Game Margins of Victory/Defeat and Fan Interest

[LAZ]

This is related to the topic we discussed last week. I have some numbers to share with everyone. Looking at all 2,193 in-state games played through Saturday, on average, the winning team is 25.7 points better than the losing team. I have compiled point margins for all 2193 games and came up with a simple chart. Some of you may disagree with the grades I've given each group. This is my opinion but I'm anxious for feedback. As you can see below, 37% of our games are pretty good or better with 20% being really good. However, 47% are pretty awful. In fact, 871 games (40% of all games played) were decided by 31 points or more. Can we do anything to shore this up?

Grade	Interest	Point Margin	Games	Pct	Cumul.
A+	Excellent	1-3	178	8%	8%
A	Really Good	4-8	259	12%	20%
B+	Good	9 -12	160	7%	27%
B	Pretty Good	13-17	222	10%	37%
C+	Somewhat	18-21	153	7%	44%
C	Not Really	22-26	180	8%	53%
D+	Poor	27-30	170	8%	60%
D	Bad	31-35	201	9%	69%
F	Horrible	36+	670	31%	100%
			2193

[Dr. D]

If I may piggyback on your excellent work, I would like to add some additional data.  I looked at only District games to date (439 games).  It is reasonable to assume that District games would be more competitive than non-District games, as teams are grouped into Districts based on geographic proximity and similar school enrollment size – the very basis of the current FHSAA classification system.  The data, however, shows just the opposite.  The average margin of victory in all District games to date is 28.4 points (over 4 touchdowns!).  Only 28% of District games have been decided by 14 points or less.  A shocking 41% of all District games have resulted in a running clock (35+ points).  Clearly, the current FHSAA classification system does not promote competitive equity, and is an obvious place to start for reform if that is the goal.  Otherwise, we can stick with the current system and endure a ridiculous number of mismatches and blowouts.   

[PinellasFB]

I'm beating the dead horse but again, the main issue is talent flows to just a few teams in seemingly every district.  There are the small number of receptors and a large majority of donors for this transfer chaos.  Not only that, you now have Rise Preparatory Academy placing it's guns-for-hire at various schools. Some of these schools, like West Boca HS, have more RPA starters than starters who actually attend their school.  I really hate how the "non-traditional learning" system is completely abused here.

Edit:  Not every district follows this talent flow though.  Distict 10, in 6A R3, has four teams East Lake, Palm Harbor, Steinbrenner and Largo.  For the most part, all of these schools roll with their own players so the district games are all competitive.  Largo is in a talent-rich area for athletes so they tend to be the favorite while Palm Harbor tends to have the toughest time finding really fast guys in our neighborhood.  Steinbrenner is rich with great facilities and great coaching so they sometimes get great players to transfer there but I don't think they actively recruit.  East Lake is in a similar demographic as Palm Harbor but they always have really good skill position players.  I have no idea how they find those players but they probably grab kids from Tarpon Springs and the occasional south county player that somehow attends East Lake HS.  Anyway, my point is the district is balanced and I wish all districts were like this.  

[LAZ]

Here's something that I find interesting. Going back 20 years through roughly the same point in the 2005 season, I took a look at scoring margins and compared them with 2025. The average game scoring margin was 21.1 points vs. 25.7 we have today. It was definitely more competitive back then. Things to note: In 2005 we had eight classifications. 6A through 3A and 2B,2A,1B and 1A. Additionally, we have approximately 50 more schools participating in 2025 than we had in 2005. 

Let's look at differences

2005

Grade	Interest	Point Margin	Games	Pct	Cumul.
A+	Excellent	1-3	236	11%	11%
A	Really Good	4-8	322	15%	27%
B+	Good	9 -12	168	8%	35%
B	Pretty Good	13-17	245	12%	46%
C+	Somewhat	18-21	222	11%	57%
C	Not Really	22-26	188	9%	66%
D+	Poor	27-30	182	9%	75%
D	Bad	31-35	173	8%	83%
F	Horrible	36+	360	17%	100%

2025

Grade	Interest	Point Margin	Games	Pct	Chg	Cumul.	Cumul. Chg
A+	Excellent	1-3	178	8.1%	-3.1%	8.1%	-3.1%
A	Really Good	4-8	259	11.8%	-3.6%	19.9%	-6.7%
B+	Good	9 -12	160	7.3%	-0.7%	27.2%	-7.4%
B	Pretty Good	13-17	222	10.1%	-1.6%	37.3%	-9.0%
C+	Somewhat	18-21	153	7.0%	-3.6%	44.3%	-12.6%
C	Not Really	22-26	180	8.2%	-0.8%	52.5%	-13.4%
D+	Poor	27-30	170	7.8%	-0.9%	60.3%	-14.3%
D	Bad	31-35	201	9.2%	0.9%	69.4%	-13.4%
F	Horrible	36+	670	30.6%	13.4%	100.0%	0.0%

 One can see, our game parity or fan interest has declined since 2005. A+ to C+ games have decreased by nearly 13% while F games have increased by more than 13%. Other than more schools playing football, what could have caused this? Could the growth spurt of the SSAA be playing a role? Anyone?

[nolebull813]

Another thing is Florida is tops in the country for having coaches sign up for ass whoopings. In state, out of state doesn’t matter. Just send their team off to slaughter. 

[MarkECannon]

17 minutes ago, nolebull813 said:

Another thing is Florida is tops in the country for having coaches sign up for ass whoopings. In state, out of state doesn’t matter. Just send their team off to slaughter. 

Good thing Spruce Creek was an exception.

[Dr. D]

2 hours ago, LAZ said:

Here's something that I find interesting. Going back 20 years through roughly the same point in the 2005 season, I took a look at scoring margins and compared them with 2025. The average game scoring margin was 21.1 points vs. 25.7 we have today. It was definitely more competitive back then. Things to note: In 2005 we had eight classifications. 6A through 3A and 2B,2A,1B and 1A. Additionally, we have approximately 50 more schools participating in 2025 than we had in 2005. 

Let's look at differences

2005

Grade	Interest	Point Margin	Games	Pct	Cumul.
A+	Excellent	1-3	236	11%	11%
A	Really Good	4-8	322	15%	27%
B+	Good	9 -12	168	8%	35%
B	Pretty Good	13-17	245	12%	46%
C+	Somewhat	18-21	222	11%	57%
C	Not Really	22-26	188	9%	66%
D+	Poor	27-30	182	9%	75%
D	Bad	31-35	173	8%	83%
F	Horrible	36+	360	17%	100%

2025

Grade	Interest	Point Margin	Games	Pct	Chg	Cumul.	Cumul. Chg
A+	Excellent	1-3	178	8.1%	-3.1%	8.1%	-3.1%
A	Really Good	4-8	259	11.8%	-3.6%	19.9%	-6.7%
B+	Good	9 -12	160	7.3%	-0.7%	27.2%	-7.4%
B	Pretty Good	13-17	222	10.1%	-1.6%	37.3%	-9.0%
C+	Somewhat	18-21	153	7.0%	-3.6%	44.3%	-12.6%
C	Not Really	22-26	180	8.2%	-0.8%	52.5%	-13.4%
D+	Poor	27-30	170	7.8%	-0.9%	60.3%	-14.3%
D	Bad	31-35	201	9.2%	0.9%	69.4%	-13.4%
F	Horrible	36+	670	30.6%	13.4%	100.0%	0.0%

 One can see, our game parity or fan interest has declined since 2005. A+ to C+ games have decreased by nearly 13% while F games have increased by more than 13%. Other than more schools playing football, what could have caused this? Could the growth spurt of the SSAA be playing a role? Anyone?

I'm unclear - is this FHSAA data only, or "all" Florida schools regardless of affiliation?

[LAZ]

OK. Here's more.  The Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD) for all teams in 2025 is 16.06. The MAD in 2005 was 16.02. So why were games much more competitive in 2005 than in 2025?

1) In 2005, Classifications were larger in 6A, 5A, 4A & 3A, typically in the range of 80 or more teams. Meanwhile, Classes 2B, 2A, 1B and 1A were much smaller. About half the size of the others.

2) In 2005, I did not rank the SSAA as its own entity, so teams were all thrown in the Independents bucket.   

Here's a comparative view of the MAD's for each Classification. Remember, the lower the MAD, the better the parity.

2025

7A	6A	5A	4A	3A	2A	1A	Rur	Ind	SSA
12.94	11.92	13.84	14.56	15.45	13.52	16.99	15.23	12.83	12.08

2005

6A	5A	4A	3A	2B	2A	1B	1A	Ind
9.22	9.45	10.84	10.63	12.12	11.59	13.73	12.35	14.76

 

Looking at this, I believe the defection of many schools to Independent status and to the SSAA has created easier schedules. IMO, we need to reduce the number of classifications by at least one and increase district size where possible to reduce the excessive amount of over scheduling vs Independents and SSAA teams. There should be limits in place to prevent this activity.  

 

 

 

[nolebull813]

2 hours ago, MarkECannon said:

Good thing Spruce Creek was an exception.

Spruce did sign up for a butt whooping lien they did against Camden Co, but they were fortunate enough for Avon to play the worst game a team can possibly play. 

[LAZ]

Just to be clear, the data I have been showing is vs. Florida teams only. It does not include games vs out of state opponents. All Florida teams are included, regardless of Affiliation. So Spruce Creek/Camden is not part of the scope of this exercise. 

[nolebull813]

On 10/23/2025 at 2:49 PM, LAZ said:

Just to be clear, the data I have been showing is vs. Florida teams only. It does not include games vs out of state opponents. All Florida teams are included, regardless of Affiliation. So Spruce Creek/Camden is not part of the scope of this exercise. 

Yeah I’m just talking in general. There is a lot of blowouts in the state because the coaches here don’t care to send their teams off to slaughter. There are never ending amounts of wasters blowouts in the non district. And even more in district because you tend to have the team who attracts the most talent, in districts with the teams who tend to lose the talent. 
 

[PinellasFB]

On 10/23/2025 at 11:30 AM, nolebull813 said:

Another thing is Florida is tops in the country for having coaches sign up for ass whoopings. In state, out of state doesn’t matter. Just send their team off to slaughter. 

Are these money games where they get an ass whooping but receive a big check?  That would make sense since fund raising is hard.

[nolebull813]

6 hours ago, PinellasFB said:

Are these money games where they get an ass whooping but receive a big check?  That would make sense since fund raising is hard.

I’m not sure. How many teams can throw out tens of thousands of dollars? There is a team up in TN that is paying 2 small bad teams to come take a butt whooping twice for $8k and $10k each year. So that’s a total of $36k they are paying for 4 home games to win by 50-60. 
 

i’m not sure there are many teams in Florida that can pay big money

[gatorman-uf]

On 10/23/2025 at 1:39 PM, LAZ said:

Looking at this, I believe the defection of many schools to Independent status and to the SSAA has created easier schedules. IMO, we need to reduce the number of classifications by at least one and increase district size where possible to reduce the excessive amount of over scheduling vs Independents and SSAA teams. There should be limits in place to prevent this activity.  

 

 

 

My solution:

Promotion/Relegation System
Class 7A: Top 32 over the past 4 years (use MaxPreps/Laz, but not the FHSAA system), requires seven games against other 7A opponents. All teams make the playoffs
Class 6A: Next 32 over the past 4 years (use MaxPreps/Laz, but not the FHSAA system), require seven games against other 7A opponents. All teams make the playoffs
Class 5A: Next 64 teams, eight districts of 8 teams, top 4 district records make the playoffs.
Class 4A: Next 64 teams, eight districts of 8 teams, top 4 district records make the playoffs.
Class 3A: Next 128 teams, 16 districts of 8 teams, District Champ/Runner-up or District Champ and Wildcards
Class 2A: Next 128 teams, 16 districts of 8 teams, District Champ/Runner-up or District Champ and Wildcards
Class 1A: Rural

The bottom 4, 4, 8, 8, and 16 teams move down from 7A-3A every 2 years based on their 4-year rolling average.
The top 4, 8, and 16 teams move up from 6A to 2A every 2 years based on their 4-year rolling average.

Size is not the most important factor; skill is.
Allows teams of relative ability to play each other.
Allows teams to still play local rivalry games, out-of-state games, or money games.

[Ray Icaza]

2 hours ago, gatorman-uf said:

My solution:

Promotion/Relegation System
Class 7A: Top 32 over the past 4 years (use MaxPreps/Laz, but not the FHSAA system), requires seven games against other 7A opponents. All teams make the playoffs
Class 6A: Next 32 over the past 4 years (use MaxPreps/Laz, but not the FHSAA system), require seven games against other 7A opponents. All teams make the playoffs
Class 5A: Next 64 teams, eight districts of 8 teams, top 4 district records make the playoffs.
Class 4A: Next 64 teams, eight districts of 8 teams, top 4 district records make the playoffs.
Class 3A: Next 128 teams, 16 districts of 8 teams, District Champ/Runner-up or District Champ and Wildcards
Class 2A: Next 128 teams, 16 districts of 8 teams, District Champ/Runner-up or District Champ and Wildcards
Class 1A: Rural

The bottom 4, 4, 8, 8, and 16 teams move down from 7A-3A every 2 years based on their 4-year rolling average.
The top 4, 8, and 16 teams move up from 6A to 2A every 2 years based on their 4-year rolling average.

Size is not the most important factor; skill is.
Allows teams of relative ability to play each other.
Allows teams to still play local rivalry games, out-of-state games, or money games.

You have been pushing this type of solution for a while and I don't have a real problem with any of it other than only one of those classifications is considered a state champ as I don't believe in labeling a losers division winner a state champ.  I myself believe in the OPEN DIVISION for the state championship with only 3 other classifications with a Gold, Silver and Bronze division and that would be your championship designation. 

[PinellasFB]

3 hours ago, gatorman-uf said:

My solution:

Promotion/Relegation System
Class 7A: Top 32 over the past 4 years (use MaxPreps/Laz, but not the FHSAA system), requires seven games against other 7A opponents. All teams make the playoffs
Class 6A: Next 32 over the past 4 years (use MaxPreps/Laz, but not the FHSAA system), require seven games against other 7A opponents. All teams make the playoffs
Class 5A: Next 64 teams, eight districts of 8 teams, top 4 district records make the playoffs.
Class 4A: Next 64 teams, eight districts of 8 teams, top 4 district records make the playoffs.
Class 3A: Next 128 teams, 16 districts of 8 teams, District Champ/Runner-up or District Champ and Wildcards
Class 2A: Next 128 teams, 16 districts of 8 teams, District Champ/Runner-up or District Champ and Wildcards
Class 1A: Rural

The bottom 4, 4, 8, 8, and 16 teams move down from 7A-3A every 2 years based on their 4-year rolling average.
The top 4, 8, and 16 teams move up from 6A to 2A every 2 years based on their 4-year rolling average.

Size is not the most important factor; skill is.
Allows teams of relative ability to play each other.
Allows teams to still play local rivalry games, out-of-state games, or money games.

It's a nice idea but there are two problems with this model:

1. Districts are geographically tied.  It will be much harder to group teams locally.

2. Teams can drastically change strength year to year, depending upon graduation and transfers.  A four year average smooths this out but last years playoff team could be this year's 1-9 team (I can show you examples from this season).

[nolebull813]

I like my idea the best. Lol. 
 

5 classes, 100 teams give or take per class. That averages 6-7 teams per district. 
 

if you acquire 7 football transfers, or net 5 whichever is least, you move to an open playoff bracket. Assuming you make the playoffs. 
 

Problem with just picking a transfer number is teams lose players too. So just because you gain 7, if you lose 5 it’s not the same as someone else gaining 7 and losing none obviously. 

[gatorman-uf]

9 hours ago, Ray Icaza said:

You have been pushing this type of solution for a while and I don't have a real problem with any of it other than only one of those classifications is considered a state champ as I don't believe in labeling a losers division winner a state champ.  I myself believe in the OPEN DIVISION for the state championship with only 3 other classifications with a Gold, Silver and Bronze division and that would be your championship designation. 

I don't care what we call the classifications, but the goal (at least in this thread) is to create competitive games. I don't think they're loser divisions. They are competitively balanced classifications. Call them 2A Champions, Silver, or Platinum, but the goal remains that classifications based purely on size don't work. 

Coaches currently don't love an OPEN division because it happens after the regular season. In other words, you have a great season, have high hopes of making it the final four for the first time in 25+ seasons, and now you are playing Chaminade Madonna and St Thomas Aquinas in Round 1 when you're championship-bound. If you know from the beginning that you will be in the 7A grouping, you have the ability to have realistic expectations of what your season might be. 

8 hours ago, PinellasFB said:

It's a nice idea but there are two problems with this model:

1. Districts are geographically tied.  It will be much harder to group teams locally.

2. Teams can drastically change strength year to year, depending upon graduation and transfers.  A four year average smooths this out but last years playoff team could be this year's 1-9 team (I can show you examples from this season).

Yes, districts will be bigger and travel will increase (for 5A and 4A). For 3A and 2A classifications, district travel would decrease because we no longer have to worry about size. A 600-student school and a 2400-student school could both play in the same district, even though they wouldn't have in the past.

And last year's 1-9 team could be 8-2. Schedules change, coaches change. The purpose of using a 4-year average (with reclassifications every 2 years) would be to allow teams to move up or down slowly. The idea that one bad season drops you several classes doesn't sit well. Maybe it was a fluke, perhaps the schedule was more demanding, or maybe it was injuries or graduation. So yeah, if everyone around you is doing well, you might have to drop to become more competitive. Or maybe you are a 5-5 team but have a magical run for 1 season —you wouldn't automatically move. It is a sustained imbalance that would move you up or down, not just one bad season. 

 

6 hours ago, nolebull813 said:

I like my idea the best. Lol. 
5 classes, 100 teams give or take per class. That averages 6-7 teams per district. 
if you acquire 7 football transfers, or net 5 whichever is least, you move to an open playoff bracket. Assuming you make the playoffs. 
Problem with just picking a transfer number is teams lose players too. So just because you gain 7, if you lose 5 it’s not the same as someone else gaining 7 and losing none obviously. 

The problem with classifying based on transfers is that our wonderful state government doesn't care about transfers; they think transfers are perfectly fine and are great, as they believe in "school choice" at all costs. A system that would punish schools for getting transfers would probably not fly with them. Additionally, not all transfers are equal. If you get the 3rd string sophomore QB from the cross-town rival, he now counts towards that number. 

______________ 

Promotion/Relegation allows schools and communities to choose how committed they are to a sport or how they want to build their team. If a school consistently has net transfers out, that sucks. But at least they play other schools that would also be net negatives. If you are a school that doesn't get transfers, that needs to be ok as well. If a school wants to get 22 transfers in so that they could move up classifications, let them. 

[LAZ]

Just did a review of the Week 10 results.

259 In-State games

Average Game Final Score 38.4 - 11.2

Average Game Point Margin 27.2

My computer picked 86% winners last week and that's just not right. The only ones who should be able to do that are God and maybe Kreskin.

Lets face it, unless you have a family member or friend affiliated with a school, or your handle ends in Cannon or Hoss, who the hell wants to see a 38-11 game? 

[MarkECannon]

17 minutes ago, LAZ said:

Just did a review of the Week 10 results.

259 In-State games

Average Game Final Score 38.4 - 11.2

Average Game Point Margin 27.2

My computer picked 86% winners last week and that's just not right. The only ones who should be able to do that are God and maybe Kreskin.

Lets face it, unless you have a family member or friend affiliated with a school, or your handle ends in Cannon or Hoss, who the hell wants to see a 38-11 game? 

Hey Laz, you may remember that for 2 seasons in a row I chose to go to games that were all decided in the final minute or one that was decided in the middle of the 4th quarter (Apopka/West Orange).  I didn’t continue that method of choosing games because I pretty much saw the same teams play.  I decided to go see other teams and go to other venues. 

[JDHoss]

On 10/28/2025 at 4:28 PM, MarkECannon said:

Hey Laz, you may remember that for 2 seasons in a row I chose to go to games that were all decided in the final minute or one that was decided in the middle of the 4th quarter (Apopka/West Orange).  I didn’t continue that method of choosing games because I pretty much saw the same teams play.  I decided to go see other teams and go to other venues. 

I'm at 308 different teams from 10 states so far. I'd like to hit games in Louisiana, Texas, and California some day. I've been to California for work a few times, but never during football season. I always look forward to checking out a venue and community I've never been to before, and of course, finding a mom-n-pop eating establishment.