Does the FHSAA punish cheaters?

[SportsFan]

If we look back at the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s 

 

Yeah there were some teams cheating and some even got caught but it was nothing compared to what's happened since a certain governor now senator signed into law and a one party majority in the state legislature and governor's office has since defended at every turn when they passed school choice into law 

 

There is no turning back to what we had pre 2010 in terms of competition in this state and it's gonna be proven when we see any rural team make the finals and face a metro school. They won't just lose at states they will get their teeth kicked down their throats and will be out of the game by halftime. There is no hope or chance of a team like Baker or Columbia or Suwannee EVER winning a state title again if they have to face a metro school like Central or AHP or whomever because there's no way to get around a public school who can pull from a county of 3m people and get the best players they can possibly choose from these counties 

 

It will never happen in football because the game favors metro cheaters and the state has made it clear they don't give a crap about teams being competitive as long as it creates chaos which is what these people WANT so they can slowly defund public schools to save the state money 

 

The sooner people realize this and start pushing back against politicians sticking their nose where it doesn't belong in our sports programs the better 

[SportsFan]

I can't express enough how much I hate how athletics is heading in this state but it's probably beyond saving at this point as long as the FHSAA remains in control and remains puppets for people in Tallahassee who don't have a clue what high school athletics need in this state 

Honestly I'm at the point where I'm not sure I want to be involved in high school athletics in any capacity at this point unless I can directly coach in it because watching it as a fan has become an impossible task because I'm not the type of person who can sit back and watch the slow decline (now rapid) into the cesspool that athletics is gonna turn into if these people in power get their way 

It's at the point where it's impossible to sit back and be a fan of the product especially when it's clear that the only people who get the top are the people who can be the most shady snakes out there and cheat their way to the top because apparently this state seems to love crooks who can be good and fancy liars then people who are honest hard workers but hell that's society for you 

[Hwy17]

15 minutes ago, SportsFan said:

You do realize Central won their first state title in 2010

2 of those 3 teams had won titles before 2010 so I don't necessarily see what your trying to get to with that by excluding the one public school in the list 

The difference now is under the current state law teams public or private are pulling from entire county so no rural team will ever compete with a school at that level again because they are pulling the top talent in a county of 2-3 million people

How exactly is a team like Baker County or Columbia or Suwannee supposed to realistically compete with those type of teams pulling from a county of 50k people 

It's not realistic no matter how many ways we try and twist it or how many ways the FHSAA chooses to pretend to be braindead and not know what's going on 

Point is you can see we had parity before the current law.  Rural schools aren't scared to play schools from metro areas when there was a level playing field.  

There's this myth that South Florida has always been the dominant area of the state when it comes to football.  That's not exactly true. STA use to get to the championship but typically they'd lose. AHP use to never get past the first round, neither could Cardinal Gibbons.  And other than 2004, I can't remember when Chaminade was all that.  In fact the rise of these programs has been at the expense of other schools down there which are really struggling .

[SportsFan]

Just now, Hwy17 said:

Point is you can see we had parity before the current law.  Rural schools aren't scared to play schools from metro areas when there was a level playing field.  

There's this myth that South Florida has always been the dominant area of the state when it comes to football.  That's not exactly true. STA use to get to the championship but typically they'd lose. AHP use to never get past the first round, neither could Cardinal Gibbons.  And other than 2004, I can't remember when Chaminade was all that.  In fact the rise of these programs has been at the expense of other schools down there which are really struggling .

But the state under the current political leadership will never reverse that law so if it's clear the current law kills parity wouldn't it make sense to adjust how teams are classified to match the changing times?

[SportsFan]

Rural teams may have been capable of competing in the past but it's doubtful they could now under the current rules 

[Hwy17]

20 minutes ago, SportsFan said:

But the state under the current political leadership will never reverse that law so if it's clear the current law kills parity wouldn't it make sense to adjust how teams are classified to match the changing times?

Which is why I'm in favor of leaving the FHSAA and going independent or forming another association 

[Hwy17]

Also I think the biggest loosers are the bottom feeder programs in metro areas.  

[SportsFan]

49 minutes ago, Hwy17 said:

Also I think the biggest loosers are the bottom feeder programs in metro areas.  

In 2013 riverside/Lee was probably the worst team in Duval County

3 years later aided by transfers they were in the final 4

Even bad programs in metros can turn it around quick if they get a coach in who can bring in a lot of transfers and flip the roster 

The problem is rural schools can't just pull from a massive county of over 1m people to turn themselves into a powerhouse overnight and even established and successful rural programs aren't gonna keep up with a team who can get 20 FBS level transfers in one off-season which is what has and can happen very easily now

[SportsFan]

55 minutes ago, Hwy17 said:

Which is why I'm in favor of leaving the FHSAA and going independent or forming another association 

I would definitely like to see everyone long term breakaway and form a new association as the FHSAA is clearly not looking out for the best interests of the majority of athletes coaches and schools in the state and are catering to a few instead of the whole picture

Sadly I think some schools have too much pride to go independent and would stay in a screwed system then be successful in a competitive one

[Hwy17]

9 hours ago, SportsFan said:

I would definitely like to see everyone long term breakaway and form a new association as the FHSAA is clearly not looking out for the best interests of the majority of athletes coaches and schools in the state and are catering to a few instead of the whole picture

Sadly I think some schools have too much pride to go independent and would stay in a screwed system then be successful in a competitive one

I don't know how it works in those counties with a centralized athletic department, like Hillsborough. Does a school have to get permission from their school board to go independent? 

[flabuck]

Pahokee is about as rural as it gets yet they were able to compete with anybody in the state for years in the first decade of the 2000's.  People weren't sending their kids from the metro areas to attend that school.

 

[Perspective]

8 hours ago, flabuck said:

Pahokee is about as rural as it gets yet they were able to compete with anybody in the state for years in the first decade of the 2000's.  People weren't sending their kids from the metro areas to attend that school.

 

You are correct.  But here's the point that I think is being made.    'Back then' the teams in the metro areas were, in theory, constrained by district boundaries.   A kid could only go to Central if they lived in the Central district (again, in theory).   So, Central's talent pool was limited to the kids who lived in the Central district.   Just like Pahokee's talent pool was limited to the kids who lived in Pahokee's district.   Now, with school choice, and as a practical matter, Pahokee's talent pool (and the talent pool of all the other rural schools) is essentially still limited to the kids who live in that relatively-sparse geographic area.  Contrast that with Central, who now has the ability to legally pull in any kid from Dade County.  Yes, they are competing against other schools, like Northwestern, for that top talent, but recent history seems to suggest that only a small handful of teams are going to end up with the vast majority of the top talent. 

To oversimplify, if one rural high school football team has a thousand kids to pick from (including gamers, trombone players, theater buffs, etc.) and a metro high school football team has a hundred thousand kids to pick from (because district lines really don't matter any more), which team is more likely to end up with a group of thirty talented football players?  Now, it wouldn't surprise me at all if a rural team, like Pahokee, could beat the bottom-feeder teams in the metro area, because all the talented kids from those metro teams ended up at the super-power de jure.  But when it comes time for playoffs, the rural team likely won't stand a chance against the metro power. 

And, yes, there will be exceptions along the way, but for the most part, the numbers won't lie. 

[Longtime Observer]

What is often missed in these discussions is the fact that, almost always, players/families CHOOSE to play for the powers. We see families pick up and move to a new area just so their kid can play for a particular program. Or, they willingly commute a further distance to play for a preferred program. This narrative of there being bad guys at a few programs going out and rounding up all the best players through bribes or coercion is silly.

Players seek the best opportunities for themselves, just like they do when they pick a college to play for. No one expects college teams to end up with equal talent. No one sees Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State etc ending up with a disproportionate share of talent and thinks 'Gosh, they HAD to have cheated. How else would they get all those good players?" Those programs have a proven record of success, and players often seek THEM out. For some reason, when it comes to high school, people get up in arms if a handful of programs end up with the best players. They demand an equal share of talent for high schools. This despite the fact that they do NOT think this way when it comes to other areas like academics or the arts. No one begrudges the parents who seek residency in the zone of top academic schools. No one accuses the top academic schools of "cheating" when they end up with a disproportionate share of motivated and/or gifted students. The logical inconsistency is amusing and annoying. 

 

[Hwy17]

1 hour ago, Longtime Observer said:

What is often missed in these discussions is the fact that, almost always, players/families CHOOSE to play for the powers. We see families pick up and move to a new area just so their kid can play for a particular program. Or, they willingly commute a further distance to play for a preferred program. This narrative of there being bad guys at a few programs going out and rounding up all the best players through bribes or coercion is silly.

Players seek the best opportunities for themselves, just like they do when they pick a college to play for. No one expects college teams to end up with equal talent. No one sees Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State etc ending up with a disproportionate share of talent and thinks 'Gosh, they HAD to have cheated. How else would they get all those good players?" Those programs have a proven record of success, and players often seek THEM out. For some reason, when it comes to high school, people get up in arms if a handful of programs end up with the best players. They demand an equal share of talent for high schools. This despite the fact that they do NOT think this way when it comes to other areas like academics or the arts. No one begrudges the parents who seek residency in the zone of top academic schools. No one accuses the top academic schools of "cheating" when they end up with a disproportionate share of motivated and/or gifted students. The logical inconsistency is amusing and annoying. 

 

First off, comparing high school athletics to college is an apple to an orange. Colleges are supposed to recruit as they offer scholarships for coming to play for them.  

Secondly, the purpose of school choice was started for academic purposes, so parents can find the best option for their children.  I personally support the concept, but what we see happening with athletics wasn't what school choice was intended for. 

As I stated earlier, I have no problem with a transfer when there is indeed a legitimate move. But what I have observed is certain schools poaching players from neighboring schools through one tactic or another. 

[Floridaatlantic1]

20 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

What is often missed in these discussions is the fact that, almost always, players/families CHOOSE to play for the powers. We see families pick up and move to a new area just so their kid can play for a particular program. Or, they willingly commute a further distance to play for a preferred program. This narrative of there being bad guys at a few programs going out and rounding up all the best players through bribes or coercion is silly.

Players seek the best opportunities for themselves, just like they do when they pick a college to play for. No one expects college teams to end up with equal talent. No one sees Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State etc ending up with a disproportionate share of talent and thinks 'Gosh, they HAD to have cheated. How else would they get all those good players?" Those programs have a proven record of success, and players often seek THEM out. For some reason, when it comes to high school, people get up in arms if a handful of programs end up with the best players. They demand an equal share of talent for high schools. This despite the fact that they do NOT think this way when it comes to other areas like academics or the arts. No one begrudges the parents who seek residency in the zone of top academic schools. No one accuses the top academic schools of "cheating" when they end up with a disproportionate share of motivated and/or gifted students. The logical inconsistency is amusing and annoying. 

 

I am sure some kids choose to play for the powers. However, it seems that today, many coaches and players recruit the players from other schools and never get punished for it. You have coaches liking players on social media and not a darn thing happens to them. CHEATERS. Lakeland can play with anybody when they get transfers but when they were limited after probation,  they were just another average team. Need an open division with about 36 teams and that would force the powers to beat each other up. Pick on someone their own size. 

[Nulli Secundus]

7 hours ago, Floridaatlantic1 said:

I am sure some kids choose to play for the powers. However, it seems that today, many coaches and players recruit the players from other schools and never get punished for it. You have coaches liking players on social media and not a darn thing happens to them. CHEATERS. Lakeland can play with anybody when they get transfers but when they were limited after probation,  they were just another average team. Need an open division with about 36 teams and that would force the powers to beat each other up. Pick on someone their own size. 

Burden of proof will continue to be an issue especially when the language has never been updated to include social media.  Have evidence, REPORT IT!

FHSAA Improper Contact

Allegation Form

[Hwy17]

2 hours ago, Floridaatlantic1 said:

I am sure some kids choose to play for the powers. However, it seems that today, many coaches and players recruit the players from other schools and never get punished for it. You have coaches liking players on social media and not a darn thing happens to them. CHEATERS. Lakeland can play with anybody when they get transfers but when they were limited after probation,  they were just another average team. Need an open division with about 36 teams and that would force the powers to beat each other up. Pick on someone their own size. 

I see this happening on more than one occasion:  One player transfers from school A to school B. Next thing you know, there's a mass exodus from school A to school B. Why's that? Did all those kids move? Is the new coach at school B a former coach at school A ?(Usually it is). Now school A is having trouble competing while school B is all of a sudden the new powerhouse. 

[Longtime Observer]

On 2/11/2024 at 11:10 AM, Hwy17 said:

First off, comparing high school athletics to college is an apple to an orange. Colleges are supposed to recruit as they offer scholarships for coming to play for them.  

Secondly, the purpose of school choice was started for academic purposes, so parents can find the best option for their children.  I personally support the concept, but what we see happening with athletics wasn't what school choice was intended for. 

As I stated earlier, I have no problem with a transfer when there is indeed a legitimate move. But what I have observed is certain schools poaching players from neighboring schools through one tactic or another. 

There are many different components to an educational experience outside of just academics. So, I don't think school choice is exclusively about academics. Though I reiterate the fact that the schools with the best track record academically end up attracting the more motivated and/or capable students, which ensures they continue to produce high test scores.  No one seems to be crying about the disproportionate share of capable, motivated students that regularly turn up at the "good" schools, or the opposite at the "bad" schools. Try teaching a class when most of the kids don't care, or even hate being there. Contrast that with having a class full of motivated, prepared, capable students. Teachers can be made to look good or bad based on those class dynamics.

"Poaching" insinuates either bribes or coercion. It suggests almost helpless kids/parents who are dragged somewhere, possibly against their will. That isn't happening. Current players, alums and boosters may have conversations about playing opportunities in a given sport. But, the families make the decision they feel is best for them.

Lake Gibson's leading rusher-the younger brother of a star player from a state title team a few years back at Lakeland- left Lakeland for LG because he wanted more playing time. He wasn't "poached". He left on his own to get playing time. The exact same thing happened with Lake Wales and Polk county's leading rusher for 2023. He left Lakeland for the same reason. Players and parents have agency to decide what's best, and they have their reasons for going wherever they go. Affording them choices doesn't make them victims; it's quite the opposite.

There are major, life-altering opportunities available through extracurricular activities like sports. Whether it's a scholarship to college, some NIL $, or in rare cases a pro career, there are many opportunities which can impact a kid's life. The idea that we should disregard that because some fans don't like seeing their team lose games is silly. 

[Longtime Observer]

12 hours ago, Floridaatlantic1 said:

I am sure some kids choose to play for the powers. However, it seems that today, many coaches and players recruit the players from other schools and never get punished for it. You have coaches liking players on social media and not a darn thing happens to them. CHEATERS. Lakeland can play with anybody when they get transfers but when they were limited after probation,  they were just another average team. Need an open division with about 36 teams and that would force the powers to beat each other up. Pick on someone their own size. 

It is true that, when the other powers got a lot of transfers while Lakeland could not do this (~2011-2016) Lakeland was good, but not an elite team. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

Pick whatever high school you consider to be a top dawg academically. Are they "Cheaters"? Because I promise you their reputation has led them to attract a highly disproportionate share of motivated, prepared and capable students. Is that "cheating"? 

[Longtime Observer]

9 hours ago, Hwy17 said:

I see this happening on more than one occasion:  One player transfers from school A to school B. Next thing you know, there's a mass exodus from school A to school B. Why's that? Did all those kids move? Is the new coach at school B a former coach at school A ?(Usually it is). Now school A is having trouble competing while school B is all of a sudden the new powerhouse. 

It's called human psychology. People want to travel together in groups. And they like to play for a winner.  If enough good players leave one school, their prospects for the season further dwindle. And perhaps another school is now that much stronger and appealing to play for. 

Good students want to attend a school with other good students. They don't want to get stuck in classrooms where the kids are disrupting lessons and acting a fool. Football players want to play with other good football players. They don't want to get stuck on a team with players who are lazy or weak players.

[Floridaatlantic1]

12 hours ago, Longtime Observer said:

It is true that, when the other powers got a lot of transfers while Lakeland could not do this (~2011-2016) Lakeland was good, but not an elite team. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

Pick whatever high school you consider to be a top dawg academically. Are they "Cheaters"? Because I promise you their reputation has led them to attract a highly disproportionate share of motivated, prepared and capable students. Is that "cheating"? 

So we can agree that in the current Florida High School football world that a team has to recruit in order to compete at the highest levels right. Than why not place all the recruiting super power teams in same classification or open division and let them play similar teams. Its not fair for a super team to play non-super teams and using enrollment number does not reflect a teams recruiting ability. This is reason why i support promotion and demotion model but am fine with a large 32-36 team open division.

[THAT S--T WAS FUNNY]

A 32 team open division would destroy the credibility and water down the other classes. An 8 team open division would put the super teams in one division while maintaining some competitiveness in the other classes. 

[Longtime Observer]

12 hours ago, Floridaatlantic1 said:

So we can agree that in the current Florida High School football world that a team has to recruit in order to compete at the highest levels right. Than why not place all the recruiting super power teams in same classification or open division and let them play similar teams. Its not fair for a super team to play non-super teams and using enrollment number does not reflect a teams recruiting ability. This is reason why i support promotion and demotion model but am fine with a large 32-36 team open division.

Emotional, knee-jerk reactions won't help matters. Legislation has to be written in objective, preferably measurable terms. I assume you'd classify Lakeland as a "cheater" and not Lake Gibson. So, how are you going to word legislation that establishes this, given the fact that Lake Gibson's leading rusher was a transfer from Lakeland and their leading WR was also a transfer from Lakeland? There were no players who started most every game for Lakeland and had played for Lake Gibson previously. (One player started sometimes but had been at Lakeland two years). The reality there seems to point to Lake Gibson being the "cheater", no?

[Ray Icaza]

12 hours ago, Floridaatlantic1 said:

So we can agree that in the current Florida High School football world that a team has to recruit in order to compete at the highest levels right. Than why not place all the recruiting super power teams in same classification or open division and let them play similar teams. Its not fair for a super team to play non-super teams and using enrollment number does not reflect a teams recruiting ability. This is reason why i support promotion and demotion model but am fine with a large 32-36 team open division.

If you are so confident in your belief that there are 32-36 teams that actively cheat and therefore are all capable of winning an open division please help me out and name them.  

[DarterBlue2]

3 hours ago, THAT S--T WAS FUNNY said:

A 32 team open division would destroy the credibility and water down the other classes. An 8 team open division would put the super teams in one division while maintaining some competitiveness in the other classes. 

8-16 sounds about right. It would remove all the real powerhouse teams while not forcing some very good, but not great teams, into a group with the best of the best where they would have little chance of ever winning it all.