is currently #3, and certainly might win it in the end. But, this past weekend did a lot to boost Venice. Not only was the win at Traz impressive, but Cocoa made it known that losing to them at their place is not a bad loss. It's very difficult to compare Vero favorably with Venice when you consider how both teams did vs. MNW. Vero needed STA vs. Cocoa level of terrible officiating to eek out a home win, while Venice put up over 60 points in a convincing win in Miami. 

[Dr. D]

Not questioning your assessment of Venice or Lakeland, nor the wisdom of playing a challenging schedule; but the practical impact of teams already having multiple losses will be significant with regards to the FHSAA Power Rankings (and postseason seeding).  Given the apparent weighting of the FHSAA Power Rankings favoring overall record vs. strength of schedule, if teams such as Vero Beach, Treasure Coast, Heritage, Buchholz, Manatee can somehow remain undefeated, they would almost certainly earn their #1 Regional seed, regardless of what Lakeland, Venice, Osceola, etc. do the rest of the way.  Not an issue if you are not worried about your team going on the road in the playoffs, but any team with multiple losses at this point has very little margin for error in terms of the Power Rankings.

[Longtime Observer]

27 minutes ago, Dr. D said:

Not questioning your assessment of Venice or Lakeland, nor the wisdom of playing a challenging schedule; but the practical impact of teams already having multiple losses will be significant with regards to the FHSAA Power Rankings (and postseason seeding).  Given the apparent weighting of the FHSAA Power Rankings favoring overall record vs. strength of schedule, if teams such as Vero Beach, Treasure Coast, Heritage, Buchholz, Manatee can somehow remain undefeated, they would almost certainly earn their #1 Regional seed, regardless of what Lakeland, Venice, Osceola, etc. do the rest of the way.  Not an issue if you are not worried about your team going on the road in the playoffs, but any team with multiple losses at this point has very little margin for error in terms of the Power Rankings.

Yes, that is something I speculated about prior to the season. We don't really know how those ratings will turn out. But, we do know they are very poor. It's calpeps ratings, minus the margin of victory component calpreps says is important.

The idea- also repeated by new Lakeland coach Frazier- that playing super hard games helps prepare a team for the playoffs is mythology. The only true benefits to playing big-name schools are: 1) they figure to generate better ticket sales 2) they may help the program recruit more talent and 3) they're a way for no-name or lightly regarded schools/coaches to make a name for themselves. Everyone now knows what Venice and Lakeland's weaknesses are (they are mostly the same!), but there isn't really anything either one of them can do about it this season. The tougher schedule only makes for a worse record, and potentially a poorer playoff seed which can alter the entire playoff pathway.

[nolebull813]

Lakeland wins vs Armwood in a preseason game that doesn’t count other than @Longtime Observer word, 2 blowout losses, and a sloppy and undisciplined win against an inferior opponent. 
 

That’s the resume. I would probably have SJP number 5-7 in FL. So Lakeland lost to the number 4 and number 5-7. By double digit margins at home. Ok I am on record of saying I don’t punish teams too much for losing to elite opponents. But other than that, what tangible evidence am I supposed to use to rank Lakeland super high? A preseason win? A 28 point win against a team ranked in the 1,000’s nationally? 
 

Help me help you 

[nolebull813]

Lakeland was winning 7-0 in the 3rd quarter and 14-0 in the 4th quarter against LARGO!!!!

 

And please don’t use the excuse they didn’t practice much because of the hurricane. Largo had just as much practice maybe less because they are located in a much more vulnerable area. 
 

Excuses like that are funny. “We loss because it was raining!!” Lol. As if it only rained on the losing team. 

[Longtime Observer]

8 hours ago, nolebull813 said:

Lakeland wins vs Armwood in a preseason game that doesn’t count other than @Longtime Observer word, 2 blowout losses, and a sloppy and undisciplined win against an inferior opponent. 
 

That’s the resume. I would probably have SJP number 5-7 in FL. So Lakeland lost to the number 4 and number 5-7. By double digit margins at home. Ok I am on record of saying I don’t punish teams too much for losing to elite opponents. But other than that, what tangible evidence am I supposed to use to rank Lakeland super high? A preseason win? A 28 point win against a team ranked in the 1,000’s nationally? 
 

Help me help you 

It is not my word you should be relying on for the Lakeland-Armwood game. It is the word of the head coaches, prior to the game being played: The game was played to win

Which games were blowouts? No one who watched the Norland game is calling that a blowout. The game was a back-and-forth shootout, with the biggest lead for either team being 14 points. You should take a look at the game, as everyone who watched it thought it was highly entertaining. Lakeland led in three of the 4 quarters vs. St. Joseph's. Yes, two awful fumbles (one an 80-yard strip-six) allowed SJP to open the game up and win going away. No doubt they are the better team. But, I think most would agree that a team who holds a lead in three of the four quarters of the game can't be "blown out". 

You can have SJP wherever you please. Most in that part of the country see them as an all-time great from that region. While you don't have to have IMG in the Florida rankings, you can't pretend they didn't play SJP. IMG won by...three points. The stupid hurdling rule stopped what might have been a winning score for SJP at the start of that game. Most have SJP more like top 5-7 in the *country*.

What evidence do you have that Armwood should be ahead of Lakeland? A 15-point loss (you claim a 14-point loss is a "blowout") in a game played to win? What evidence do you have that Seminole or Treasure Coast should be ahead of Lakeland? STA? Apopka? BTW? etc

The fact, as I've said, is that scheduling elite teams that may beat you is a bad idea. Rewards come to those who win, not those who lose to nationally elite teams. 

[nolebull813]

9 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

It is not my word you should be relying on for the Lakeland-Armwood game. It is the word of the head coaches, prior to the game being played: The game was played to win

Which games were blowouts? No one who watched the Norland game is calling that a blowout. The game was a back-and-forth shootout, with the biggest lead for either team being 14 points. You should take a look at the game, as everyone who watched it thought it was highly entertaining. Lakeland led in three of the 4 quarters vs. St. Joseph's. Yes, two awful fumbles (one an 80-yard strip-six) allowed SJP to open the game up and win going away. No doubt they are the better team. But, I think most would agree that a team who holds a lead in three of the four quarters of the game can't be "blown out". 

You can have SJP wherever you please. Most in that part of the country see them as an all-time great from that region. While you don't have to have IMG in the Florida rankings, you can't pretend they didn't play SJP. IMG won by...three points. The stupid hurdling rule stopped what might have been a winning score for SJP at the start of that game. Most have SJP more like top 5-7 in the *country*.

What evidence do you have that Armwood should be ahead of Lakeland? A 15-point loss (you claim a 14-point loss is a "blowout") in a game played to win? What evidence do you have that Seminole or Treasure Coast should be ahead of Lakeland? STA? Apopka? BTW? etc

The fact, as I've said, is that scheduling elite teams that may beat you is a bad idea. Rewards come to those who win, not those who lose to nationally elite teams. 

They lost to Norland and St Joe’s Philly. by a combined 5 touchdowns. 
 

you argue that they were competitive all the way until the fourth quarter, but failed to leave out that Lakeland was only beating LARGO 7-0 with two minutes left in the 3rd quarter!!!!! 
 

The national computers have Largo 109th in Florida. Let’s say that’s B.S. and they are really around 75th in FL. Why is Lakeland who you think is this top juggernaut barely beating an inferior team like that? 
 

Like I said this is Lakelands resume to date. 
 

Lost 2 games by a combined 5 touchdowns to 2 really good teams. 
 

Struggled for 4 quarters against a bad team. 
 

That’s it. That’s all l have to use to rank them. 

[PinellasFB]

4 hours ago, nolebull813 said:

Struggled for 4 quarters against a bad team. 

I wouldn't exactly call Largo a bad team.  They have a few D1 prospects, one of which is a 4-star LB commit to UF.  More like a decent team that is below the elite tier that one would put Lakeland in.

[nolebull813]

3 hours ago, PinellasFB said:

I wouldn't exactly call Largo a bad team.  They have a few D1 prospects, one of which is a 4-star LB commit to UF.  More like a decent team that is below the elite tier that one would put Lakeland in.

Bad in the context of where they are in the state. If you watching them from a local standpoint, they are a good team. For the area. But like I said on a state scale they are not that good. It all depends on how you a rating them. From a county standpoint they are good. From Tampa Bay area, they are decent. From the state they are not good. 

[Longtime Observer]

15 hours ago, nolebull813 said:

They lost to Norland and St Joe’s Philly. by a combined 5 touchdowns. 
 

you argue that they were competitive all the way until the fourth quarter, but failed to leave out that Lakeland was only beating LARGO 7-0 with two minutes left in the 3rd quarter!!!!! 
 

The national computers have Largo 109th in Florida. Let’s say that’s B.S. and they are really around 75th in FL. Why is Lakeland who you think is this top juggernaut barely beating an inferior team like that? 
 

Like I said this is Lakelands resume to date. 
 

Lost 2 games by a combined 5 touchdowns to 2 really good teams. 
 

Struggled for 4 quarters against a bad team. 
 

That’s it. That’s all l have to use to rank them. 

Nothing you say here justifies any of the teams ranked #6-15 being ranked ahead of Lakeland...unless you go with straight records. And, that would be odd considering your propensity for calling out coaches who don't "have the chest" to play teams you deem to be worthy. Edgewater has a five-point win and a 1-point win over teams that are both winless on the season. Apopka hasn't even scored so much as 19 points in any game. STA has been beaten twice at home as well. Etc

If you want to say Lakeland can't justify being ranked ahead of those teams, either, I get it. But, when you put a smaller number next to those teams names than the number next to Lakeland, a claim is being made. And there is nothing objective in reality to justify that claim.

[Longtime Observer]

11 hours ago, PinellasFB said:

I wouldn't exactly call Largo a bad team.  They have a few D1 prospects, one of which is a 4-star LB commit to UF.  More like a decent team that is below the elite tier that one would put Lakeland in.

They aren't bad. But, also, they were sandwiched between two titanic games on the schedule, what we call a "trap game". Lakeland sat out several starters and was never seriously threatened, even if some awful calls helped keep the game close on the scoreboard. Note the inconsistency Nolebull uses here: On the one hand, Lakeland holding a 3rd quarter lead on SJP is meaningless because SJP ended up winning by 21. On the other hand, Lakeland winning 28-0 is meaningless because they only led 7-0 at one point in the 3rd quarter...in a game they couldn't have played with the same sort of passion  as games 1 and 3 for obvious reasons.

[nolebull813]

9 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

They aren't bad. But, also, they were sandwiched between two titanic games on the schedule, what we call a "trap game". Lakeland sat out several starters and was never seriously threatened, even if some awful calls helped keep the game close on the scoreboard. Note the inconsistency Nolebull uses here: On the one hand, Lakeland holding a 3rd quarter lead on SJP is meaningless because SJP ended up winning by 21. On the other hand, Lakeland winning 28-0 is meaningless because they only led 7-0 at one point in the 3rd quarter...in a game they couldn't have played with the same sort of passion  as games 1 and 3 for obvious reasons.

So which is it? Do I reward Lakeland for playing good for 3 quarters against SJP, or do I punish them for playing flat for 3 quarters against Largo? 
 

You can’t have one with out the other. That’s called bias. I said SJP was about 7 in FL if I was ranking them here. 
 

So Lakeland lost by a combined 5 touchdowns to the number 4 team and number 7 team, and was in a 4 quarter death struggle with the number 75 team.

Lakeland is not being punished for having the chest to schedule top teams and losing to them. They are getting punished for more for the Largo game than anything. If they would have played 2 average teams and won, and played Largo the way they did they probably would have dropped too. How far I’m not sure. I’m not an oracle!!!!

[Longtime Observer]

12 hours ago, nolebull813 said:

So which is it? Do I reward Lakeland for playing good for 3 quarters against SJP, or do I punish them for playing flat for 3 quarters against Largo? 
 

You can’t have one with out the other. That’s called bias. I said SJP was about 7 in FL if I was ranking them here. 
 

So Lakeland lost by a combined 5 touchdowns to the number 4 team and number 7 team, and was in a 4 quarter death struggle with the number 75 team.

Lakeland is not being punished for having the chest to schedule top teams and losing to them. They are getting punished for more for the Largo game than anything. If they would have played 2 average teams and won, and played Largo the way they did they probably would have dropped too. How far I’m not sure. I’m not an oracle!!!!

You have to consider the context a game is played in, as well as how that game actually goes. The context is the Largo game was sandwiched between two of the biggest games the program has played in the last many years. The team figured to be less than peak form emotionally, and they held out some key players. As for the game, it wasn't so much as a "death struggle" as it was sleepwalking. Largo never showed they could sustain a drive, and some sloppy mistakes and a couple of awful calls kept Lakeland from tacking on a couple more scores. They won by four touchdowns anyway. Contrast that with Norland and SJP. The Norland game was a shootout that was never out of hand, and Lakeland's QB threw four touchdown passes. The SJP game was also back-and-forth, with Lakeland holding a 3rd quarter lead, before the better team pulled away, thanks to a large degree to two costly fumbles.

You had to have laughed as you typed out that you'd have SJP as #7 in Florida! No other rankings list has them anything like that. They are 3rd in a compilation rankings list, and that's with the fact that many rankers penalize teams with a loss, even if it's a three-point loss to IMG! They would be 2nd- and 9th nationally- in the same calpreps ratings you use to denigrate Largo. SJP, last season with a younger version of this team and without the DB that had a pick-six vs. Lakeland, was in a 42-37 shootout at a much better STA team before STA was the one with the strip-six as time expired. Ask anyone who follows SJP and they'll tell you the expectation has always been the 2023 team would be better than that 2022 team.

Georgia won at Missouri by four points (trailed for much of the game) and at Kentucky 16-6. Imagine deciding to base their ranking primarily on those games!

[Longtime Observer]

I maintain that it is not wise to schedule these gauntlet schedules. Treasure Coast did it last year. How did their record and postseason turn out? Osceola did it this year; they are winless and their playoff rating will suffer as a result. Lakeland did it this year, and we see they are 1-2 and if CAI gets Evans Chuba back, that could be a 3rd loss and that's really going to hurt considering the computers won't consider that he missed these games they've narrowly lost. 

The powerhouse teams WILL expose weaknesses. But, there's almost never anything a team can do about those weaknesses within the season. Lakeland and Venice are sub-elite physically speaking in the defensive front seven. Armwood, Cocoa, MNW, Norland and SJP all proved as much. And there's nothing either can do about it until they can recruit better players (or not) during the off-season. But, now, with the screwy ratings system the FHSAA uses, the losses absorbed by those teams is almost certainly going to hurt them in playoff seedings. And, "haters" have plenty more to chew on with them losing games. 

[nolebull813]

Largo was losing to Gibbs 6-0 in the 3rd quarter!! Man Gibbs is a glorified JV team!! Lakeland is lucky they don’t drop from that. The fact that Lakeland was winning 7-0 in the 3rd vs Largo will probably be the biggest head scratcher of the 2023 season 

[Ray Icaza]

2 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

I maintain that it is not wise to schedule these gauntlet schedules. Treasure Coast did it last year. How did their record and postseason turn out? Osceola did it this year; they are winless and their playoff rating will suffer as a result. Lakeland did it this year, and we see they are 1-2 and if CAI gets Evans Chuba back, that could be a 3rd loss and that's really going to hurt considering the computers won't consider that he missed these games they've narrowly lost. 

The powerhouse teams WILL expose weaknesses. But, there's almost never anything a team can do about those weaknesses within the season. Lakeland and Venice are sub-elite physically speaking in the defensive front seven. Armwood, Cocoa, MNW, Norland and SJP all proved as much. And there's nothing either can do about it until they can recruit better players (or not) during the off-season. But, now, with the screwy ratings system the FHSAA uses, the losses absorbed by those teams is almost certainly going to hurt them in playoff seedings. And, "haters" have plenty more to chew on with them losing games. 

Just to be clear, Osceola schedule this year is "IDENTICAL" to last years so using our team to bolster your point of view just shows you are picking examples to fit your narrative.  It seemed to work very well in our quest last year for a state championship in giving Lakeland all they could handle in their backyard.  Other factors you fail to account for are reasons for our early season struggles. 

[VeniceIndianFan]

Calling it right now. Said the same on Scorestream. Kissimmee Osceola breaks through at home tomorrow night and beats Lakeland to win their first game of the year!! 

[Longtime Observer]

20 minutes ago, nolebull813 said:

Largo was losing to Gibbs 6-0 in the 3rd quarter!! Man Gibbs is a glorified JV team!! Lakeland is lucky they don’t drop from that. The fact that Lakeland was winning 7-0 in the 3rd vs Largo will probably be the biggest head scratcher of the 2023 season 

I'd say a major head-scratcher is your obsession with downgrading a team over a 28-0 win. Largo is bad on offense and good on defense. The result is lower point totals for both them and their opponents. 

The Kentucky team that Georgia beat 16-6 only beat Northern Illinois by eight points. I suppose in Nolebull's ratings 2022 Georgia would take a big hit for that...

[Longtime Observer]

11 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

Just to be clear, Osceola schedule this year is "IDENTICAL" to last years so using our team to bolster your point of view just shows you are picking examples to fit your narrative. 

But this year's Osceola team is *not* identical. This year's team is not equipped to handle the teams its had to face. There are plenty of teams it could have beaten, to get to a 3-0 or 2-1 record. But, they are now 0-3. And that, by itself, is going to hurt their playoff seed. Also, that gauntlet is not going to bring you the kind of players you had last year. John Walker and Jakeem Jackson aren't walking through your door just because you took some Ls. 

[Ray Icaza]

5 minutes ago, Longtime Observer said:

But this year's Osceola team is *not* identical. This year's team is not equipped to handle the teams its had to face. There are plenty of teams it could have beaten, to get to a 3-0 or 2-1 record. But, they are now 0-3. And that, by itself, is going to hurt their playoff seed. Also, that gauntlet is not going to bring you the kind of players you had last year. John Walker and Jakeem Jackson aren't walking through your door just because you took some Ls. 

We know those losses have hurt the playoff seed, but that schedule was a two-year deal and we expected to perform just as well this year as last.  You obviously, talk a lot but know little about us.  Jackson and Walker were 4 stars.  Melendez and Swint are now 4* that we haven't had basically all season.  If our team didn't have the injury bug to not only them but to many others, that record would look very different.  So stick to a team you actually know something about and we don't need a bunch of players walking through our door going forward (or as you refer to Lakeland doing..."Recruiting them) as they are young and already in the house.  In other words, we aren't going anywhere next year as even the aforementioned 4 stars are class of 2025.  Put brain in gear before putting foot in mouth. 

[Longtime Observer]

29 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

We know those losses have hurt the playoff seed, but that schedule was a two-year deal and we expected to perform just as well this year as last.  You obviously, talk a lot but know little about us.  Jackson and Walker were 4 stars.  Melendez and Swint are now 4* that we haven't had basically all season.  If our team didn't have the injury bug to not only them but to many others, that record would look very different.  So stick to a team you actually know something about and we don't need a bunch of players walking through our door going forward (or as you refer to Lakeland doing..."Recruiting them) as they are young and already in the house.  In other words, we aren't going anywhere next year as even the aforementioned 4 stars are class of 2025.  Put brain in gear before putting foot in mouth. 

What is it that I am supposed to put my foot in my mouth for?

You had Melendez and Swint last year too..along with all of the other top players that graduated. Now, you just have them. So, their loss stings that much more. It is darn near impossible for a program in a rural area (though not too far from Orlando, I know) to lose THAT many great players and just bounce right back. There's no shame in the drop off, but there's no shock in it, either.

FWIW, I don't think the tough schedule made Osceola any better last year, either. I think the playoff game with Lakeland being a rematch did help them, especially given that both teams liked to play at a slower pace and were defense-oriented. Rematches tend to be lower scoring as it is. But, those games were tough because Osceola was tough as nails. Losing to Jones didn't make Osceola's defense tough. Osceola's players and coaches made their defense tough.  

[nolebull813]

1 hour ago, Longtime Observer said:

I'd say a major head-scratcher is your obsession with downgrading a team over a 28-0 win. Largo is bad on offense and good on defense. The result is lower point totals for both them and their opponents. 

The Kentucky team that Georgia beat 16-6 only beat Northern Illinois by eight points. I suppose in Nolebull's ratings 2022 Georgia would take a big hit for that...

They should have dropped for only beating Kentucky 16-6 but and here’s the key, they would have proven without a shadow of a doubt they deserved a high ranking in the other wins 
 

Ohio State just last week went from 3 to 5 after beating Indiana ugly. 
 

Rankings shouldn’t be win you move up, lose you move down. There is much more to it.