Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, FBGUY1989 said:

St. Thomas can't or anyone can decides who's in there district and if you have issues go Independent. It's not St. Thomas fault Fort Lauderdale and Blanche Ely were horrible at the time and still are and without transfers I'm sure St. Thomas would beat both of them

And i didn't say that either but to claim the district is great because you have one elite team and a bunch of pushovers isn't logical

 

STA is a great team and I would be confident that they would beat probably 95% of the SFL teams even without having a single transfer but just because they in a district doesn't mean the entire district is great as a result, one team doesn't make a district great 


Posted

Subzero entire take is the district STA is in must be the best in the classification because STA is the best team in 7a and that's asinine 

 

STA being great has nothing to do with how good the rest of the teams in district are 

 

 

That would be the same exact claim as saying the ACC is the best conference in college football when Clemson wins the national title because "the best team makes it the toughest division/conference by default" 

 

There is NO difference in those claims so don't anyone give me any bullshit about "that's college football so it's not the same"

 

If that's the argument THEN IT IS THE SAME DAMN THING 

 

 

Now do you see where that take flys off the handle?

Posted

Two good teams in a district makes for a "good district." 

Three good teams in a district makes for an "elite district." 

Many years, there are no elite districts.  Some years it's hard to find more than a handful of good districts. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Perspective said:

Two good teams in a district makes for a "good district." 

Three good teams in a district makes for an "elite district." 

Many years, there are no elite districts.  Some years it's hard to find more than a handful of good districts. 

When the Miami powers were all in the same district that was elite.

Posted
3 hours ago, KeemD321 said:

When the Miami powers were all in the same district that was elite.

Thank you very much. Also add in District 8A-12 i think when Flanagan, Miramar & Cypress Bay were pretty well back then. Not the case anymore.

Posted
16 hours ago, FBGUY1989 said:

Yeah but then only of them could be state Champs 

They were all in the same classification for years so at the end of the day only one would be state champs whether they were in the same district or not.

Posted
2 hours ago, KeemD321 said:

They were all in the same classification for years so at the end of the day only one would be state champs whether they were in the same district or not.

Maybe only one of them should be a state champ. Here in Central Florida, the vast majority of teams are in 8A and 7A; there are a few in 6A and 5A. I don't hear complaints about classifications. Classifications are supposed to be based on student population, not on who has a chance to win a state championship. Maybe they should re-classify based upon academic rating; but then again, most of the South Florida schools may fall in the same classification and still only play for one state championship. :lol:

Posted
15 minutes ago, HornetFan said:

Maybe only one of them should be a state champ. Here in Central Florida, the vast majority of teams are in 8A and 7A; there are a few in 6A and 5A. I don't hear complaints about classifications. Classifications are supposed to be based on student population, not on who has a chance to win a state championship. Maybe they should re-classify based upon academic rating; but then again, most of the South Florida schools may fall in the same classification and still only play for one state championship. :lol:

If you're trying to be funny you not

Posted
3 hours ago, KeemD321 said:

They were all in the same classification for years so at the end of the day only one would be state champs whether they were in the same district or not.

Exactly Northwestern Central Carol City not sure about Norland though and if you go back further adding in Jackson during the glory days of the Soul Bowl you then talking about talent spread across the field all in the same boat

Posted
5 hours ago, KeemD321 said:

They were all in the same classification for years so at the end of the day only one would be state champs whether they were in the same district or not.

And amazingly the next year they were in, not two but three different classes.

One school drops 1 class, and another school drops 2 classes. Just like that.

Truly amazing feat:ph34r:

Posted
5 hours ago, FBGUY1989 said:

If you're trying to be funny you not

You assumed that I meant that the South Florida schools would all fall in a low rated academic classification. I keep seeing loads of transfers in South Florida and no one ever mentions it's for an IB program or going to an "A" rated academic school. It's almost always to play football in a dominant program. 

Posted
2 hours ago, HornetFan said:

You assumed that I meant that the South Florida schools would all fall in a low rated academic classification. I keep seeing loads of transfers in South Florida and no one ever mentions it's for an IB program or going to an "A" rated academic school. It's almost always to play football in a dominant program. 

Again if you're trying to be funny your not

Posted
12 hours ago, FBGUY1989 said:

Again if you're trying to be funny your not

Not trying to be funny, just stating the obvious. Loads of kids in South Florida transferring for football and none of them ever seem to mention better academics at the new school. It's about priorities. Less than 1% of HS football players go on to NFL, and for those that do, the average career in the NFL is less than 3 years. Instead of pushing a state championship as the ultimate goal, these kids should be getting advice on career goals that do not involve playing football. Reality is often a cruel master!

Posted
1 hour ago, HornetFan said:

Not trying to be funny, just stating the obvious. Loads of kids in South Florida transferring for football and none of them ever seem to mention better academics at the new school. It's about priorities. Less than 1% of HS football players go on to NFL, and for those that do, the average career in the NFL is less than 3 years. Instead of pushing a state championship as the ultimate goal, these kids should be getting advice on career goals that do not involve playing football. Reality is often a cruel master!

There are approximately 1,036,842 high school football players in any given year in the United States. 1% of these players would mean that 10,368 players go on to play NFL football in any given year. There are only 1,696 players total in the NFL in any given year. Approximately only 255 players per year are drafted into the NFL. Which is only 7% of "eligible" College Seniors which is 3,500. Or .00025% of eligible high school players. In other words a high school football player has a better chance of getting kicked by a Mule than he does of getting into the NFL. Not trying to be a wise guy HornetFan just going by the stats. If you have some other figures please feel free to provide. What I think we are both trying to say is that for every CJ Spiller there are thousands of half way decent players who will have played their last game before HS  graduation day or that will disappear into the fog of a D2 or D3 gridiron. :)

Posted

For those kids in high school who were born with athletic talent and/or who work hard enough to produce success on the football field, the real goal should be to put themselves in a position to have someone else pay for their college education, while playing a game they enjoy playing with other guys who will be their brothers for life.  Success on the field in college and a chance to play professional football would simply be the gravy on top. 

Posted
54 minutes ago, Proseteye said:

There are approximately 1,036,842 high school football players in any given year in the United States. 1% of these players would mean that 10,368 players go on to play NFL football in any given year. There are only 1,696 players total in the NFL in any given year. Approximately only 255 players per year are drafted into the NFL. Which is only 7% of "eligible" College Seniors which is 3,500. Or .00025% of eligible high school players. In other words a high school football player has a better chance of getting kicked by a Mule than he does of getting into the NFL. Not trying to be a wise guy HornetFan just going by the stats. If you have some other figures please feel free to provide. What I think we are both trying to say is that for every CJ Spiller there are thousands of half way decent players who will have played their last game before HS  graduation day or that will disappear into the fog of a D2 or D3 gridiron. :)

I did say "Less than 1% of HS football players go on to NFL"; you actually took the time to research the numbers and show it is far less than a fraction of 1%. Your figures offer a stronger case for what I was trying to point out. I enjoy watching a great player excel on the football field, but it's far more important that we prepare these young men to succeed in the world. 

Posted
7 hours ago, Perspective said:

For those kids in high school who were born with athletic talent and/or who work hard enough to produce success on the football field, the real goal should be to put themselves in a position to have someone else pay for their college education, while playing a game they enjoy playing with other guys who will be their brothers for life.  Success on the field in college and a chance to play professional football would simply be the gravy on top. 

That may be the one redeeming part of the entire process. A handful of players may get full or partial scholarships to colleges for their commitment to play football for their entire time at college. And, hoping that they do not get injured or cannot make it academically. So, you are correct in that regard. 

 

6 hours ago, HornetFan said:

I did say "Less than 1% of HS football players go on to NFL"; you actually took the time to research the numbers and show it is far less than a fraction of 1%. Your figures offer a stronger case for what I was trying to point out. I enjoy watching a great player excel on the football field, but it's far more important that we prepare these young men to succeed in the world. 

The thing that has always bothered me is that academically superior students get far fewer scholarships and which are much more difficult to attain than do students engaged in sports. At least that has been my understanding. 

Posted
9 hours ago, Proseteye said:

The thing that has always bothered me is that academically superior students get far fewer scholarships and which are much more difficult to attain than do students engaged in sports. At least that has been my understanding. 

Yeah, apparently colleges and universities figured out that they can't pack 60,000 people into a lab room on Saturday to watch a kid pour a solution into a beaker.   :P

Posted
17 hours ago, Proseteye said:

That may be the one redeeming part of the entire process. A handful of players may get full or partial scholarships to colleges for their commitment to play football for their entire time at college. And, hoping that they do not get injured or cannot make it academically. So, you are correct in that regard. 

 

The thing that has always bothered me is that academically superior students get far fewer scholarships and which are much more difficult to attain than do students engaged in sports. At least that has been my understanding. 

Academically superior students can't get fans to fill an 85,000 seat football stadium, and a million people won't pay for cable TV to watch them do their homework. Athletic scholarships for football and basketball players bring revenue to a university. I imagine that there are very few people who would pay to watch kids take a political science or sociology class. It's more important that these student athletes succeed in the classroom than on the football field. The education will hopefully enable them to secure a career that lasts 40 years and allows them to support a family and secure their future. . 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...


  • Posts

    • Larry Blustein podcast link talking about this event: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/south-florida-high-school-sports-radio/id993198627?i=1000717251522
    • I suddenly wish Bridgewater had known he was breaking the rules and kept it on the DL.  He obviously cares a lot about that program and those kids.  Hate to see a guy who cares like that get taken down while the true cheaters are out there doing their thing.
    • Yes, the free market should be allowed to draw the lines between amateurism and professionalism. The beauty of playing strictly for the love of the game will certainly be allowed to persist. And, kids and adults alike play A LOT of games for fun as it is. See adult rec leagues, intramurals etc. This includes those who've been able to become wealthy through playing the sport as well!  I think that, eventually, people like most all of us are going to recognize that it is preposterous to have teenagers getting paid to play high school sports, and/or get a free college education along with the extra compensation. Most of us have been fans of the game and of the school, not the "star" athletes. In the long run, I don't think there will be much of a market for paid teenager athletes. But, if someone is willing to part with their $ to allow a kid to be less poor, and that means that School A easily crushes the competition, I don't think that's a bad thing. It IS a thing that will cause a great many people to lose interest. And that will in turn diminish the market, which will of course mean kids aren't making any money anyway. At issue, as I keep harping on, is the fact that the "big time" sports world where NIL money is available is an entirely different, beast of an animal that K-12 schools and even universities are not equipped to manage. Nor should they be. Big time, for profit sports should be separated from schools. The mission of the two entities is competely misaligned. 
    • It is somewhat understandable for a guy who's passionate about the sport, and who reached very close to the pinnacle of it, to be dismissive of the many dimwits making the rules who have none of the above characteristics. And, he may also be considering the possibility that calling attention to the (perhaps) absurd nature of the rules and/or the dearth of funding in high school football may be worth it in the big picture. He's almost certainly going to have the opportunity to coach at the higher levels, and is not likely to be at Norhwestern for very long, anyway. He may make a bigger impact long-term/big picture doing this sort of thing than just winning a couple state titles and jetting.
    • I think the argument is this:  if 'free adults are allowed to give gifts to poor kids who happen to be good at sports,' we move from an amateur environment into a professional environment.   Historically, high school sports, college sports and even the Olympics were reserved solely for amateur athletes.  Within the last couple of decades, the barriers for professionals started to erode for the Olympics.   You may recall that Jim Thorpe won gold medals in track in the 1912 Olympics, but was stripped of those medals because he had played minor league (or "semipro") baseball prior to participating in the Olympics.   Ultimately, those medals were restored a few years ago.  The USA Olympic basketball team used to be comprised only of college players.  Now, it's all pros (with one or two college stars).  Within the last 5-10 years, NIL changes have permitted college athletes to receive compensation. Before then, the rules in place for decades allowed college student-athletes to receive room, board and tuition.  The $100 post-game handshakes from alums in the locker room and brown paper bags filled with money - although they happened everywhere - were illegal (and arguably still are; they just don't happen as much because the athletes can receive money legally through NIL). The NIL world is quickly filtering down to the high school level.  However, the rules in most all states, and certainly in Florida, are rooted in the concept that only amateur athletes can compete in high school sports.   And if you allow athletes to receive gifts, or otherwise compensate them or their families, such athletes are no longer considered amateurs.   Simply put, the rules has always been that if you get compensated to do play a sport, you are considered a professional.  And professionals cannot participate in amateur sports.  Again, the rules in place (FHSAA Rules) are rooted in a clear distinction between amateur sports and professional sports.  There was a clear line that is slowly becoming more and more blurred. If you want the argument as to why the rule makes sense, I think it is this:   there is a certain beauty in amateur sports, knowing that everyone who is playing is playing for the love of the game and not for money.  Everything changes once you start compensating athletes.  As I have stated before, the concept of compensation is a slippery slope.  What do you allow and what don't you?   FHSAA rules prohibiting impermissible benefits were written before Uber even existed. But the rule is pretty clear:  if you give something to football players that you don't give to all other students, that's an impermissible benefit - especially if the benefit is given to entice a kid to come to your school.   If you allow schools/coaches/alums to compensate kids to play sports, then you take away the somewhat-level playing field.  And, over time, certain schools will dominate high school sports because they will have the financial wherewithal to attract the most talented athletes.  While this might be good for the handful of select, talented athletes, everyone else suffers.   I guess the real question is whether we just want to eliminate the distinction between amateur athletics and professional athletics altogether and simply allow the free-market system to play out for all athletes and all schools?  If you're inclined to answer this question with a "yes," I have only six words for you:  be careful what you wish for.   
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...