TREASURE COAST TITANS 28 - OSCEOLA KOWBOYS 0

[181pl]

Excellent topic. Double edged sword both ways.

 Playing superior teams that execute well and that are talented helps coaching staffs game plan for future quality opponents and teaches the players the value of focus, hard work, and assignment football . But if a team doesn’t have the talent, desire, or coaching acumen to execute what it learns against quality opponents then a team is just piling up Ls.

Sometimes teams learn and get better by winning bc confidence built by winning will make hem work harder to get better. They like the feeling of winning and want to hang onto  it.  But when they run into a next level opponent they get beaten easily.

Schedule should be a mix of winnable games and very challenging games. But more winnable games bc teams need confidence building and self belief. 

[Perspective]

19 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

In fact, it can harm the morale of the team, which can ultimately harm efforts to recruit better players. 

 

9 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

But, they lost all of those games and so I'm not sure they'll fare all that well in recruiting as a result. Same goes for Lakeland, by the way. Their losses might hurt them in recruiting this off-season.

I can see both sides of this issue.  In theory, I think you try to schedule at least one team that you suspect is either better than you are or that will play a style similar to the team that will stand in the way of a title run.

That said, I pulled out the two quotes above for a reason:  while it may go on, I find it troubling that people talk openly about "recruit[ing] better players," and "recruiting this off-season."  Recruiting is illegal.  It's against the rules.  Period.

Longtime Observer, I'm not picking on you.  Others have said it, too, in other threads.   You just happened to say it in this thread.  That said, if you know the team you support is openly recruiting (and not just attracting transfers because of the success they've had), you're supporting the wrong team. 

[VeniceIndianFan]

9 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

I don't disagree with you here. I just think the "gauntlet" schedules with a bunch of teams likely to beat you, or the schedule with a couple of mega-powers (Norland and SJP may well have their best ever teams this year) doesn't actually help. Lakeland could still win 4S, but losing to Norland and SJP wouldn't be why they might win. I think Venice scheduling Armwood and Cocoa might have helped them, as neither is such world beaters that they would've been out of the question. Osceola, losing that great senior class, would've been better off with a couple of easy wins. Maybe they felt they needed to schedule those games in order to compete for the best players in the area. But, they lost all of those games and so I'm not sure they'll fare all that well in recruiting as a result. Same goes for Lakeland, by the way. Their losses might hurt them in recruiting this off-season.

Again, the psyche of your team matters. Losing hurts it; winning helps. And, many times, the weaknesses exposed are weaknesses you can't fix. But now teams are more assured in what to attack. You can be sure Venice is going to be more confident in trying to pound the ball on Lakeland than they may have been if there wasn't film of Norland and SJP doing it.

Lakeland was competitive until the end in the Norland game and kept themselves respectable against SJP for 2.5 quarters before the wheels fell off. Don't sell your Dreadnaughts short. They didn't schedule those games with getting their butts kicked in mind and it showed. Venice matches up poorly with Armwood. Cocoa is a top 15 team nationally. But, playing those games helped to expose our weakness this year: our defensive line. Does losing to a better team hurt, yes. But a good coaching staff will find a way to maintain cohesion in their locker room, address the issues that appear on film, and correct them moving forward.

[Longtime Observer]

2 hours ago, Perspective said:

 

I can see both sides of this issue.  In theory, I think you try to schedule at least one team that you suspect is either better than you are or that will play a style similar to the team that will stand in the way of a title run.

That said, I pulled out the two quotes above for a reason:  while it may go on, I find it troubling that people talk openly about "recruit[ing] better players," and "recruiting this off-season."  Recruiting is illegal.  It's against the rules.  Period.

Longtime Observer, I'm not picking on you.  Others have said it, too, in other threads.   You just happened to say it in this thread.  That said, if you know the team you support is openly recruiting (and not just attracting transfers because of the success they've had), you're supporting the wrong team. 

I'm referring to ALL teams. I just speak with total candor.

[Ray Icaza]

11 hours ago, Perspective said:

 

I can see both sides of this issue.  In theory, I think you try to schedule at least one team that you suspect is either better than you are or that will play a style similar to the team that will stand in the way of a title run.

That said, I pulled out the two quotes above for a reason:  while it may go on, I find it troubling that people talk openly about "recruit[ing] better players," and "recruiting this off-season."  Recruiting is illegal.  It's against the rules.  Period.

Longtime Observer, I'm not picking on you.  Others have said it, too, in other threads.   You just happened to say it in this thread.  That said, if you know the team you support is openly recruiting (and not just attracting transfers because of the success they've had), you're supporting the wrong team. 

This whole discussion about scheduling began because of our record this year.  The so-called "GAUNLET SCHEDULE" we signed up for last year, to get these teams we had to make a 2 year commitment which I have previously alluded to.  We knew last year we could compete with anybody and felt we had a chance to win "EVERY GAME" on that schedule.  As it turned out, we lost to a total of 3 teams on that schedule of 10 games; a loss to Seminole by 1 in OT which we should have won in regulation had it not been for a missed extra point. Then a 3 point loss at Lakeland, mind you a ghost from our past known as Skyway claimed they would beat everyone by 40, including us.  I laughed at him knowing we could win and they not only wouldn't win by 40, but they wouldn't get 40.  This was all posted on this site last year for everyone to see, so it should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain those 2 games were winnable.  Lastly, we committed 6 or 7 turnovers at Jones uncharacteristically and lost another game we clearly were the better team.  It happens.  Thinking ahead to this year when that scheduling was decided, we felt we were blessed with a great incoming freshmen class of 2026 (which happens to be correct) and knew it would be tougher to navigate but the talent would be there to compete although not as confident we could win them "ALL" like the previous year.  For a myriad of reasons without boring you with them all, we lost more games than we would have liked.  Our HC does participate on this forum at times and I know he would echo my sentiments that he has no regrets regarding the scheduling which will only serve these sophomores that carried a monster load to be better next year.  The other missing element in all this was the "SUPPOSED" added incentive called STRENGTH of SCHEDULE", which didn't play as big a role as we thought it would.   With FHSAA discussions underway for next year, the mindset just as always is to do what we feel benefits us the most and best prepares us for a championship which is always our goal.  Each HC for FL schools decides how the scheduling can help achieve that goal depending on the level of talent, ability to compete, etc... and thus choose different routes to their desired goal.  Someone that knows little about our team wanting to criticize our HC for his decisions because you know better is asinine for the simple fact you know little.  Final Point to address your concerns Perspective.  We have never considered devising a schedule to help you "RECRUIT"!   More idiocy.

[Ray Icaza]

2 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

This whole discussion about scheduling began because of our record this year.  The so-called "GAUNLET SCHEDULE" we signed up for last year, to get these teams we had to make a 2 year commitment which I have previously alluded to.  We knew last year we could compete with anybody and felt we had a chance to win "EVERY GAME" on that schedule.  As it turned out, we lost to a total of 3 teams on that schedule of 10 games; an overtime loss to Seminole by 1 in OT which we should have won in regulation had it not been for a missed extra point. Then a 3 point loss at Lakeland, mind you a ghost from our past known as Skyway claimed they would beat everyone by 40, including us.  I laughed at him knowing we could win and they not only wouldn't win by 40, but they wouldn't get 40.  This was all posted on this site last year for everyone to see, so it should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain those 2 games were winnable.  Lastly, we committed 6 or 7 turnovers at Jones uncharacteristically and lost another game we clearly were the better team.  It happens.  Thinking ahead to this year when that scheduling was decided, we felt we were blessed with a great incoming freshmen class of 2026 (which happens to be correct) and knew it would be tougher to navigate but the talent would be there to compete although not as confident we could win them "ALL" like the previous year.  For a myriad of reasons without boring you with them all, we lost more games than we would have liked.  Our HC does participate on this forum at times and I know he would echo my sentiments that he has no regrets regarding the scheduling which will only serve these sophomores that carried a monster load to better next year.  The other missing element in all this was the "SUPPOSED" added incentive called STRENGTH of SCHEDULE", which didn't play as big a role as we thought it would.   With FHSAA discussions underway for next year, the mindset just as always is to do what we feel benefits us the most and best prepares us for a championship which is always our goal.  Each HC for FL schools decides how the scheduling can help achieve that goal depending on the level of talent, ability to compete, etc... and thus choose different routes to their desired goal.  Someone that knows little about our team wanting to criticize or HC for his decisions because you know better is asinine for the simple fact you know little. 

By the way, isn't it ironic that TC had that "GAUNLET" schedule last year that everyone was second guessing them on as they ended the season 4-7, identical to us this year. Now with a heavy senior class returning against that "GAUNLET" schedule they are sitting at 8-2 poised to challenge for a state championship.  Congrats TITANS!!

[Longtime Observer]

23 hours ago, Ray Icaza said:

This whole discussion about scheduling began because of our record this year.  The so-called "GAUNLET SCHEDULE" we signed up for last year, to get these teams we had to make a 2 year commitment which I have previously alluded to.  We knew last year we could compete with anybody and felt we had a chance to win "EVERY GAME" on that schedule.  As it turned out, we lost to a total of 3 teams on that schedule of 10 games; a loss to Seminole by 1 in OT which we should have won in regulation had it not been for a missed extra point. Then a 3 point loss at Lakeland, mind you a ghost from our past known as Skyway claimed they would beat everyone by 40, including us.  I laughed at him knowing we could win and they not only wouldn't win by 40, but they wouldn't get 40.  This was all posted on this site last year for everyone to see, so it should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain those 2 games were winnable.  Lastly, we committed 6 or 7 turnovers at Jones uncharacteristically and lost another game we clearly were the better team.  It happens.  Thinking ahead to this year when that scheduling was decided, we felt we were blessed with a great incoming freshmen class of 2026 (which happens to be correct) and knew it would be tougher to navigate but the talent would be there to compete although not as confident we could win them "ALL" like the previous year.  For a myriad of reasons without boring you with them all, we lost more games than we would have liked.  Our HC does participate on this forum at times and I know he would echo my sentiments that he has no regrets regarding the scheduling which will only serve these sophomores that carried a monster load to be better next year.  The other missing element in all this was the "SUPPOSED" added incentive called STRENGTH of SCHEDULE", which didn't play as big a role as we thought it would.   With FHSAA discussions underway for next year, the mindset just as always is to do what we feel benefits us the most and best prepares us for a championship which is always our goal.  Each HC for FL schools decides how the scheduling can help achieve that goal depending on the level of talent, ability to compete, etc... and thus choose different routes to their desired goal.  Someone that knows little about our team wanting to criticize our HC for his decisions because you know better is asinine for the simple fact you know little.  Final Point to address your concerns Perspective.  We have never considered devising a schedule to help you "RECRUIT"!   More idiocy.

Can you share the post where I said anything about winning every game by 40? 

I've criticized *every single coach*, including Lakeland's current coach, for having the mistaken idea that playing a bunch of powerhouses improves a team more than a more sensible schedule. At no point have I alleged that my view is a majority view: I hear and read the rhetoric about scheduling super tough. I don't accept the ad populum argumentation as valid.

Much of what ALL programs do-including scheduling big games- is aimed at, OK, "attracting" top talent. I don't believe your staff doesn't care whether players want to play at Osceola or not. They want them to want to play at Osceola. They understand that other Orlando-area powers might be more appealing to players and families, and they want to have an answer for that. So, scheduling tough games is one thing they can do along those lines. 

You seem to interpret everything I say through some sort of cynical filter. It's pretty weird.

[Longtime Observer]

On 11/12/2023 at 5:43 PM, Ray Icaza said:

By the way, isn't it ironic that TC had that "GAUNLET" schedule last year that everyone was second guessing them on as they ended the season 4-7, identical to us this year. Now with a heavy senior class returning against that "GAUNLET" schedule they are sitting at 8-2 poised to challenge for a state championship.  Congrats TITANS!!

Going 4-7 last year didn't help TC. Playing big names may have helped "attract" more players. But, most of all, what happened is Osceola was way down; Seminole, Jesuit and Vero Beach flipped to home games this season; Chaminade dropped off the schedule. TC fared worse against a lesser STA team and hasn't won any big playoff games yet anyway.

[Vero Indian]

58 minutes ago, Longtime Observer said:

Going 4-7 last year didn't help TC. Playing big names may have helped "attract" more players. But, most of all, what happened is Osceola was way down; Seminole, Jesuit and Vero Beach flipped to home games this season; Chaminade dropped off the schedule. TC fared worse against a lesser STA team and hasn't won any big playoff games yet anyway.

I actually think Vero has a chance against TC......

[Ray Icaza]

1 hour ago, Longtime Observer said:

Can you share the post where I said anything about winning every game by 40? 

I've criticized *every single coach*, including Lakeland's current coach, for having the mistaken idea that playing a bunch of powerhouses improves a team more than a more sensible schedule. At no point have I alleged that my view is a majority view: I hear and read the rhetoric about scheduling super tough. I don't accept the ad populum argumentation as valid.

Much of what ALL programs do-including scheduling big games- is aimed at, OK, "attracting" top talent. I don't believe your staff doesn't care whether players want to play at Osceola or not. They want them to want to play at Osceola. They understand that other Orlando-area powers might be more appealing to players and families, and they want to have an answer for that. So, scheduling tough games is one thing they can do along those lines. 

You seem to interpret everything I say through some sort of cynical filter. It's pretty weird.

Unless you are admitting that Longtime Observer went by the pseudo-name of Skyway last year on this forum, I never accused you of the level of Lakeland dominance last year.  Thanks for admitting, most coaches disagree with your scheduling theory and the fact your criticism includes the Lakeland HC does nothing to support your theory.  You conveniently ignored the "FACT" that last year we potentially could have won every game on that so-called gaunlet while still holding the belief that we would have benefited by having a "MORE SENSIBLE" schedule whatever the hell that means.  Or the reason we chose to schedule some of the best teams in the state........because we knew we were one of the best teams in the state.  As far as attracting talent from this schedule, I guess your reasoning is after all these years of being in the playoffs we finally figured out just last year we needed to schedule a gaunlet to get players.  What a genius idea.  I have no cynical filter, simply don't agree with your theory and tried to simply convey that no amount of your Mumbo jumbo will change my mind. 

[Ray Icaza]

1 hour ago, Longtime Observer said:

Going 4-7 last year didn't help TC. Playing big names may have helped "attract" more players. But, most of all, what happened is Osceola was way down; Seminole, Jesuit and Vero Beach flipped to home games this season; Chaminade dropped off the schedule. TC fared worse against a lesser STA team and hasn't won any big playoff games yet anyway.

GOT IT!   It really isn't about the schedule, rather home field advantage.  Now why didn't I think of that?

[Longtime Observer]

2 hours ago, Ray Icaza said:

Unless you are admitting that Longtime Observer went by the pseudo-name of Skyway last year on this forum, I never accused you of the level of Lakeland dominance last year.  Thanks for admitting, most coaches disagree with your scheduling theory and the fact your criticism includes the Lakeland HC does nothing to support your theory.  You conveniently ignored the "FACT" that last year we potentially could have won every game on that so-called gaunlet while still holding the belief that we would have benefited by having a "MORE SENSIBLE" schedule whatever the hell that means.  Or the reason we chose to schedule some of the best teams in the state........because we knew we were one of the best teams in the state.  As far as attracting talent from this schedule, I guess your reasoning is after all these years of being in the playoffs we finally figured out just last year we needed to schedule a gaunlet to get players.  What a genius idea.  I have no cynical filter, simply don't agree with your theory and tried to simply convey that no amount of your Mumbo jumbo will change my mind. 

I've never denied going by skyway. That account was banned because I said a bad word to jambun. I don't recall saying Lakeland would win every game by 40.

The schedule you played last year also didn't lead to extra improvement beyond what you'd have gotten with a more modest schedule. It only produced a few losses last year, and a seven loss season this year. Again, and regardless of intentions or assumptions, the only benefit Osceola got/will get from all of the losses is more name recognition and "exposure" to players who may be looking to transfer to a school with opportunities (like, say, a QB from north Florida).

[Ray Icaza]

7 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

I've never denied going by skyway. That account was banned because I said a bad word to jambun. I don't recall saying Lakeland would win every game by 40.

The schedule you played last year also didn't lead to extra improvement beyond what you'd have gotten with a more modest schedule. It only produced a few losses last year, and a seven loss season this year. Again, and regardless of intentions or assumptions, the only benefit Osceola got/will get from all of the losses is more name recognition and "exposure" to players who may be looking to transfer to a school with opportunities (like, say, a QB from north Florida).

Skyway boasted before the official start of last season since Lakeland easily handled Venice in the spring game and then got over a dozen quality transfers from Lake Gibson, Kathleen, Bartow, Auburndale and others the outcome for that state championship was predetermined and they would running clock everyone, except CAI.  The only team that would even put up a decent fight.  I disputed that then, like I dispute your theories now and guess what?   You were wrong as CAI got blasted and we did not.  As far as the kid from N. FL, I have spoken to his father dozens of times and he told me exactly why they transferred here and the scheduled had nothing to do with it.  In any event, that turned out to be so beneficial and probably a reason for our slow start out of the gate this season.  So, if you are Skyway, you were full of BS last year and it appears that you haven't changed except for the name. 

[h8r]

playing the hardest sked in the state, doesnt instantly make you tough.

ultimate team sport, if 1/11th of a unit messes up, the entire offesne, defense, special teams loses.

10/11 do their job, fill the appropriate run fits, drop into correct coverage.  the 11th misses his gap on his run fit and waterfall downhill effect takes place and the dam has multiple holes in it to be plugged by only a couple hands, it doesnt work like that.

in other sports maybe,

flip side is no different, playing a weaker sked doesnt make things better against a power house.  easy blocks vs a weak dl or coverage vs a poor wr does not give you extra confidence vs the stud teams.

double edged sword as previously mentioned.

 3 games you will win, 3 games you will struggle but could win , 3 games you will need to play well to even keep it close. and 1 game to keep you humble.  

even then it doesnt matter much.

[181pl]

I may go 5 very winnable 3 tough, 1 you have to play perfect, and 1 pipe dream

[Perspective]

Of course, all of this "ideal scheduling" talk means very little in a county like Hillsborough where the County AD does the lion's share of the scheduling for all public schools. 

[h8r]

this open deal goes according to plan, distircts but not having to play anyone in there, will see alot of interesting schedules.  will be a bit of a nightmare for those trying to find 9 games.  play who you want, turns into I want to go 9-1 and be happy with losing in "dist title game" and not making playoffs....