High School Football

[sup-rbeast]

Using your formula I decided to make the numbers a little more realistic for any state championship matchup and show how little it really matters. Beacuse, in the divisions there is not a disparity as great as 100-2000. So let's say Division 1 numbers according to the current VHSL alignment. And, I am going to round my #'s up because you can't have 1/2 of a player. Let's say you still have schools A, B, & C.

total school polulations: A=100, B=300, C=500.

Number of boys: A=50, B=150, C=250.

Number of players who come out for Football: A=25, B=75, C=125

Players capable of being on the field (role players): A=13, B=37, C=63.

Players with great ability (Stars): A=2, B=4, C=6.

So according to your formula:

Team A should have about 25 players, with 13 who are capable of signifigant minutes, and 2 stars.

Team B should have 75 players, with 37 capable of signifigant minutes and 3 Stars.

Team C should have 125 players, with 63 capable of playing time and 6 stars.

As for the Division 1 talent numbers they shake out as A=.2, B=.4, and C=.6. Not much of a disparity.

This just further illustrates the point. Team a could put 11 of there 15 total capable players and stars on the field against any 11 of teams B or C. And if they control the ball and punish the opposing team they could quite likely win even though their school is much smaller than the other 2. Like I said, it's all about HEART and who wants it the most.

[R0cketer]

Ok, first off, we're assuming that if we just work harder or go smash mouth, we win....or are we assuming that the other time doesn't have any fight? All things being equal, if you have more people in a talent pool, you win more. You talk about 10 years ago, thats fine, 10 years ago, our schools were bigger, the other schools were smaller. Its great to run smash mouth football, when you can, no question on that, but if you got 12 players, smash mouth football can get you killed. You say put the people in a system, but if you don't have the system to run a power game, how can you run it? Its great when you have a line that goes 300 lbs and a big solid back that you can just run over people and keep the ball, but if you have a line that maybe goes 220-240, its great to think run the power game, but by the end of the game, having guys 50 lbs more hitting you all game, which dog is going to have more fight (most likely?).

Now if you want to argue that it seems like we dont grow no big boys around here anymore, then yes, I'll agree with that. Clintwood has been a team that has tried to stick to the smash mouth football (generally speaking), but when your mashers go 240 and 6, getting beat on the whole game, I don't care how much you want it, you're going to move a bit slower.

You're right about 11 guys on the field at a time, but if I send you to Ervinton and tell you to find 11 guys, and I send someone to Gate City and tell them to find 11 guys, 9/10 times, who is going to find a better 11? Yes, you'll have the times where a group of kids all come along at the same time and are very good and don't fit into the equation, but I'm sorry, I don't buy that suddenly every kid on the other end of the state just 'wants it more' or 'works harder' while suddenly nobody here does.

[R0cketer]

And dont round up the small numbers (1.3 I think rounded to 2) while (6.3 rounds to 6).

[sup-rbeast]

if all the nubers for all 3 are rounded the same it makes no difference. And as far as size goes, the kids nowdays are larger than in the past. Back in my day lines would average around 200-225 and maybe have one huge kid. Nowdays, almost all the linemen are huge. Not that size matters that much when you have a quick, strong athletic type, with a mean streak and good technique. I'd take that over a boheamouth any day of the week even if he was undersized. Some of the best HS lines I ever saw weren't huge...in fact, smaller than the lines nowdays. The difference is the discipline and attention to detail. If a small lineman plays low and drives his feet he can accomplich anything a large one can.

[R0cketer]

If you do the same, then yes but if 1.3 rounds to 2, then 6.3 rounds to 7, not 6 [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I dont know about the larger, it seems like there average may be higher, but it seems like less big ones.


And you're right, a smaller one can do exactly what you say but you're smaller one getting hit and beat on all game is going to wear down, I dont care how much they work (why do you think that teams try to rotate in players, pash-rush specialists, run-stoppers, etc)

[sup-rbeast]

Well, I'll use an example of what i know...My senior year in HS our LT was 240, LG 175, C 155, RG 225, and RT 210. That is not a very big line. We played teams with lines much larger than us (Haysi, Coeburn, Clintwood, GC, Lee, Lebanon, Burton,etc) (all outsized us)but finished 14-0. I've seen teams like Appy do it with lines smaller than that. It goes back to discipline, heart, will and philosophy. Really, nothing else matters all that much.

[imported_Counts]

It does help if you are able to 2 platoon you O and D line (unless I am mistaken that was something your team was able to do... 90 PV?)

[sup-rbeast]

We started out that way but didn't stay that way the whole game. Appy never 2 platooned tho when they won their championships....and their players weren't very big either.

[imported_Counts]

LOL I was on the 90 Clintwood team [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] and you guys 2 platooned the whole game both games against us with a coupple of exceptions in short yardage situations. You can NEVER underestamate the advantage of being fresh at the end of a ball game.

That being said I think the 90 PV team was the best of the PV state championship teams while they did not have anyone of "Jones" calaber on that team they had 10 or 12 kids that were as good at there position as anyone in the district has been since

[sup-rbeast]

According to the quote it seems that you are attributing alot of it to the change in philosophy...cuz if the
players' drive hasn't changed (which I don't buy) there is not much else it could be.

quote: "but I'm sorry, I don't buy that suddenly every kid on the other end of the state just 'wants it more' or 'works harder' while suddenly nobody here does"


The deck has always been stacked...that's nothing new. What is new is the inability to overcome it.