Bartow figures to remain atop its region rankings...

[Hwy17]

47 minutes ago, SportsFan said:

If that's not a district game they have no business scheduling them 

I'm fine with a system punishing a team for scheduling a bad team they just needed to configure the points where they would get more points for a win than a loss but a team that plays bad teams all year should risk falling behind a team with 1 or 2 loss team who playing state ranked teams every week

And to your point. There really are only a few teams out there that "elite" or dominant every year.  Most schools have a few good seasons followed by a down year or two.  Likewise, most schools create their schedules for a two year cycle because that's how districts are done. When a school shows they're good most years,(this is especially true in the smaller classes), others don't want to play them. And the weaker teams usually stick to playing other weaker teams until they start winning.  This makes for a catch 22.  Here's some real examples: Clewiston, not really a weak team but because of past successes they find themselves playing a brutal schedule.  North Port, years of being everyone's homecoming game has finally decided to play some teams they can actually win. Good for them! I suspect next season they'll have to schedule a little tougher.  Same thing with Lemon Bay.  Hardee, (my team) also playing a very weak schedule but as someone else pointed out to me, some of those weak teams had a winning season last year.  

The point I'm getting at is this: While a promotion or relegation system sounds good,  unless there is some measure to show that a team is vastly superior than the rest of their class I don't believe a team should be forced up because of a couple good years. And those who consistently struggle have the ability to schedule accordingly now.  Strength of schedule sounds good but when you schedule a team that had a winning season and now they are winless your stuck.

[Nulli Secundus]

2 hours ago, Hwy17 said:

 

To both of your points, remember back a couple of seasons the system used awarded points based off strength of schedule, which sounded good. However as was pointed out, St. Pete Gibbs was awarded points for getting running clocked by Lakeland who in turned was penalized by the system for playing a winless team. As I said then, all that proved to me was Gibbs had no business playing Lakeland.  Yet under that system it was better for a bad team to over schedule and get beat than to play teams along their own level.  It's almost like telling a student who struggles with basic math to take calculus because an F in calculus is better than an A+ in basic math. 

C's get degrees.  Do F's?

[Hwy17]

9 minutes ago, Nulli Secundus said:

C's get degrees.  Do F's?

Under that system it would!

Makes you want to ask your Dr for his transcripts before having surgery 

[SportsFan]

1 hour ago, Hwy17 said:

And to your point. There really are only a few teams out there that "elite" or dominant every year.  Most schools have a few good seasons followed by a down year or two.  Likewise, most schools create their schedules for a two year cycle because that's how districts are done. When a school shows they're good most years,(this is especially true in the smaller classes), others don't want to play them. And the weaker teams usually stick to playing other weaker teams until they start winning.  This makes for a catch 22.  Here's some real examples: Clewiston, not really a weak team but because of past successes they find themselves playing a brutal schedule.  North Port, years of being everyone's homecoming game has finally decided to play some teams they can actually win. Good for them! I suspect next season they'll have to schedule a little tougher.  Same thing with Lemon Bay.  Hardee, (my team) also playing a very weak schedule but as someone else pointed out to me, some of those weak teams had a winning season last year.  

The point I'm getting at is this: While a promotion or relegation system sounds good,  unless there is some measure to show that a team is vastly superior than the rest of their class I don't believe a team should be forced up because of a couple good years. And those who consistently struggle have the ability to schedule accordingly now.  Strength of schedule sounds good but when you schedule a team that had a winning season and now they are winless your stuck.

It's one thing if you schedule someone like a Buchholz or Bolles or Osceola or Rockledge and they have a down year 

At least you can say they were a team that should be a good game regardless, but are you really trying to say that Lakeland scheduled St Pete Gibbs expecting them to be a good game? 

I get where you're going with it and I agree in theory but I still feel like teams shouldn't be punished because certain teams in the same region refuse to play a school so they are forced to play state ranked teams and yet the team who won't play will play an easy schedule and claim they should be in the playoffs over the other team when they have no interest in playing said team and aggressively avoided any attempt to play 

If we allow a system where you don't have to even play your district opponents during the season you open up a situation where a team could be the best team in the district but will miss the playoffs because nobody else in the district would play them 

It works in other sports because they have district tournaments at the end of the regular season but it won't work for football

[SportsFan]

My question for you @Hwy17 is this 

- One school goes 10-0 and doesn't beat a single team above .500

- One school goes 8-2 facing 6 teams ranked top 25 in Florida and goes 4-2 in those games with both losses coming to teams inside the top 10 

- Both have 4 team districts 

Can you really make an argument that 10-0 team deserves a higher seeding, I'm not saying them missing the playoffs I'm talking just difference between 1 and 2 seed in regional play? If not how can we justify any school benefits by playing better teams 

[Hwy17]

7 hours ago, SportsFan said:

My question for you @Hwy17 is this 

- One school goes 10-0 and doesn't beat a single team above .500

- One school goes 8-2 facing 6 teams ranked top 25 in Florida and goes 4-2 in those games with both losses coming to teams inside the top 10 

- Both have 4 team districts 

Can you really make an argument that 10-0 team deserves a higher seeding, I'm not saying them missing the playoffs I'm talking just difference between 1 and 2 seed in regional play? If not how can we justify any school benefits by playing better teams 

I don't disagree that in the above scenario that the 8-2 team shouldn't be the higher seed come playoffs.  However my observation over the last several years would suggest that a team that plays that tough of a schedule and goes 8-2 most likely has something (a lot of transfers coming in) most other schools don't.  Also they are likely one of those teams others avoid. Likewise, the 10-0 team, most likely didn't load up on easy teams for easy wins but rather has a traditional schedule playing neighboring schools that all happen to be lousy.  I see it happening a lot. Lake Wales for example gets criticized for playing a "weak" schedule even though a lot of those games are neighboring schools and the understanding that who we play every year. 

[SportsFan]

1 hour ago, Hwy17 said:

I don't disagree that in the above scenario that the 8-2 team shouldn't be the higher seed come playoffs.  However my observation over the last several years would suggest that a team that plays that tough of a schedule and goes 8-2 most likely has something (a lot of transfers coming in) most other schools don't.  Also they are likely one of those teams others avoid. Likewise, the 10-0 team, most likely didn't load up on easy teams for easy wins but rather has a traditional schedule playing neighboring schools that all happen to be lousy.  I see it happening a lot. Lake Wales for example gets criticized for playing a "weak" schedule even though a lot of those games are neighboring schools and the understanding that who we play every year. 

I think Lake Wales takes a lot of heat for their schedule because they aren't playing Lakeland every year even though that's probably the team who would compete with them most years 

[nolebull813]

15 hours ago, SportsFan said:

I think Lake Wales takes a lot of heat for their schedule because they aren't playing Lakeland every year even though that's probably the team who would compete with them most years 

Not just Lakeland but they aren’t playing any good teams from anywhere. The only reason they won a title last year was because the FHSAA went from a state title format to an area title format. Lake Wales was the best of the suburbs. 

[DarterBlue2]

5 minutes ago, nolebull813 said:

Not just Lakeland but they aren’t playing any good teams from anywhere. The only reason they won a title last year was because the FHSAA went from a state title format to an area title format. Lake Wales was the best of the suburbs. 

That's probably true and they won a nail biter. I bet Dan would argue Mainland was the better team. 

[Hwy17]

14 minutes ago, nolebull813 said:

Not just Lakeland but they aren’t playing any good teams from anywhere. The only reason they won a title last year was because the FHSAA went from a state title format to an area title format. Lake Wales was the best of the suburbs. 

 

7 minutes ago, DarterBlue2 said:

That's probably true and they won a nail biter. I bet Dan would argue Mainland was the better team. 

Exactly! Lake Wales benefited from the split.  Now get this; if the current proposal goes through LW might benefit even more as maxpreps says they are #45 in the state meanwhile Mainland is in the top 32. LW would love that! Mainland, IMHO, gets screwed!