Is it Lemoore?
Granted I don't think they'd beat Bako or Edison but they are undefeated.
You can look at common opponents. Lemoore beat Buchanan 21-3; Edison beat Buchanan 13-7.
Lemoore beat Sanger on the road. Sanger beats Edison on the road.
Does Lemoore deserve to be #1 until they lose?
Quote from: Sixtynine on October 18, 2014, 02:17:34 PM
Is it Lemoore?
Granted I don't think they'd beat Bako or Edison but they are undefeated.
You can look at common opponents. Lemoore beat Buchanan 21-3; Edison beat Buchanan 13-7.
Lemoore beat Sanger on the road. Sanger beats Edison on the road.
Does Lemoore deserve to be #1 until they lose?
Why not Hanford they've played a tougher schedule according to CalPreps:
Hanford (CA) 8-0 38.3 47 30 17 41.7 21.6 20.1
Lemoore (CA) 8-0 37.7 45.5 20.2 25.3 37.2 19.6 17.6
But the Drillers and Liberty Bako have both played tougher schedules than Lemoore and Hanford:
Bakersfield (CA) 6-1 51.4 35 3.5 31.5 34.7 11.5 23.2
Liberty (Bakersfield, CA) 5-2 46.3 43.5 10.5 33 33.2 18.2 15
But so has Edison and SJM:
SJM (Fresno, CA) 6-1 35.3 31.5 35.5 -4 37.7 19.8 17.9
Edison (Fresno, CA) 6-1 53.3 29 14.5 14.5 27.5 16.5 11
1. Edison
2. Drillers
3. Liberty Bako
4. Hanford
5. Lemoore
6. SJM
I'd say Edison #1 and Drillers #2.
Quote from: bksflddan on October 18, 2014, 02:52:19 PM
Why not Hanford they've played a tougher schedule according to CalPreps:
Hanford (CA) 8-0 38.3 47 30 17 41.7 21.6 20.1
Lemoore (CA) 8-0 37.7 45.5 20.2 25.3 37.2 19.6 17.6
But the Drillers and Liberty Bako have both played tougher schedules than Lemoore and Hanford:
Bakersfield (CA) 6-1 51.4 35 3.5 31.5 34.7 11.5 23.2
Liberty (Bakersfield, CA) 5-2 46.3 43.5 10.5 33 33.2 18.2 15
But so has Edison and SJM:
SJM (Fresno, CA) 6-1 35.3 31.5 35.5 -4 37.7 19.8 17.9
Edison (Fresno, CA) 6-1 53.3 29 14.5 14.5 27.5 16.5 11
1. Edison
2. Drillers
3. Liberty Bako
4. Hanford
5. Lemoore
6. SJM
You are delusional putting Liberty 3.
Hanford, Lemoore, SJM...and Ridgeview fits in...Where?
Quote from: Roughneck005 on October 18, 2014, 04:50:13 PM
You are delusional putting Liberty 3.
I was thinking that too...
Quote from: TeddyKGB on October 18, 2014, 05:19:28 PM
I was thinking that too...
Strength of schedule:
Ridgeview (Bakersfield, CA) 6-1 44.9 54.5 14.5 40 42.4 21.8 20.5
1. Edison
2. Drillers
3. Liberty Bako
4. Ridgeview
5. Hanford
6. Lemoore
7. SJM
Quote from: TeddyKGB on October 18, 2014, 05:19:28 PM
I was thinking that too...
Hater, all Liberty have to do, is run the table. 8)
Quote from: flexmac3 on October 18, 2014, 05:52:54 PM
Hater, all Liberty have to do, is run the table. 8)
Which is slim ...
This I find strange:
Per Game Averages
Tri-River Season
School Record Rating Offense Defense Margin Offense Defense Margin
Clovis North (Fresno, CA) 4-3 40.5 47.5 14 33.5 29.7 25.4 4.3
Central (Fresno, CA) 4-3 35.5 31.5 14 17.5 24 22.8 1.1
Clovis (CA). 4-3 29.1 37.5 31.5 6 27.5 26.8 0.6
Clovis West (Fresno, CA) 3-4 25.7 21 30 -9 22.5 28.2 -5.6
Buchanan (Clovis, CA) 1-6 20.2 21 38.5 -17.5 16.5 26.5 -10
Clovis East (Clovis, CA) 1-6 3 31.5 62 -30.5 31.2 47.4 -16.2
QuoteStrength of schedule:
Ridgeview (Bakersfield, CA) 6-1 44.9 54.5 14.5 40 42.4 21.8 20.5
1. Edison
2. Drillers
3. Liberty Bako
4. Ridgeview
5. Hanford
6. Lemoore
7. SJM
Strength of schedule is over rated. Especially when #4 whipped #3 on their home field 42-21.
Quote from: GoldenHawksFootball on October 18, 2014, 07:13:04 PM
Strength of schedule is over rated. Especially when #4 whipped #3 on their home field 42-21.
That's exactly my point. Just because the game happened in the early season doesn't change the fact that they slapped 3/5ths of the SWYL around and was a legitimate competitor against BHS.
1. Drillers (By a hair)(BHS loss to Edison 15-14)
2. Ridgeview (Loss to BHS) I think R would beat Edison on a neutral field.
3. Edison (Loss to Sanger D2, Sanger losses to Lemoore D2 and Redwood D2)
4. Liberty Bako
Quote from: BHS Fan on October 20, 2014, 08:09:23 AM
1. Drillers (By a hair)(BHS loss to Edison 15-14)
2. Ridgeview (Loss to BHS) I think R would beat Edison on a neutral field.
3. Edison (Loss to Sanger D2, Sanger losses to Lemoore D2 and Redwood D2)
4. Liberty Bako
Bako ahead of Edison even though they have the same record and Edison beat them? Alrighty then
Boogaard went with Clovis North...
Quote from: Sixtynine on October 20, 2014, 10:12:27 AM
Bako ahead of Edison even though they have the same record and Edison beat them? Alrighty then
Edison lost to Sanger a D2 program who lost to Lemoore and Redwood both D2 programs.
BHS lost to Edison by 1 point.
You have to look at the one loss each. BHS lost to Edison D1; Edison lost to Sanger D2
BHS should be number 1 by a hair.
Quote from: BHS Fan on October 20, 2014, 12:03:01 PM
Edison lost to Sanger a D2 program who lost to Lemoore and Redwood both D2 programs.
BHS lost to Edison by 1 point.
You have to look at the one loss each. BHS lost to Edison D1; Edison lost to Sanger D2
BHS should be number 1 by a hair.
I am looking at each loss. Bako lost to Edison. Both have 1 loss. Until they play again, Edison > Bako.
If ET drops another though, sure put Bako ahead.
FWIW, Boogaard has some head scratchers to me. Especially at the very top
TOP 20
1. Clovis North (4-3)
2. Edison (6-1)
3. Bakersfield (6-1)
4. Ridgeview (6-1)
5. Liberty-Bakersfield (5-2)
6. Hanford (8-0)
7. Lemoore (8-0)
8. Sanger (5-2)
9. Central (4-3)
10. Clovis (4-3)
11. Memorial (6-1)
12. Madera (6-1)
13. Bullard (4-3)
14. Liberty-Madera Ranchos (7-0)
15. Dinuba (7-1)
16. Clovis West (3-4)
17. Stockdale (3-4)
18. Centennial (4-3)
19. Mission Oak (6-1)
20. Central Valley Christian (6-1)
Boogaard is way off with Clovis North at number one. They lost too Edison and to Merced who Edison beat. If anyone should be number one other than Edison, it should be Bakersfield. Anyway Boogard doesn't write for the Fresno Bee he writes for the Clovis Bee so it explains his ranking. Oh. I forgot, there isn't a Clovis Bee. Ha Ha , but maybe there should be.
Don't get CN #1.
Anyone who disagrees, please explain
Bakersfield
Edison
Lemoore
should be the first three Sorry but CN shouldnt even be top 10
CN...........really Boogard. So much being unbiased.
Boogard is a loon anyway. Too much moonshine. Killed to many brain cells.
Quote from: hardhitter23 on October 20, 2014, 01:31:38 PM
Bakersfield
Edison
Lemoore
should be the first three Sorry but CN shouldnt even be top 10
You are almost as delusional putting Lemoore at 3...
The ignorance in this thread is killing me.
Quote from: hardhitter23 on October 20, 2014, 01:31:38 PM
should be the first three Sorry but CN shouldnt even be top 10
I'm curious; what 8 teams, other than Bakersfield and Edison, are better than Clovis North? Please understand the question, better NOT have a better record.
Liberty Ranchos ahead of Dinuba? Would like to see that game.
And Ridgeview is in the discussion as a top 4 team, but evidently will remain in D2 until they win it all. That must be how it works, as they were in the D3 VC 4 years in a row, (winning it once) before they finally got moved to D2. With 2251 students its hard to figure.
Quote from: TeddyKGB on October 20, 2014, 04:00:17 PM
I'm curious; what 8 teams, other than Bakersfield and Edison, are better than Clovis North? Please understand the question, better NOT have a better record.
According to MaxPreps D-1.
# School Overall League Rating Strength
1 Edison (Fresno, CA) 6-1 1-1 53.4 33.9
2 Bakersfield (CA) 6-1 2-0 51.4 31.6
3 Liberty (Bakersfield, CA) 5-2 2-0 46.3 33.9
4 Clovis North (Fresno, CA) 4-3 2-0 40.5 36
5 Central (Fresno, CA) 4-3 2-0 35.5 34.5
6 Clovis (CA) 4-3 1-1 29.1 25.3
7 Bullard (Fresno, CA) 4-3 1-1 29.1 22.7
8 Clovis West (Fresno, CA) 3-4 1-1 25.7 32.7
9 Stockdale (Bakersfield, CA) 3-4 1-1 24.1 28.1
10 Centennial (Bakersfield, CA) 4-3 1-1 22.8 17.2
11 Buchanan (Clovis, CA) 1-6 0-2 20.2 34
12 Frontier (Bakersfield, CA) 3-4 0-2 20.1 25.4
13 El Diamante (Visalia, CA) 3-4 0-3 19.2 18.3
14 Clovis East (Clovis, CA) 1-6 0-2 3 20.4
Oo
Quote from: Roughneck005 on October 20, 2014, 03:46:30 PM
You are almost as delusional putting Lemoore at 3...
The ignorance in this thread is killing me.
Why not Lemoore at 3? Is Edison even better than them? Honestly I don't know
1. Edison
2. Bakersfield
3. Clovis North
4. Lemoore
5. Ridgeview
Quote from: Sixtynine on October 20, 2014, 05:43:35 PM
Why not Lemoore at 3? Is Edison even better than them? Honestly I don't know
Lemoore loses to Edison, BHS, Liberty, and Ridgeview.
Clovis North loses to Edison, BHS, Liberty and/or Ridgeview.
Sanger game was hard fought and well deserved, but I don't believe that because Lemoore beat Sanger and Sanger beat Edison that that automatically means Lemoore is leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of DI and RHS.
If I did believe in this "logic" then Ridgeview should be ranked higher than everyone on this list.
Reasoning: Ridgeview spanked Liberty, who beat Mission Viejo, who just beat Tesoro last Friday night who at the time was the 16th ranked team in the state after beating Upland (17th), Corona Del Mar (36th), San Clemente (33rd), and El Toro (60th).
Logic...
Just curious since Lemoore seems to be taboo on this thread but why do most rank Hanford above when records are the same and with mutual opponents Hanford struggled or allowed more points and Lemoore easily won the game? Also just my opinion after watching Lemoore play I don't think they are an automatic loss to Edison Bakersfield or Ridgeview.
Quote from: luvnsoftball2 on October 20, 2014, 10:27:17 PM
Just curious since Lemoore seems to be taboo on this thread but why do most rank Hanford above when records are the same and with mutual opponents Hanford struggled or allowed more points and Lemoore easily won the game? Also just my opinion after watching Lemoore play I don't think they are an automatic loss to Edison Bakersfield or Ridgeview.
I think everyone is aware that the Lemoore/Hanford game is going to be a heck of a game. It will answer some questions about both teams, that's for sure. I couldn't tell you who would win in that one.
I am not sure what games you are referring to Hanford struggling in though. Per MaxPreps:
Lemoore/Hanford Common Opponent games/scores
Monache: Lemoore 28-24 Hanford 50-27 +1 Hanford
Redwood: Lemoore 28-14 Hanford 35-21 Same spread - Push
Hanford West: Lemoore 49-21 Hanford 55-34 The 3:2 score difference would normally give Lemoore the edge - however, Scoring over 50 is worth an extra score in itself: +1 Hanford
Golden West: Lemoore 56-31 Hanford 56-44 +1 Lemoore
Final tally: Hanford +3 Lemoore +2
As a bonus lets take Hanford and Lemoore's best win and place them head to head:
Hanford: Win against Dinuba 31-7. Dinuba currently ranked 114 in CA with a team rating of 35.4.
Lemoore: Win against Clovis 40-27. Clovis currently ranked 173 in CA with a team rating of 29.1.
Again, plus 1 Hanford.
If after watching Lemoore play you think that Edison, Bakersfield, and Ridgeview are not automatic losses for them, then you obviously have not spent enough time watching those three teams.
At any rate, the bottom line is that in reality, if you look at all the evidence, Hanford should be ranked higher than Lemoore. Simple reason as to why they are not currently: They are in DIII.
Quote from: Sixtynine on October 20, 2014, 12:21:40 PM
FWIW, Boogaard has some head scratchers to me. Especially at the very top
TOP 20
1. Clovis North (4-3)
2. Edison (6-1)
3. Bakersfield (6-1)
4. Ridgeview (6-1)
5. Liberty-Bakersfield (5-2)
6. Hanford (8-0)
7. Lemoore (8-0)
8. Sanger (5-2)
9. Central (4-3)
10. Clovis (4-3)
11. Memorial (6-1)
12. Madera (6-1)
13. Bullard (4-3)
14. Liberty-Madera Ranchos (7-0)
15. Dinuba (7-1)
16. Clovis West (3-4)
17. Stockdale (3-4)
18. Centennial (4-3)
19. Mission Oak (6-1)
20. Central Valley Christian (6-1)
Hold on... Let me look at that list one more time.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-P-DrVwA2EBw/TlJuNaneyWI/AAAAAAAAA2Y/Ipag2lOOApU/s1600/t3.gif)
Through star studded, rose colored glasses, EVEN I don't get this list. Boogard... it figures, even when I love his messed up rankings, he's still a dill berry.
FYI, Boogard is NOT a fan of Clovis North. He's just ignorant. He usually bangs the CW drum loud and hard, so I give him a little credit for not being a complete dingbat this time.
I wouldn't give Boogard's rankings any traction. He's just plain wrong.
More like this IMO:
1. Bakersfield (6-1)
2. Ridgeview (6-1)
3. Lemoore (8-0)
4. Edison (6-1)
5. Clovis North (4-3)
6. Hanford (8-0)
7. Sanger (5-2)
8. Liberty-Bakersfield (5-2)
Yes I put CN ahead of an 8-0 Hanford team, because Clovis North played a brutal early schedule. IMO, they left 30 seconds on the clock vs Edison at the 24 yard line... Lost to Merced because, YOU KEEP KICKING THE BALL TO A KID WHO ALREADY TOOK ONE TO THE HOUSE, AND YOU DO IT 3 TIMES! TWO FOR TOUCHDOWNS! Yep, that is me yelling. Just a horrible game all the way around. A lot of injuries during that two loss stretch. Folsom would beat the tar out of any team in the central valley so, that was a sacrifice on the football altar of arse whuppin'.
As for Edison, I not convinced... They could EASILY be 4-3, just like Clovis North. They have some "mojo" in their favor, as izne has pointed out, but that could fizzle out come playoff time.
The Broncos are getting back to full strength now. I think they play will much better football going forward. Hopefully the coaches have learned a few things, like what NOT TO DO! :u:
With the team getting back to strength, the play calling is improving. They have their running game and passing game on track now. Central will be a good test this Thursday night. If the Broncos lose that game... they drop like a two ton rock... fast and hard. If they win, they, uh win... pointless comment, because then they face Clovis High. Get by Central AND Clovis High... then Clovis North is in for a run at the Valley Championship. Lose one of those games, they can pack it up and go home. I'm not convinced just yet about this team, just like I'm not convinced about Edison. I need to see these next two games played out. They are either on the verge of becoming what we hoped they could be, or perhaps another melt down is on the horizon.
We'll know more about the 2014-15 Broncos about 10:30 p.m. Thursday night. :u:
Quote from: Roughneck005 on October 20, 2014, 10:57:24 PM
I think everyone is aware that the Lemoore/Hanford game is going to be a heck of a game. It will answer some questions about both teams, that's for sure. I couldn't tell you who would win in that one.
I am not sure what games you are referring to Hanford struggling in though. Per MaxPreps:
Lemoore/Hanford Common Opponent games/scores
Monache: Lemoore 28-24 Hanford 50-27 +1 Hanford
Redwood: Lemoore 28-14 Hanford 35-21 Same spread - Push
Hanford West: Lemoore 49-21 Hanford 55-34 The 3:2 score difference would normally give Lemoore the edge - however, Scoring over 50 is worth an extra score in itself: +1 Hanford
Golden West: Lemoore 56-31 Hanford 56-44 +1 Lemoore
Final tally: Hanford +3 Lemoore +2
As a bonus lets take Hanford and Lemoore's best win and place them head to head:
Hanford: Win against Dinuba 31-7. Dinuba currently ranked 114 in CA with a team rating of 35.4.
Lemoore: Win against Clovis 40-27. Clovis currently ranked 173 in CA with a team rating of 29.1.
Again, plus 1 Hanford.
If after watching Lemoore play you think that Edison, Bakersfield, and Ridgeview are not automatic losses for them, then you obviously have not spent enough time watching those three teams.
At any rate, the bottom line is that in reality, if you look at all the evidence, Hanford should be ranked higher than Lemoore. Simple reason as to why they are not currently: They are in DIII.
Thank you for your editorial. As I said I was just curious and we all have our opinions. Guess a lot of things will become clearer over the next couple weeks. Central section football has been great so far
Quote from: luvnsoftball2 on October 21, 2014, 03:49:17 AM
Thank you for your editorial. As I said I was just curious and we all have our opinions. Guess a lot of things will become clearer over the next couple weeks. Central section football has been great so far
Someone didn't get the answer she wanted... ;)
Quote from: luvnsoftball2 on October 21, 2014, 03:49:17 AM
Thank you for your editorial. As I said I was just curious and we all have our opinions. Guess a lot of things will become clearer over the next couple weeks. Central section football has been great so far
This is an interesting breakdown however I will say in scores that you see a wide spread this does not represent what a team can do against an opponent. most coaches will take the opportunity in the second half when you have a comfortable lead to start placing in their 2s and 3s to give them experience. That is when you see scoring slow and sometimes defense weaken. This will throw of your math drastically.
In the end this will be a close game and will stir up the rankings which is what hard fought football is all about.
Quote from: Roughneck005 on October 20, 2014, 09:38:56 PM
Lemoore loses to Edison, BHS, Liberty, and Ridgeview.
Clovis North loses to Edison, BHS, Liberty and/or Ridgeview.
Sanger game was hard fought and well deserved, but I don't believe that because Lemoore beat Sanger and Sanger beat Edison that that automatically means Lemoore is leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of DI and RHS.
If I did believe in this "logic" then Ridgeview should be ranked higher than everyone on this list.
Reasoning: Ridgeview spanked Liberty, who beat Mission Viejo, who just beat Tesoro last Friday night who at the time was the 16th ranked team in the state after beating Upland (17th), Corona Del Mar (36th), San Clemente (33rd), and El Toro (60th).
Logic...
Who said that?
The question was do they deserve a #1 ranking?
You can't argue that they don't have a claim
Quote from: Sixtynine on October 21, 2014, 10:37:19 AM
Who said that?
The question was do they deserve a #1 ranking?
You can't argue that they don't have a claim
With that logic, Redwood has a claim as well.
Quote from: Darth Backer on October 21, 2014, 10:58:34 AM
With that logic, Redwood has a claim as well.
Except that Lemoore is undefeated.....with a win over Redwood..... ;)
Redwood would have a claim for #1 if they were undefeated at this point of the year. That means they would have beaten Sanger, Lemoore, Hanford. Yes, they would have had a claim in that scenario.
Reality is they are 3-4 with losses to Lemoore, Hanford, Centennial, and Golden West.
So with my logic from the original post, I'm voting 'No' on if Redwood has a claim to be #1 right now
JMHO
Quote from: Sixtynine on October 21, 2014, 11:56:00 AM
Redwood would have a claim for #1 if they were undefeated at this point of the year. That means they would have beaten Sanger, Lemoore, Hanford. Yes, they would have had a claim in that scenario.
Reality is they are 3-4 with losses to Lemoore, Hanford, Centennial, and Golden West.
So with my logic from the original post, I'm voting 'No' on if Redwood has a claim to be #1 right now
JMHO
I was joking. I think more than anything, there is more parity this season than ever before. Anyone from #1-15 or so could beat anyone on a given night.
Quote from: Darth Backer on October 21, 2014, 12:11:33 PM
I was joking. I think more than anything, there is more parity this season than ever before. Anyone from #1-15 or so could beat anyone on a given night.
Agreed
Quote from: luvnsoftball2 on October 20, 2014, 10:27:17 PM
Also just my opinion after watching Lemoore play I don't think they are an automatic loss to Edison Bakersfield or Ridgeview.
Quote from: Roughneck005 on October 20, 2014, 10:57:24 PM
If after watching Lemoore play you think that Edison, Bakersfield, and Ridgeview are not automatic losses for them, then you obviously have not spent enough time watching those three teams.
I wouldn't consider Lemoore and automatic loss against Edison, Bakersfield, or Ridgeview. A week ago these people would have said the same about Sanger but for those to blind to see Sanger just proved otherwise. While maybe its unlikely Lemoore beats them it wouldn't be by any means an "automatic loss".
Now to rile up roughneck, what if Lemoore goes 10-0? Who does the committee give the #1 seed to in Div2?
WEEK 8 NEW CAL-HI SPORTS
STATE 25 OVERALL FOOTBALL RANKINGS
(Previous ranking in parentheses; through games of Saturday, Oct. 18)
1. (1) ST. JOHN BOSCO (BELLFLOWER) 6-1
2. (2) DE LA SALLE (CONCORD) 7-0
3. (3) MATER DEI (SANTA ANA) 6-1
4. (4) FOLSOM 7-0
5. (5) CENTENNIAL (CORONA) 5-2
6. (6) OCEANSIDE 7-0
7. (7) SERVITE (ANAHEIM) 4-3
8. (9) LONG BEACH POLY (LONG BCH) 7-1
9. (8) JSERRA (SJ CAPISTRANO) 6-1
10. (10) GRANT (SACRAMENTO) 7-0
11. (17) SANTA MARGARITA (RANCHO SM) 5-2
12. (12) BAKERSFIELD 6-1
13. (22) CRESPI (ENCINO) 6-1
14. (14) LUTHERAN (ORANGE) 4-3
15. (15) WESTLAKE (WESTLAKE VILLAGE) 5-2
16. (16) FOOTHILL (PLEASANTON) 7-0
17. (24) BISHOP AMAT (LA PUENTE) 5-3
18. (18) SERRA (GARDENA) 4-2
19. (20) ALEMANY (MISSION HILLS) 6-1
20. (19) NOTRE DAME (SHERMAN OAKS) 5-2
21. (21) SERRA (SAN MATEO) 4-2
22. (23) MILPITAS 7-0
23. (NR) CATHEDRAL CATHOLIC (SAN DIEGO) 7-1
24. (NR) ROCKLIN 7-0
25. (NR) HELIX (LA MESA) 6-1
Dropped Out
Previous No. 11 Edison (Fresno); No. 13 Chino Hills; No. 25 Chaminade (West Hills
They also granted them a state bowl spot with two losses on their record... Doesn't surprise me.
I can't comprehend how Bako is in those rankings and Edison isn't. Both teams have the same record and Bako's loss was to Edison.
How does head to head go out the window when both teams have the same record?
Quote from: Bench Warmer on October 21, 2014, 01:13:01 PM
I wouldn't consider Lemoore and automatic loss against Edison, Bakersfield, or Ridgeview. A week ago these people would have said the same about Sanger but for those to blind to see Sanger just proved otherwise. While maybe its unlikely Lemoore beats them it wouldn't be by any means an "automatic loss".
Now to rile up roughneck, what if Lemoore goes 10-0? Who does the committee give the #1 seed to in Div2?
Look at Bench Warmer stirring that pot :D
D2 has at least four schools who could be seeded #1,
Then you have schools schools like Tehachapi, and Sanger chomping at the bits.
Quote from: Sixtynine on October 21, 2014, 02:28:29 PM
I can't comprehend how Bako is in those rankings and Edison isn't. Both teams have the same record and Bako's loss was to Edison.
How does head to head go out the window when both teams have the same record?
Sixtynine, if you are trying to understand state rankings, goodluck.
IMO, Edison lossing to a D2 school didnt help. And it didnt help BHS.
Quote from: Bench Warmer on October 21, 2014, 01:13:01 PM
I wouldn't consider Lemoore and automatic loss against Edison, Bakersfield, or Ridgeview. A week ago these people would have said the same about Sanger but for those to blind to see Sanger just proved otherwise. While maybe its unlikely Lemoore beats them it wouldn't be by any means an "automatic loss".
Now to rile up roughneck, what if Lemoore goes 10-0? Who does the committee give the #1 seed to in Div2?
No riling up over here, no worries.
CIF committee likes to puff themselves up and claim that they award higher seeds to teams with a greater strength of schedule. This is somewhat true every year.
Since RHS is somewhat of a subject here:
2011 RHS was 10-0 going into playoffs (with multiple 21+ point wins, including a win over a high ranked Frontier team) and was given a #2 seed behind a 10-0 Dinuba team that had played some multiple higher ranked teams.
Working off of the consistency of CIF using strength of schedule pretty much across the board over the past few years, I would say Lemoore's argument for #1 is not very sound, considering Dinuba has also played a tougher schedule.
But in the end, who knows...CIF does whatever CIF wants.
QuoteSixtynine, if you are trying to understand state rankings, goodluck.
IMO, Edison lossing to a D2 school didnt help. And it didnt help BHS.
Sixty Nine has a point! How does any team in any poll go from #11 to #26 or above? They did lose to a D2 team but it wasn't a lopsided loss. I think Ridgeview is the most quality win for the Drillers. You have a couple 4-3 teams Oaks Christian which is way down and Crenshaw which is down. And a win over 3-4 Salesian. An early 1 point loss to a top valley team on the road doesn't affect their ranking much.
I'm going to go with the money response. If you want to find out how they do a lot of things, follow the money. Who will bring the most fans and who will buy the most apparel. Do you think having two valley teams in it last year was a coincidence? The CIF saw an opportunity and a reason to have two valley teams there, and they capitalized. I may be way off, but to me, many of you are right on. You cant guess nor comprehend how the CIF does seeding. Why? Because you never know what criteria they are going to use that year.
Force I believe you are 100% correct, it all comes down to money! That's what drives college football & NFL and now high school football. It's what's been said on here for years, why is there 6 divisions of playoffs in the CV, why do teams with below .500 records get an 11th game, the gate.
Quote from: TeddyKGB on October 22, 2014, 08:46:29 AM
Force I believe you are 100% correct, it all comes down to money! That's what drives college football & NFL and now high school football. It's what's been said on here for years, why is there 6 divisions of playoffs in the CV, why do teams with below .500 records get an 11th game, the gate.
So true...... Still dont understand how a team only wins two games and are granted a playoff spot :huh: :huh:
Quote from: hardhitter23 on October 22, 2014, 08:55:16 AM
So true...... Still dont understand how a team only wins to games and are granted a playoff spot :huh: :huh:
Doesn't happen for everyone.....just the school districts that can afford the bus.......Tulare, Visalia, and I'm sure a few other districts enforce a .500 rule for playoffs......
Kern Valley should be in the top 20.
QuoteForce I believe you are 100% correct, it all comes down to money! That's what drives college football & NFL and now high school football. It's what's been said on here for years, why is there 6 divisions of playoffs in the CV, why do teams with below .500 records get an 11th game, the gate.
Teddy if that's the case, than why not make it an 11 or 12 game schedule? Let all the schools make an extra or 2 weeks worth of gate money. And then put the schools in the post season that belong by earning it on the field. To me that would make more sense and more money. Why? Because you have all these cross section playoff games that require all this travel. You're telling me that Tehachapi playing Yosemite is going to make lots of gate money? How about Arvin playing Chowchilla? Not many Bear fans would travel..
Quote from: GoldenHawksFootball on October 22, 2014, 10:20:34 AM
Teddy if that's the case, than why not make it an 11 or 12 game schedule? Let all the schools make an extra or 2 weeks worth of gate money. And then put the schools in the post season that belong by earning it on the field. To me that would make more sense and more money. Why? Because you have all these cross section playoff games that require all this travel. You're telling me that Tehachapi playing Yosemite is going to make lots of gate money? How about Arvin playing Chowchilla? Not many Bear fans would travel..
Quit looking at one game only. Multiply what you just said by 8 or 10 games. Remember it doesn't cost the CIF anything to have these games. It only brings in revenue.
Quote from: Forceuser on October 22, 2014, 11:25:53 AM
Quit looking at one game only. Multiply what you just said by 8 or 10 games. Remember it doesn't cost the CIF anything to have these games. It only brings in revenue.
The CIF gets a cut of the gate receipts for playoff games.....they get diddly from the gate if it's a regular season game......
I was just going to say the same thing Force said, its not one game. Remember there is 10 sections within the CIF, if you figure 2 extra playoff games per section its 20 gates. at $1000 per gate its $20000. $20K is just a little more than what Arvin-Chowchilla draw.
Quote
The CIF gets a cut of the gate receipts for playoff games.....they get diddly from the gate if it's a regular season game......
Was not aware of the CIF getting a cut from playoff games only. Thought it was regular season games as well. Then make the regular season 8 weeks and the post season 5 or 6 weeks. Double elimination bracketology! lol... Don't think they haven't thought of that. Instead of 9 lives you get 2 lives.
QuoteI was just going to say the same thing Force said, its not one game. Remember there is 10 sections within the CIF, if you figure 2 extra playoff games per section its 20 gates. at $1000 per gate its $20000. $20K is just a little more than what Arvin-Chowchilla draw.
No I wasn't referring to 1 game only Arvin vs. Chowchilla. I'm not sure how you got that conclusion. That makes no sense at all. I was referring to adding 2 more regular season weeks worth of games for "every" school in the section. As is the post season as watered down as it is has about 65% of the teams going to the playoffs. The games added for those 2 weeks in each section don't travel like cross section playoff games and it's not 65% playing, it's %100 playing. By making the regular season a week or 2 longer you have every school playing a week or 2 longer. But it's a moot point because the CIF doesn't draw from regular season games. That's what I was getting at. I was not aware of how the CIF makes their money.
The CIF gets the whole gate...not a cut. (unless this has changed). That is why your season passes only work during the regular season. The CIF doesnt want to lose out on any revenue at the gate. The schools get concessions and anything else going on during the game
I got what youre saying GHF, I don't see a problem with adding a game or 2. The CIF couldn't care any less about the playoffs being watered down because in all likelihood the better teams will end up in the finals and semis and will draw the be gate. Fact is the teams that travel best are usually the better teams anyway.
I believe the gate break down is 30% each school, 40% CIF.
Quote from: Coach Scudder on October 22, 2014, 01:00:58 PM
I believe the gate break down is 30% each school, 40% CIF.
That's what I thought it was......or 1/3 each.......either way, it's a cut.....
Quote from: Coach Scudder on October 22, 2014, 01:00:58 PM
I believe the gate break down is 30% each school, 40% CIF.
This; except home site does get to deduct some expenses and paying of officials before the cut.
Quote from: mkb152 on October 23, 2014, 09:45:27 AM
This; except home site does get to deduct some expenses and paying of officials before the cut.
They also self report what the gate total $ are ;)
Since the CIF allows everyone into playoffs, districts establish their own requirements, wouldn't it make more sense for the CIF to pay for officials out of their cut?
Quote from: Coach Scudder on October 23, 2014, 10:30:08 AM
Since the CIF allows everyone into playoffs, districts establish their own requirements, wouldn't it make more sense for the CIF to pay for officials out of their cut?
Not really; it's done pre-cut so it's more equitable. And other sections don't even give the schools a cut, so I think it's fair.
If you host any state or regional events you get ZERO money. ;)
this may be a stupid question, but what exactly does the CIF do other than make a cluster huck of rules and decide where and when playoffs take place? Where is all this money going?
Quote from: TeddyKGB on October 23, 2014, 02:09:20 PM
this may be a stupid question, but what exactly does the CIF do other than make a cluster huck of rules and decide where and when playoffs take place? Where is all this money going?
To the incompetent administrators within the CIF.
Quote from: TeddyKGB on October 23, 2014, 02:09:20 PM
this may be a stupid question, but what exactly does the CIF do other than make a cluster huck of rules and decide where and when playoffs take place? Where is all this money going?
OK, I'm going to treat this as an honest question. The CIF is empowered by law to oversee and operate the sports programs for high schools in the state.
1. For money, it's actually much less than you think. The average elementary's school's operating budget dwarfs the section's budget by a large margin.
2. The Central section employs 3 full time employees and 3 part time area administrators who are basically volunteers. It's probably the smallest staff of all the sections.
3. The administrators many on this site always complain about
*do not make the rules.* Schools/leagues do through the board of managers, which is a democratic process. The administrators simply enforce policy as best they can, and most people who actually talk/work with them respect them a great deal. Much of the rule enforcement is left on the schools to enforce and self-report. Believe it or not, *most* schools are not sketchy in this regard.
4. The vast majority of big decisions (re-leaguing, etc.) there is probably almost an excess of input of opinions from schools.
5. Our sections is *far* more open and easy to deal with than the other sections. If you want an example of a Byzantine organization with random rules *very* sketchily enforced, see the Southern Section. Want to see something closer to a dictatorship? See the SJS.
And, just a little tidbit of information:
Most states are run by associations as opposed to federations. The main difference is that in an association it is much less democratic.
I have a friend who coached football and basketball in Texas for many years. He explained that most decisions made in Texas are like "Word comes down from God. No appeal (or a laughable one at best)."
thanks mkb, it was a honest question and your break down helped to clarify for me.