Football reclassifications

[blackmagic 52]

1 minute ago, Hwy17 said:

FAMU & Marathon.

Well FAMU is located in Tallahassee. Don't think that fit under the rural umbrella. I know absolutely nothing about the Marathon area. I see there population is around 10,000. Where Moore Haven population is around 2000. But Moore Haven is no question a 1A school.

[Hwy17 434]

33 minutes ago, blackmagic said:

Well FAMU is located in Tallahassee. Don't think that fit under the rural umbrella. I know absolutely nothing about the Marathon area. I see there population is around 10,000. Where Moore Haven population is around 2000. But Moore Haven is no question a 1A school.

Marathon is located in the Keys.  

[DB4 387]

On 12/14/2018 at 8:00 PM, gatorman-uf said:

Curious, but there seem to be a lot of large south Florida teams missing from the new classifications

Dr. Krop
Ferguson
Hialeah Gardens
Hialeah Miami Lakes
Hollywood Hills
Goleman
Miami Sunset
Pompano Beach
Reagan
Varela
Westland Hialeah

-----
Titusville???
Umatilla???
Warner Christian???

Those Dade schools plus Coral Park and maybe 1-2 other schools are going independent and starting a conference I believe. They're trying to go with a north/south division format and the top 2 from each division does a 4 team playoff. Been trying to find something official on it but nothing yet

[FL_HS_football 135]

5 hours ago, DB4 said:

Those Dade schools plus Coral Park and maybe 1-2 other schools are going independent and starting a conference I believe. They're trying to go with a north/south division format and the top 2 from each division does a 4 team playoff. Been trying to find something official on it but nothing yet

Before the creation of the playoff format that was introduced by the FHSAA in 1963, the conference format was widely used throughout the state. For Manatee HS they belonged to the Western Conference which in 1962 comprised of 16  teams mostly from Pinellas, Hillsborough, Manatee, and Sarasota County and believe or not also included Mainland HS. The rules for conference play were that of the 10 game schedule, 8 of those games had to include conference within each team's division. The conference was split into 2 divisions and at the end of the year the champions from each division would meet for a conference championship game .

In the Miami area there was the "Big Ten" conference....... 

Thinking to myself and wondering id the state should look into developing something along the lines of what existed prior to the playoff format of 1963, the only difference being creating a competitive bracket and a non-competitive bracket. The competitive bracket would allow the FHSAA to combine say 8A - 6A, and then do something similar with the smaller classifications. Teams in the competitive bracket would have to meet a pre-determined level of competitiveness every say 2 or 3 years, in order to stay in this bracket, and teams from the non-competitive bracket could petition the FHSAA to join the competitive bracket. For teams in the non-competitive bracket they would play other non-competitive teams in a conference format.......with Conference champions being the best these teams could achieve at the end of each season......no playoffs.

Playoffs would only exist for teams belonging to the competitive brackets..........

Its all just thoughts on my part, but to me with the way everything is evolving in Florida with HS football, I don't see why something like this couldn't worked out..............creating to bracket levels - competitive & non-competitive.

 

[gatorman-uf 490]

21 hours ago, OldSchoolLion said:

..very interesting situation.  Many of these are programs that have struggled over the years to get traction and gotten slaughtered regularly...no fun.  There are a LOT of such schools and that number is likely to grow big-time in future years as more schools open.  

Should we just let these schools cull themselves, or build into the current system a mechanism to allow them to play in the classes against programs at a similar level of maturity, ie a relegation system?  

IMO, this is the biggest issue we face today in FL hs football...much bigger than transfers or playoff systems..because this issue impacts so many teams.  The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer.  And it is clearly getting worse.  Anyone watching football over the past 25 years can see it clearly.  

Allowing teams to go off and their do their own thing..I can see that leading to a real mess in the future.  As challenging as it might be to design such a system, I think we have to start thinking outside the box in terms of solutions if we want to keep hs football looking anything like what it has in the past.  

Yes, a million times yes. 
When we talk about "regions being weak", what we are really talking about is that there is a little also ran programs and certain teams will face little competition on the way to state finals. But imagine if 80 teams were of a similar caliber. no, they won't all be state championship worthy, but let them fight it out.

Allow the teams that struggle to field a team to start in 1A and work their way up. I know that population size is a key factor in success, but it isn't the only factor. Allow good teams to rise up, allow bad teams to fall. Eventually the really good teams will be in 8A, the really bad teams will be in 2A. 

 

2 hours ago, FL_HS_football said:

Thinking to myself and wondering id the state should look into developing something along the lines of what existed prior to the playoff format of 1963, the only difference being creating a competitive bracket and a non-competitive bracket. The competitive bracket would allow the FHSAA to combine say 8A - 6A, and then do something similar with the smaller classifications. Teams in the competitive bracket would have to meet a pre-determined level of competitiveness every say 2 or 3 years, in order to stay in this bracket, and teams from the non-competitive bracket could petition the FHSAA to join the competitive bracket. For teams in the non-competitive bracket they would play other non-competitive teams in a conference format.......with Conference champions being the best these teams could achieve at the end of each season......no playoffs.

Playoffs would only exist for teams belonging to the competitive brackets..........

Its all just thoughts on my part, but to me with the way everything is evolving in Florida with HS football, I don't see why something like this couldn't worked out..............creating to bracket levels - competitive & non-competitive.

 

I think conferences are useful if they are done the right way. I think many small schools have done conferences with some success as their team rebuilds or becomes resurgent. Some teams know they are never going to be able to compete with a Miami Northwestern or a Trinity Christian or an Armwood, and there might be 8-10 schools in a similar situation. I think in today's world though it takes a different kind of coaching and focus to make those conference championships worth something to the kids.

Where I grew up, you had League Titles, County Championships, and State Championships. While League titles (similar to district titles) were nice, the fans cared just as deeply about the County Championship as they did state titles. County Championships were based on the fact that you had to have a 500 record by a certain point in the season, a committee would seed the teams, and you would play the games. I think attendance at the county championship was usually better than the state championships. A county championship was against a team that you knew and was played locally in the community college gym, while the state championship was played hours away against a team you most likely never heard of. In other words, coaches had to make a decision on where they were going to put their energy. 

[peezy28 395]

21 hours ago, blackmagic said:

Well FAMU is located in Tallahassee. Don't think that fit under the rural umbrella. I know absolutely nothing about the Marathon area. I see there population is around 10,000. Where Moore Haven population is around 2000. But Moore Haven is no question a 1A school.

1A the only class FHSAA doesnt forces anyone in... If you meet the criteria you can choose to be in it.  

[OldSchoolLion 1,798]

2 hours ago, gatorman-uf said:

Yes, a million times yes. 
When we talk about "regions being weak", what we are really talking about is that there is a little also ran programs and certain teams will face little competition on the way to state finals. But imagine if 80 teams were of a similar caliber. no, they won't all be state championship worthy, but let them fight it out.

Allow the teams that struggle to field a team to start in 1A and work their way up. I know that population size is a key factor in success, but it isn't the only factor. Allow good teams to rise up, allow bad teams to fall. Eventually the really good teams will be in 8A, the really bad teams will be in 2A. 

 

As time goes on and more new schools open, the gap will widen.  New schools today are having to compete against teams that have had 40-50 years to build their programs, and it is a huge disadvantage.   Today we throw brand new schools in with these older schools and wonder why so many of them get slaughtered.  Even an average adult is likely going to beat up a 14 year-old in a fight, right?  We would never condone such a fight, yet that is exactly what we are doing today in hs football.  It's ludicrous.

We didn't have this problem 35 years ago because that weren't that many newer schools opening and many existing schools weren't that old.  Back then a new school was fighting their older brother.  Today they are fighting dad.  We have never adjusted our thinking. 

Forgive me for beating the horse dead, but this is a much bigger problem than transfers and playoff systems.  We have 25 years worth of data to show us how the newer schools are not getting traction and many are floundering.  And more new schools are coming down the pike with no plan to make things any different.  Doing things the same way and expecting different results = insanity.

 

[coachmcg 0]

 

On 12/17/2018 at 11:19 AM, OldSchoolLion said:

..very interesting situation.  Many of these are programs that have struggled over the years to get traction and gotten slaughtered regularly...no fun.  There are a LOT of such schools and that number is likely to grow big-time in future years as more schools open.  

Should we just let these schools cull themselves, or build into the current system a mechanism to allow them to play in the classes against programs at a similar level of maturity, ie a relegation system?  

IMO, this is the biggest issue we face today in FL hs football...much bigger than transfers or playoff systems..because this issue impacts so many teams.  The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer.  And it is clearly getting worse.  Anyone watching football over the past 25 years can see it clearly.  

Allowing teams to go off and their do their own thing..I can see that leading to a real mess in the future.  As challenging as it might be to design such a system, I think we have to start thinking outside the box in terms of solutions if we want to keep hs football looking anything like what it has in the past.  

There is no reason for Umatilla to go Independent, they won their District in 2014.  They would be in 4A hence they wouldn't be in a District and get to make their schedule regardless. 

Warner could go to the SSAC.  The rest of those teams would be in a District and going Independent gives them control of their schedule.

[gatorman-uf 490]

2 hours ago, OldSchoolLion said:

As time goes on and more new schools open, the gap will widen.  New schools today are having to compete against teams that have had 40-50 years to build their programs, and it is a huge disadvantage.   Today we throw brand new schools in with these older schools and wonder why so many of them get slaughtered.  Even an average adult is likely going to beat up a 14 year-old in a fight, right?  We would never condone such a fight, yet that is exactly what we are doing today in hs football.  It's ludicrous.

We didn't have this problem 35 years ago because that weren't that many newer schools opening and many existing schools weren't that old.  Back then a new school was fighting their older brother.  Today they are fighting dad.  We have never adjusted our thinking. 

Forgive me for beating the horse dead, but this is a much bigger problem than transfers and playoff systems.  We have 25 years worth of data to show us how the newer schools are not getting traction and many are floundering.  And more new schools are coming down the pike with no plan to make things any different.  Doing things the same way and expecting different results = insanity.

 

I know Americans hate the idea of English Soccer Pyramid, but it honestly makes the most sense when we are talking about teams of different caliber competing against each other. Sure a higher division teams loses against a lower level team occasionally, but for the most part the premiere teams continue to rise. The same is true in football. One of the things I liked about the FHSAA's proposal for other sports was to put teams into classifications based on skilled level. In sports like basketball, soccer, and softball, they could do promote and relegate every year since most games are home and home already. It would take many years for a 2A team to end up in 8A. 

[Perspective 528]

2 hours ago, gatorman-uf said:

 

I know Americans hate the idea of English Soccer Pyramid, but it honestly makes the most sense when we are talking about teams of different caliber competing against each other. Sure a higher division teams loses against a lower level team occasionally, but for the most part the premiere teams continue to rise. The same is true in football. One of the things I liked about the FHSAA's proposal for other sports was to put teams into classifications based on skilled level. In sports like basketball, soccer, and softball, they could do promote and relegate every year since most games are home and home already. It would take many years for a 2A team to end up in 8A. 

Question from a guy who grew up playing the traditional sports, but had to learn a little about soccer when my youngest son got involved with 'European football' at a club level:   how consistent are the English soccer teams?  Is Manchester United consistently good?  Are there other teams that are consistently average?  I'm guessing there are no consistently bad teams in the league as those are the ones that get relegated down, right?  

I'm intrigued by the relegation idea, but from what I've seen over the last decade, there are very few high school teams that are good year in and year out (although I'm a firm believer that, going forward, the 'rich' are going to have an easier time staying rich, and the 'poor' are going to have a tougher time turning things around under the relatively new transfer rules).  I could see a team having a 3-7 season one year, getting relegated down just as their under-achieving underclassmen become seniors. And that group may very well have been an 8-2 playoff team the next year if they stayed at the level they were out, but if they drop down a notch, they would dominate a weaker division.  The following year, as most of the now-seniors graduate, that team would move back up to the higher division just in time to get their butts kicked again for a year by the upper-division teams.  Is there any way to keep this from happening? 

All that said, I'm generally in favor of a historically bad team being able to drop down a classification or two until they get things sorted out or a historically good team moving up a class or two until they hit their performance plateau.   But, it occurs to me that the club soccer teams maintain a certain amount of roster consistency over the years that high school teams simply cannot maintain because of the very nature of the school system.   But I'm open to learn more. 

[OldSchoolLion 1,798]

6 hours ago, Perspective said:

Question from a guy who grew up playing the traditional sports, but had to learn a little about soccer when my youngest son got involved with 'European football' at a club level:   how consistent are the English soccer teams?  Is Manchester United consistently good?  Are there other teams that are consistently average?  I'm guessing there are no consistently bad teams in the league as those are the ones that get relegated down, right?  

I'm intrigued by the relegation idea, but from what I've seen over the last decade, there are very few high school teams that are good year in and year out (although I'm a firm believer that, going forward, the 'rich' are going to have an easier time staying rich, and the 'poor' are going to have a tougher time turning things around under the relatively new transfer rules).  I could see a team having a 3-7 season one year, getting relegated down just as their under-achieving underclassmen become seniors. And that group may very well have been an 8-2 playoff team the next year if they stayed at the level they were out, but if they drop down a notch, they would dominate a weaker division.  The following year, as most of the now-seniors graduate, that team would move back up to the higher division just in time to get their butts kicked again for a year by the upper-division teams.  Is there any way to keep this from happening? 

All that said, I'm generally in favor of a historically bad team being able to drop down a classification or two until they get things sorted out or a historically good team moving up a class or two until they hit their performance plateau.   But, it occurs to me that the club soccer teams maintain a certain amount of roster consistency over the years that high school teams simply cannot maintain because of the very nature of the school system.   But I'm open to learn more. 

I just made an entire thread on this.  3 teams are relegated each year in the English Premier League.  That is 15% of the teams in the League.  The bottom 15% of teams in each class in FL hs football are typically your teams with 2 or fewer wins in a seasons.  And teams with such records are usually your consistently "bad" teams.   Most teams don't go from 9-1 one year to 1-9 the next.  But it can happen. 

In the example I created in the separate thread, I proposed relegating teams every 2 years and using 2-year records. That would minimize some of the fluctuation you mention above and go a long way toward ensuring that the truly struggling teams were the ones being relegated.  Piper High in Fort Lauderdale was an oddity.   They were 9-1 in the regular season in 2016 and 1-9 in 2017.  If we were relegating every year, Piper might have met the criteria for relegation after that 1-9 season.  But Piper's 10-10 record over 2 years is middle of the pack and they would not be relegated if we used 2-year records.  Using 2-year records, it pretty much necessitates 2 really bad seasons to be in the bottom 15% of teams. 

There are 20 teams in the English Premier.  Since its inception in 1992, 6 teams have never been relegated: Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool, Everton, Chelsea and Tottenham.  There are certain "bubble" teams that have been relegated and promoted numerous times, and have routinely bounced back and forth between leagues.  For example, Hull City was relegated after the 2014/2015 season and played in the Championship League in 2015/2016.  They qualified to move back up to the Premier League in 2016/2017 and were relegated once again after that season.