We should all want competitiveness as well as fairness and no question those 2 metrics were better achieved with the Suburban/Metro formula and yes, I was in favor of that system as were many around the state.  Some folks wanted to smear the achievement of teams in the Suburban part as not being real champions, but most of us weren't fazed by that characterization.   In time, the necessary tweaks could have been made to make it even better but the Metro schools that clearly have the competitive advantage due to surrounding populations didn't want to limit the championships they could collect if they had to beat each other to do it.   Sad that the solution from those loud voices returned us to the mess we are trying to make better.   Dr. D, you might hold the view of the little guy in this universe but not the minority. 

Its acceptable to the clowns running the fhsaa but thats what happens when the governor who has no experience running athletics decides to reform the fhsaa board of directors with corporate "yes men"  You end up with people completely clueless on the needs of the athletic programs because they never followed the growing issues on a year to year basis and are trying to treat athletics like it's the 70s before school choice, open transfers, etc was a major concern or issue Metro suburban worked because it was the only thing the fhsaa ever did to address the talent discrepancy between teams recruiting in large metros and the smaller areas of the state  After all Chaminade-Madonna has a very small enrollment yet can beat anyone larger typically. Same goes for schools like Booker T Washington, Trinity Christian,  Bolles,  Cocoa. Like I can keep naming schools who routinely beat schools 3 times their size which shows how little enrollment matters when you can recruit from your entire county line or sometimes even into another county 

Yes, that’s exactly what you would expect in Classes with widely disparate talent levels.  Just as is often seen in the opening round of NCAA March Madness.  And if one finds that desirable or entertaining, then so be it.  My point is that there are a multitude of ways to potentially provide more equitable competition in the regular season and playoffs.  For all the whining, the Metro-Suburban set-up provided more competitive playoffs.  Other methods (as you point out) have been proposed on these pages.  But perhaps I am in the minority view, and the status quo is acceptable to those involved.  

Wouldn't that be expected in any situation where we are seeding teams? Like the gap between a #1 and #8 is supposed to be big. If that continues in the 2nd round or the state finals, I think that is the bigger problem. And no, I am not suggesting that the system is good. For than 10 years, I have suggested that we do a classification system based on previous seasons' success rather than population. 

BTW/Springs didn’t Happen