PDA

View Full Version : 5A state champions.. best teams in Texas? The Nation?



grayowl60
09-16-2009, 07:37 AM
I started this kind of thread on the "others" board with predictable results. Some of you dont go to that board, so I am wondering what 5A fans think. So as to not have confusion, I am saying that year in and year out the BEST FOOTBALL in this state and the nation is played in 5A, The state champions are the Kings of Texas HS football

E-Vol-ution
09-16-2009, 08:04 AM
"Texas School for the Deaf" plays the most out of state competition. (no joke).:notworthy

I started this kind of thread on the "others" board with predictable results. Some of you dont go to that board, so I am wondering what 5A fans think. So as to not have confusion, I am saying that year in and year out the BEST FOOTBALL in this state and the nation is played in 5A, The state champions are the Kings of Texas HS football

33Blood
09-16-2009, 08:25 AM
I would say that one or the other 5A Texas Champion is either the best or near the top of the nation's best. But last year the best team in the world was Lake Travis and they are 4A.

OakTreeUp-n-Out
09-16-2009, 08:44 AM
The more OOS football I watch, the more I'm convinced that a true national top 50 poll would consist of about 15 teams from Texas, 15 from Florida, 12 from California, and 8 from everywhere else. With regards to who is actually "the best" team in any given year, I'm not convinced Texas has the stranglehold on that every year like some here would like to think. I do believe that if the states all had similar transfer policies and Texas ever started doing the private school thing, Texas or Florida would have the "best" team 95% of the time.

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 09:01 AM
On the " best of the rest" board, some of those folks say that 1A,2A,3A,4A are "equal" to 5A championships. I say those 240 or so teams in 5A are the best 240 teams in the nation as a whole, and the champions wear the crowns as THE BEST IN THE STATE, thus the nation

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 09:23 AM
ttt

SLC
09-16-2009, 09:25 AM
The kings in Texas, until someone gets more in the trophy case is the Celina Bobcats with 8 state titles won in the best high school football state.

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 09:29 AM
The kings in Texas, until someone gets more in the trophy case is the Celina Bobcats with 8 state titles won in the best high school football state.
No the best football, coaching, facilities, fans etc. is in 5A, thus the best record in recent years belongs to KATY, the kings of Texas HS footbal for the time being

longhorn3
09-16-2009, 09:30 AM
The kings in Texas, until someone gets more in the trophy case is the Celina Bobcats with 8 state titles won in the best high school football state.

respectfully disagree..the kings of texas football are the 5a state champs...celina could not now or ever have beaten a 5a state championship team....

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 09:33 AM
respectfully disagree..the kings of texas football are the 5a state champs...celina could not now or ever have beaten a 5a state championship team....
:notworthy.... woops:D

SLC
09-16-2009, 09:35 AM
respectfully disagree..the kings of texas football are the 5a state champs...celina could not now or ever have beaten a 5a state championship team....


The competiton is all relative to who your are playing. Celina has 8 playing the same relative competiton that everyone else plays in their repsective classifications.

Thats like saying if they cretated a 6A next season that automaticaly because the number in front of the "A" is now bigger, that it is now better.;)


It's all relative to who you are playing.

Dynastybegan86
09-16-2009, 09:40 AM
The competiton is all relative to who your are playing. Celina has 8 playing the same relative competiton that everyone else plays in their repsective classifications.

Thats like saying if they cretated a 6A next season that automaticaly because the number in front of the "A" is now bigger, that it is now better.;)


It's all relative to who you are playing.

Are you saying how one team might match up better against another that it is possible for a lower classification team to play and even beat a higher classification team? Hmmm, very interesting thought!:cool:

longhorn3
09-16-2009, 09:40 AM
The competiton is all relative to who your are playing. Celina has 8 playing the same relative competiton that everyone else plays in their repsective classifications.

Thats like saying if they cretated a 6A next season that automaticaly because the number in front of the "A" is now bigger, that it is now better.;)


It's all relative to who you are playing.

When you use the words "kings of texas football" i would interpet that as who is the best in texas football....let's take last year for example...could the best team in 3A beat the best team in 5A ? nope, not even close game...so to me it's not relative to the competition its whos the best and the best is going to come out of 5A...i know its not fair but thats the way the cookie crumbles.

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 09:43 AM
When you use the words "kings of texas football" i would interpet that as who is the best in texas football....let's take last year for example...could the best team in 3A beat the best team in 5A ? nope, not even close game...so to me it's not relative to the competition its whos the best and the best is going to come out of 5A...i know its not fair but thats the way the cookie crumbles.
Look over on the small schools baord on how this argument goes.... strange

Dynastybegan86
09-16-2009, 09:45 AM
When you use the words "kings of texas football" i would interpet that as who is the best in texas football....let's take last year for example...could the best team in 3A beat the best team in 5A ? nope, not even close game...so to me it's not relative to the competition its whos the best and the best is going to come out of 5A...i know its not fair but thats the way the cookie crumbles.

Lake Travis...4A..could have beaten Katy or Allen last year!

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 09:53 AM
Lake Travis...4A..could have beaten Katy or Allen last year!
Because you say so?;) Over the years there have been 4A schools that would have been competitive in 5A and maybe won state..LT is one, Breckenridge long ago, actually beat champions in the largest class. Those are exceptions. The best football, top to bottom is played in the largest class!


.

longhorn3
09-16-2009, 09:59 AM
Because you say so?;) Over the years there have been 4A schools that would have been competitive in 5A and maybe won state..LT is one, Breckenridge long ago, actually beat champions in the largest class. Those are exceptions. The best football, top to bottom is played in the largest class!


.

agreed!!!!!!

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 10:49 AM
On the other baord it has been implied that staeing that 5A football is the best is downplaying other championships. No, other classifications champions are the best in that group and have won playing vs thier peers. Keyword: peers. The "peers" that 5A teams play are better. Better equiped, coached, more depth, have stronger or as strong fan support, etc.

maxtor
09-16-2009, 11:02 AM
Because you say so?;) Over the years there have been 4A schools that would have been competitive in 5A and maybe won state..LT is one, Breckenridge long ago, actually beat champions in the largest class. Those are exceptions. The best football, top to bottom is played in the largest class!


.


SLC was a good 4A team in 2001. In 2002 they added enough students to jump them into a small 5A school and they won the next 31 games in a row.
Those extra 50 students(minus 25 girls) must have been chock full of great football players.
I dont think that there is that much difference in the top 4A and 5A.

drgnbkr
09-16-2009, 11:09 AM
SLC was a good 4A team in 2001. In 2002 they added enough students to jump them into a small 5A school and they won the next 31 games in a row.
Those extra 50 students(minus 25 girls) must have been chock full of great football players.:rolleyes:
I dont think that there is that much difference in the top 4A and 5A.

Longview showed that earlier this year...

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 11:11 AM
SLC was a good 4A team in 2001. In 2002 they added enough students to jump them into a small 5A school and they won the next 31 games in a row.
Those extra 50 students(minus 25 girls) must have been chock full of great football players.:rolleyes:
I dont think that there is that much difference in the top 4A and 5A.
No the system from the early grades started payng off... Ennis, Stephenville SLC and now Katy were and are the best "systems" programs ever.. Others now are trying to do the same. And yes growth in numbers dont hurt

ThEgReAtOnE
09-16-2009, 11:25 AM
Lake Travis...4A..could have beaten Katy or Allen last year!

LT might have beaten Katy, but they would've had a hard time beating the likes of Allen, FB Hightower, and North Shore.

SLC
09-16-2009, 12:11 PM
Are you saying how one team might match up better against another that it is possible for a lower classification team to play and even beat a higher classification team? Hmmm, very interesting thought!:cool:


Well...That could happen, my guess is just the sheer number of participants, numerous feeder teams (freshman and JV's), and the numerous feeder middle schools is the overwhelming deciding factor in it and that would obviously leave the deck stacked against a smaller school when playing a 5A team who has all that.

RockinL
09-16-2009, 12:35 PM
Lake Travis...4A..could have beaten Katy or Allen last year!

I saw alot of playoff teams last year in 4A and 5A, and LT was definitely the best I saw last year. They had the talent and depth at any level to beat anyone.

SLC
09-16-2009, 12:36 PM
No the best football, coaching, facilities, fans etc. is in 5A,

You've completely lost it there...Butch Ford, GA Moore, Sam Harrell, Chad Morris, Joey Florence, Dale Keeling, Barry Bowman, Kyle Lynch, Kieth Gardner, Jeff Traylor and many many more great coaches are on those lower levels. And facilities...Good lord...have you not seen Gilmers stadium and facilities?, how about Brownwoods? How about Carthage? How about Celina's?..Man oh man you seriously must not get out and go see anything past Garland, Texas. It's like anywhere and at any level of Texas football...some have it and others dont...There are some 5A facilities that aren't on the same level as some smaller schools. And fans?...holy hell, just wow...You need to go see some of those other teams play..They bring the house with their fans...Hell Denison played at Texas Stadium last season in the last game of a quad header and had their side damn near full...with Denison 4A fans...lol.

thus the best record in recent years belongs to KATY, the kings of Texas HS footbal for the time being

On this one you should really check the facts on that as it pertains to 5A, but as far as the state as a whole, the 8 titles for Celina puts them as the top dogs until someone over takes them.



^^^

SLC
09-16-2009, 12:46 PM
When you use the words "kings of texas football" i would interpet that as who is the best in texas football....let's take last year for example...could the best team in 3A beat the best team in 5A ? nope, not even close game...so to me it's not relative to the competition its whos the best and the best is going to come out of 5A...i know its not fair but thats the way the cookie crumbles.


I think one thing is clear here and this we all will agree on...To be the best, at all, you have to win the titles...OK, relative to the entire field of competition, leaving enrollments and participations out (because thats all that is seperating the small from the bigs) there is one team in this state that has been the best of the best in their class and that is Celina in winning 8 state titles against their comperative competition, the same way those titles are earned for every level, including 5A.


Great post here by Firebird on the other board that sums this up completely and it needs to be stated on this one as well...


Thing is that the Celina Bobcats play with the same handicap the rest of their competition does and dominate against it. It's like the para-Olympics. It's no less impressive to beat a bunch of dudes with one leg when you only have one leg yourself.

SLC
09-16-2009, 12:47 PM
Look over on the small schools baord on how this argument goes.... strange


Strange indeed and your losing the arguement there as well.;)

bowiedawgs01
09-16-2009, 12:49 PM
Y'all are arguing different things. Good grief.

gray - Yes, the best football in the state, as a whole, is in 5A.

SLC - Yes, all titles are equal relative to school size.

People who say Celina had it easier because they beat 2 and 3A schools to win their titles are forgetting that Celina is a 3A SCHOOL! It's not like they're a big 5A beating up on 3A schools for their titles.

That means, based on relative difficulty, all titles are equal.

That does not mean, nor is SLC stating, that all teams are equal. There is a difference, although subtle. The 2A champ will not beat the 5A champ. But their titles are equal.

SLC
09-16-2009, 12:54 PM
Because you say so?;) Over the years there have been 4A schools that would have been competitive in 5A and maybe won state..LT is one, Breckenridge long ago, actually beat champions in the largest class.

yep and the same goes for 1A's beating 2A's and 2A's beating 3A's and 3A's beating 4A's and 4A's beating 5A's.

There is little doubt in my mind that Lake Travis was the best team in this state, regardless of classification, last season...and they were one of the best in the nation as well.


Those are exceptions. The best football, top to bottom is played in the largest class!


Actually no...Just on quality alone, the best classes from top to bottom are 3A and 4A...This has been a proven fact for years over and over...Then I would put 1A and 2A, with 5A last, due mainly to the fact that really the top 50 teams and especially the top 25 teams in 5A would kill the bottom 5o and blast the bottom 25 completely off the field...so no.

^^^

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 12:56 PM
^^^
Hay little dood, get on back over to the "small" board where you belong. good coaching and good facilities are all over the state, and yes since many of the smaller schools are in one school towns and its the only game in town, they have a following. Something you dont have the depth of intelect to understand is this is an OVERALL projection... you can pick out good high paid couching from some small schools, same with facilities, but over all it dont stack up with 5A... never will
Oh and...:) I mean all that in a sweet nice way... trying to be helpful:notworthy

SLC
09-16-2009, 01:01 PM
On the other baord it has been implied that staeing that 5A football is the best is downplaying other championships. No, other classifications champions are the best in that group and have won playing vs thier peers. Keyword: peers. The "peers" that 5A teams play are better. Better equiped, coached, more depth, have stronger or as strong fan support, etc.

Actually no, the relative difficulty for the lower class teams is the same that a 5A team plays against and they aren't better coached just because they have a "5" in front of the "A" either...Lots and lots of great coach's on the lower levels...The fan support for alot of the smaller schools is in alot of casses better than a great many of the bigger schools I have seen. The only difference is depth, in terms of if you compare a 5A to a 3A, but 3A to 3A they are on the same equal footing that the 5A's are on with the other 5A's.



^^^

SLC
09-16-2009, 01:04 PM
SLC was a good 4A team in 2001. In 2002 they added enough students to jump them into a small 5A school and they won the next 31 games in a row.
Those extra 50 students(minus 25 girls) must have been chock full of great football players.:rolleyes:
I dont think that there is that much difference in the top 4A and 5A.


Agreed. the same equation can be used when comparing 1A to 2A and 2A to 3A and 3A to 4A. the bigger jump obviously happens in the splits of size amoung that particular class in the case of a D1 or D2, but you get what I'm saying and I certainly agree with you.

SLC
09-16-2009, 01:06 PM
I saw alot of playoff teams last year in 4A and 5A, and LT was definitely the best I saw last year. They had the talent and depth at any level to beat anyone.


Agreed. They were/are one of the best teams/programs in this state, classification be damned.

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 01:08 PM
Y'all are arguing different things. Good grief.

gray - Yes, the best football in the state, as a whole, is in 5A.

SLC - Yes, all titles are equal relative to school size.

People who say Celina had it easier because they beat 2 and 3A schools to win their titles are forgetting that Celina is a 3A SCHOOL! It's not like they're a big 5A beating up on 3A schools for their titles.

That means, based on relative difficulty, all titles are equal.

That does not mean, nor is SLC stating, that all teams are equal. There is a difference, although subtle. The 2A champ will not beat the 5A champ. But their titles are equal.
Keyword(s) relative, and peers. No the top FOOTBALL is played in 5A and thus thier Championships are bigger. More scouts, more recruites, more media attention... far and away, the best in Texas top to bottom... 5A

bowiedawgs01
09-16-2009, 01:10 PM
Keyword(s) relative, and peers. No the top FOOTBALL is played in 5A and thus thier Championships are bigger. More scouts, more recruites, more media attention... far and away, the best in Texas top to bottom... 5A

What part of "y'all are arguing different things" do you not understand?

This all started when SLC said that the titles were equal. He didn't say Thorndale could beat Katy.

SLC
09-16-2009, 01:24 PM
Hay little dood, get on back over to the "small" board where you belong.

No little dude here...As far as the board, I'm on the right one..and it urks you to no end that I am a Carroll (5A) fan saying this, but alas, it needs to be said and I am a Texas High School Football fan first and foremost, therefore I dont have 5A blinders on, I know there is great football played at all levels in Texas, their are also great on each level and the greatest I've seen at any level is not even my own beloved Dragons or the Tigers from Katy...It is the Bobcats from Celina, their record and their trophy case provides unmatched proof of that..Once someone knocks them off their throne, then there can be discussions, until then, they have the title of king in this state...and again, please note, this is coming from a huge Carroll fan!


good coaching and good facilities are all over the state, and yes since many of the smaller schools are in one school towns and its the only game in town, they have a following.

Agreed and if it wasn't worth watching then they would find something else to do.


Something you dont have the depth of intelect to understand is this is an OVERALL projection... you can pick out good high paid couching from some small schools, same with facilities, but over all it dont stack up with 5A... never will

I can also do the same with the 5A level you like to tout so very much...Some 5A teams have crappy facilities as well as crappy teams, same as any level, you seem to think that isn't the case in 5A and only occurs on the lower levels, on that you are dead wrong!

Overall they do stack up, team for team, town for town, title for title, coach for coach they stack up across the board.



^^^

SLC
09-16-2009, 01:34 PM
Keyword(s) relative, and peers. No the top FOOTBALL is played in 5A and thus thier Championships are bigger. More scouts, more recruites, more media attention.

You will note that the bigger schools are mostly located in the major metro areas, thus they are maor easily scouted...that one is a no brainer...Recruits for the same reason I just stated..media..same thing much easier to cover when those big schools are located around news papers and tv stations, as opposed to the smaller rural areas that dont have those at all....thats a real no brainer!


I will point out though, it works pretty well most of the time...Small school teams have Colt McCoy as the QB for the #2 team in the nation and Adrian Peterson (from a small school) may be the best RB in the NFL.

Farmer told me yesterday or the day before that from Texas last year the recruit ratio was like 60/40 %a and small schools, so the small schools are holding their own considering they dont get the same staus by being in the rural areas that the big schools do by being in the major metro areas.

far and away, the best in Texas top to bottom... 5A

Not from top to bottom it isn't...far cry from it.


^^^

SLC
09-16-2009, 01:35 PM
What part of "y'all are arguing different things" do you not understand?

This all started when SLC said that the titles were equal. He didn't say Thorndale could beat Katy.


Thank you BD01...You get it, as well as 95% of the rest of the people.:)

Gator4ever
09-16-2009, 01:46 PM
Hello,


Our team went from 4A to 5A and there is a difference in my opinion. The lines are bigger and everything is bigger at positions etc...


We did good in 4A but we don't want to go back to that 4A district with LaMarque,Texas City,Friendswood,Manvel,Dawson...etc...


We would beat those teams in 4A but we prefer 5A because that old district is so hard to play week after week...lol. I can guarantee you that a 4A district will wear down through the district competition due to size and roster players. Bay City who could have beaten Yates a few weeks ago played us. I felt sorry for them as we arrived as they had maybe 35 players and they will probably make the playoffs in 4A.


Gator4ever

SLC93
09-16-2009, 01:52 PM
The more OOS football I watch, the more I'm convinced that a true national top 50 poll would consist of about 15 teams from Texas, 15 from Florida, 12 from California, and 8 from everywhere else. With regards to who is actually "the best" team in any given year, I'm not convinced Texas has the stranglehold on that every year like some here would like to think. I do believe that if the states all had similar transfer policies and Texas ever started doing the private school thing, Texas or Florida would have the "best" team 95% of the time.

Well played. I agree with this 100%. With all the samplings we get now via Fox or ESPN it is abundantly evident that there is significant separation between states like Texas, FL, Cali and the rest of the country.

SLC93
09-16-2009, 01:55 PM
On the " best of the rest" board, some of those folks say that 1A,2A,3A,4A are "equal" to 5A championships. I say those 240 or so teams in 5A are the best 240 teams in the nation as a whole, and the champions wear the crowns as THE BEST IN THE STATE, thus the nation

Equal because they are class champions. How do we measure success? Titles, period. A team wins it's title and it has earned a place at the podium. If you want to differentiate then it becomes, like this thread, a new debate.

RedRage00
09-16-2009, 01:56 PM
Thank you BD01...You get it, as well as 95% of the rest of the people.:)

I get it :)

SLC93
09-16-2009, 01:57 PM
SLC was a good 4A team in 2001. In 2002 they added enough students to jump them into a small 5A school and they won the next 31 games in a row.
Those extra 50 students(minus 25 girls) must have been chock full of great football players.
I dont think that there is that much difference in the top 4A and 5A.


Longview showed that earlier this year...

:cool:

SLC
09-16-2009, 01:59 PM
Well played. I agree with this 100%. With all the samplings we get now via Fox or ESPN it is abundantly evident that there is significant separation between states like Texas, FL, Cali and the rest of the country.


Yep...And while I have and will continue to be a strong supporter for Texas ball over most others, I even state and will continue to, that Texas is not Gods gift to high school football...Other areas have it good too, I believe us, along with Florida and California are the 3 best and any given year it fluctuates as to who is at the top.

SLC93
09-16-2009, 02:05 PM
Keyword(s) relative, and peers. No the top FOOTBALL is played in 5A and thus thier Championships are bigger. More scouts, more recruites, more media attention... far and away, the best in Texas top to bottom... 5A

You frequently mention things like this along with hc salary, facilities, fan base etc.. etc.. but, again, all these things are peripheral and do not reflect the quality of football being played. I read your argument and get the feeling you're a salesman's wet dream. If he can wow you with a baby bear, some confetti and a free girlie calendar you'll sign anything.

5A is more often than not the producer of the top team in this state. The quality of ball being played in this state, however, varies little class to class. It's all off the charts.

Titles are equal and all mean/represent the same thing.

SLC
09-16-2009, 02:08 PM
I get it :)


All right then...Welcome to the 95% club...You are now know as a 95%er.:D

bowiedawgs01
09-16-2009, 02:09 PM
I guess lower weight class boxers and wrestlers aren't real champions either.

That Oscar De La Hoya sucks!

SLC93
09-16-2009, 02:09 PM
Yep...And while I have and will continue to be a strong supporter for Texas ball over most others, I even state and will continue to, that Texas is not Gods gift to high school football...Other areas have it good too, I believe us, along with Florida and California are the 3 best and any given year it fluctuates as to who is at the top.

The next three aren't far off but there is a difference. Ohio is close. Georgia plays great ball. If so many of their schools weren't utterly impoverished, Lousianna would take a back seat to few. The little bog is dripping in talent.

SLC
09-16-2009, 02:12 PM
The next three aren't far off but there is a difference. Ohio is close. Georgia plays great ball. If so many of their schools weren't utterly impoverished, Lousianna would take a back seat to few. The little bog is dripping in talent.



Yep and I made a list awile back and those were my next 3...along with Alabama and Mississippi.

SLC
09-16-2009, 02:15 PM
I guess lower weight class boxers and wrestlers aren't real champions either.

That Oscar De La Hoya sucks!


Him and some guy's named Roy Jones Jr. and Floyd Mayweather and Julio Cesar Chavez and Sugar Ray Robinson.

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 02:16 PM
You frequently mention things like this along with hc salary, facilities, fan base etc.. etc.. but, again, all these things are peripheral and do not reflect the quality of football being played. I read your argument and get the ffeling you're a salesmans wet dream. If he can wow you with a baby bear, some confetti and a free girlie calendar you'll sign anything.

5A is more often than not the producer of the top team in this state. The quality of ball being played in this state, however, varies little class to class. It's all off the charts.

Titles are equal and all mean/represent the same thing.
After you finished with your SLC smart *** crap, your second paragraph makes some sense. From what I have seen the quality of play in 4A drops off quickly about half way down the enrollment chart... and the closer you get to the 3A cut off

SLC93
09-16-2009, 02:24 PM
After you finished with your SLC smart *** crap, your second paragraph makes some sense. From what I have seen the quality of play in 4A drops off quickly about half way down the enrollment chart... and the closer you get to the 3A cut off

Guess I wouldn't be Carroll if my arse weren't a smarty.:D All was saying is that many of the things you were pointing out are not exclusive to 5A and even fewer of them have a real impact on the product on the field.

SLC
09-16-2009, 02:31 PM
After you finished with your SLC smart *** crap, your second paragraph makes some sense. From what I have seen the quality of play in 4A drops off quickly about half way down the enrollment chart... and the closer you get to the 3A cut off



Not much difference than it does in 5A then to be honest...The bottom half of 5A, dependent on how good you are to begin with, is not really comperative to the top half and it cuts that way in all classes, but for example...Lake Dallas, Sulphur Springs and Waco Midway are all near the bottom in enrollment in 4A and are very very good teams and highly competitve every year...Its affected more by coaching than anything, as it is in all classes.

DragonFan0316
09-16-2009, 02:33 PM
Him and some guy's named Roy Jones Jr. and Floyd Mayweather and Julio Cesar Chavez and Sugar Ray Robinson.

Don't forget Sugar Ray Leonard, Tommy Hearns and Marvelous Marvin Hagler.

Firebird
09-16-2009, 02:48 PM
I will put forth the argument that it is actually more difficult to put together a year in-year out powerhouse dynasty in the lower ranks than it is in the upper ranks.

Why? Because with a larger pool of talent to chose from, the likelihood that a coach will be able to install a system that is basically plug and play is going to be much higher. When you have thousands of kids in the school, your chances of finding a QB or RB that is servicable enough to run your offense or play in your defense goes up. The much ballyhooed depth at the 5A level means that your average team is both stronger and is not as affected as badly by graduation of a few studs, or the injury bug, etc.

On the other hand, the reality of fat-lean years is much more pronounced at smaller (especially sub-4A) schools. That's why you'll see certain classes of athletes at a 3A or 2A school light the world on fire and maybe go back to back, three peat.....but building a year in year out dynasty at these levels is tougher. It takes more creative coaching, greater buy in from the team and fan, and a talent for putting together mismatched jigsaw pieces to build a power like Celina.

Fire away, now.

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 03:11 PM
I will put forth the argument that it is actually more difficult to put together a year in-year out powerhouse dynasty in the lower ranks than it is in the upper ranks.

Why? Because with a larger pool of talent to chose from, the likelihood that a coach will be able to install a system that is basically plug and play is going to be much higher. When you have thousands of kids in the school, your chances of finding a QB or RB that is servicable enough to run your offense or play in your defense goes up. The much ballyhooed depth at the 5A level means that your average team is both stronger and is not as affected as badly by graduation of a few studs, or the injury bug, etc.

On the other hand, the reality of fat-lean years is much more pronounced at smaller (especially sub-4A) schools. That's why you'll see certain classes of athletes at a 3A or 2A school light the world on fire and maybe go back to back, three peat.....but building a year in year out dynasty at these levels is tougher. It takes more creative coaching, greater buy in from the team and fan, and a talent for putting together mismatched jigsaw pieces to build a power like Celina.

Fire away, now.
I agree... I think:rolleyes:

twcpfan1
09-16-2009, 03:20 PM
When we say best in the country, do we mean our best can beat their best or do we mean we have more good teams here than anywhere else?

Best of the best I've seen this year is St Thomas Aquinas. But chances are Texas and California probably have more good teams obviously because of the overwhelming numbers compared to Florida, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania etc.

Basically we have very good athletes here. We have a lot of kids. As does California. So of course, a bunch of them are bound to be good. I can't figure out why we keep bragging about it though. Maybe we really don't believe it ourselves. Given all the spread offenses that dominate the top of the HS football food chain here, I guess I can see why. It's a waste of talent.

SLC
09-16-2009, 03:26 PM
When we say best in the country, do we mean our best can beat their best or do we mean we have more good teams here than anywhere else?

Best of the best I've seen this year is St Thomas Aquinas. But chances are Texas and California probably have more good teams obviously because of the overwhelming numbers compared to Florida, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania etc.

Basically we have very good athletes here. We have a lot of kids. As does California. So of course, a bunch of them are bound to be good. I can't figure out why we keep bragging about it though. Maybe we really don't believe it ourselves. Given all the spread offenses that dominate the top of the HS football food chain here, I guess I can see why. It's a waste of talent.


Look around...Those spread offenses dominate the ranks all across the country, it's not just a Texas thing.

bowiedawgs01
09-16-2009, 03:40 PM
Given all the spread offenses that dominate the top of the HS football food chain here, I guess I can see why. It's a waste of talent.

Wtf? A waste of talent would be a good passer being forced to run the option 95% of the game.

Don't hate on the spread. It's a progression in offense. And there are no signs that this is a cycle that will go back to run-oriented offenses in the future. It's been a steady trend toward more passing.

I appreciate a well-run smashmouth offense as well. But don't try to claim the spread is a waste of talent. Most HS and college teams use the spread.

SLC
09-16-2009, 03:45 PM
Wtf? A waste of talent would be a good passer being forced to run the option 95% of the game.

Don't hate on the spread. It's a progression in offense. And there are no signs that this is a cycle that will go back to run-oriented offenses in the future. It's been a steady trend toward more passing.

I appreciate a well-run smashmouth offense as well. But don't try to claim the spread is a waste of talent. Most HS and college teams use the spread.



Good stuff, I agree.


The runner still gets to run, but now the passer gets to pass as well and the reciever will be blockers sometimes, but now they can actually catch some passes.

twcpfan1
09-16-2009, 03:45 PM
Wtf? A waste of talent would be a good passer being forced to run the option 95% of the game.

Don't hate on the spread. It's a progression in offense. And there are no signs that this is a cycle that will go back to run-oriented offenses in the future. It's been a steady trend toward more passing.

I appreciate a well-run smashmouth offense as well. But don't try to claim the spread is a waste of talent. Most HS and college teams use the spread.

And yet, year in year out, USC is consistently near the top if not at the top of College Football with their WC offense. Pretty remarkable when you consider the odds. Amazing to me that more teams do not go to it. Both in College and HS.

And yeah yeah yeah. USC's recruiting class blah blah.

twcpfan1
09-16-2009, 03:54 PM
And yet, year in year out, USC is consistently near the top if not at the top of College Football with their WC offense. Pretty remarkable when you consider the odds. Amazing to me that more teams do not go to it. Both in College and HS.

And yeah yeah yeah. USC's recruiting class blah blah.

The spread is fine. It's the inability to change things up, particularly in red zone situations that sometimes gets painful to watch.

Firebird
09-16-2009, 04:01 PM
CavDad:

I would say that you are going to see more and more of the top HS teams, especially those that are "programs" or factories go towards the spread offense. The spread is a talent equalizing offense, and a system that can negate talent and matchup disadvantages through ball distribution and confusion. It's a natural fit for the high school level, where coaching and drill play far more of a role than talent and where coaches have to live and die with the players they are stuck with, not that they can purchase or recruit. It's a fit that was recognized as far back as the Masonic Home "Mighty Mites" in Depression era Texas.

You don't need bruising or blindingly quick running backs, or a quarterback with a cannon for an arm, or massive offensive linemen or fleet footed wide recievers to run the spread effectively. Well drilled, well coached players that are solid fundamentally (blocking schemes, catching, reads, etc) can run it effectively, even against superior defensive talent. They just keep chipping away at you with short passing routes across the field, slashing runs through wide gaps, etc. The defense is by nature a reactive unit, a step behind the offensive side of the ball, and by forcing them to cover sideline to sideline and end zone to end zone on the high school level, a less physically talented offense can negate some of the speed and size advantages of a better defense by forcing them to be even MORE reactive instead of proactive. I

t's much harder to coach up a high school defense to effectively defend the spread than it is to coach up a high school offense to effectively run the spread. The basic principle behind the spread is no different than that behind the wishbone or triple option-- confuse the defense, distribute the ball, and force the defenders to cover as many people as possible on the field. The main difference now is that you are forcing the defense not only to cover possible ball carriers and recievers, but every inch of space on the field as well.

So I think the proliferation of the spread at the HS level across the country will continue, even with teams that have great talent. It's just smart football coaching. But teams that have the ability to go out and get physical specimens across the board are always going to want to have at least the ability to go to a more traditional look and overwhelm the other side with talent. Get vertical in the passing game and steamroll them with a great OL and RB. But high school programs that don't recruit (most all, nationwide) or go for free agency are always going to gravitate towards systems that rely more on fundamentals, confusion, and schemes than on physical ability.

Firebird
09-16-2009, 04:04 PM
The spread is fine. It's the inability to change things up, particularly in red zone situations that sometimes gets painful to watch.

This is a real problem with the spread. As I mention above, the key to the spread's effectiveness is that it forces defenders to cover the maximum amount of space on the field, because every inch of turf is a possible passing lane or running lane. But as the field shrinks (ie, the red zone), the defense's job by necessity gets easier. And the offense's job harder-- all that space they usually have to work with is now crowded. A great red zone team will always want to be able to get a helmet in the chest of each defender and move the LOS the old fashioned way.

bowiedawgs01
09-16-2009, 04:25 PM
And yet, year in year out, USC is consistently near the top if not at the top of College Football with their WC offense. Pretty remarkable when you consider the odds. Amazing to me that more teams do not go to it. Both in College and HS.

And yeah yeah yeah. USC's recruiting class blah blah.

There are just as many, if not more, spread offenses at the top of the polls in college football.

grayowl60
09-16-2009, 10:21 PM
I should have posted a poll on this thread. So I will do that now.

The Field Hogger
09-16-2009, 11:15 PM
to determain the true state champion in texas they should just complete the brackets by letting all 10 state champions play on out until it comes down to only one state champion.

twcpfan1
09-18-2009, 07:31 AM
CavDad:

I would say that you are going to see more and more of the top HS teams, especially those that are "programs" or factories go towards the spread offense. The spread is a talent equalizing offense, and a system that can negate talent and matchup disadvantages through ball distribution and confusion. It's a natural fit for the high school level, where coaching and drill play far more of a role than talent and where coaches have to live and die with the players they are stuck with, not that they can purchase or recruit. It's a fit that was recognized as far back as the Masonic Home "Mighty Mites" in Depression era Texas.

You don't need bruising or blindingly quick running backs, or a quarterback with a cannon for an arm, or massive offensive linemen or fleet footed wide recievers to run the spread effectively. Well drilled, well coached players that are solid fundamentally (blocking schemes, catching, reads, etc) can run it effectively, even against superior defensive talent. They just keep chipping away at you with short passing routes across the field, slashing runs through wide gaps, etc. The defense is by nature a reactive unit, a step behind the offensive side of the ball, and by forcing them to cover sideline to sideline and end zone to end zone on the high school level, a less physically talented offense can negate some of the speed and size advantages of a better defense by forcing them to be even MORE reactive instead of proactive. I

t's much harder to coach up a high school defense to effectively defend the spread than it is to coach up a high school offense to effectively run the spread. The basic principle behind the spread is no different than that behind the wishbone or triple option-- confuse the defense, distribute the ball, and force the defenders to cover as many people as possible on the field. The main difference now is that you are forcing the defense not only to cover possible ball carriers and recievers, but every inch of space on the field as well.

So I think the proliferation of the spread at the HS level across the country will continue, even with teams that have great talent. It's just smart football coaching. But teams that have the ability to go out and get physical specimens across the board are always going to want to have at least the ability to go to a more traditional look and overwhelm the other side with talent. Get vertical in the passing game and steamroll them with a great OL and RB. But high school programs that don't recruit (most all, nationwide) or go for free agency are always going to gravitate towards systems that rely more on fundamentals, confusion, and schemes than on physical ability.

FB, Thanks for the insight. I guess coaching and teaching this game is a lot more complicated than I thought. Complicated in the sense that it seems to be a real challenge to have a diverse enough offense to change things up from the spread formation to a more traditional WC style and a little play action if the situation and field position calls for it. I guess I can understand it at the less than elite HS level. Although Round Rock in 2006 and the ND Cali team we saw just recently indicated that it can be taught. I don't quite get it at the elite level and certainly not at the level of Texas and OU. Quite frankly that goal line sequence against BYU 2 weeks ago - well, I expected more from a team like OU. It was ugly.

IMO, it comes down to putting most of the emphasis on winning as opposed to teaching kids to play the game better. But coaches do this for a living and I can certainly understand where they're coming from.

The Wood
09-18-2009, 01:14 PM
When we say best in the country, do we mean our best can beat their best or do we mean we have more good teams here than anywhere else?

Best of the best I've seen this year is St Thomas Aquinas. But chances are Texas and California probably have more good teams obviously because of the overwhelming numbers compared to Florida, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania etc.

Basically we have very good athletes here. We have a lot of kids. As does California. So of course, a bunch of them are bound to be good. I can't figure out why we keep bragging about it though. Maybe we really don't believe it ourselves. Given all the spread offenses that dominate the top of the HS football food chain here, I guess I can see why. It's a waste of talent.

huh?

So to not waste talent you must not run the spread?

Texans misuse talent...is that what you said?

And if everyone ran the ball every play they would then, and only then, be getting the most of their talent?

Or is it only if you pass it out of a pro set you use your talent appropriately? Or as close to perfectly as YOU want it?

I believe we have a paradox in your comments if you say the spread is at the top of the food chain (wins?) and a waste. Would those teams at the top be better and win more if they dropped the spread and played conventionally, i.e. non-spread? Doubt it.

The Wood
09-18-2009, 01:20 PM
Fellas...it takes more than a can of whoopazz to win football games week in and week out....don't forget the brain part of it.

If you spread the field to create mismatches or lanes or space...that's part of the game. If a superior defensive squad is faced with those challenges and gets beat, they may have been individually superior athletes...but they were not the best football players...at least when they got beat.

twcpfan1
09-18-2009, 02:06 PM
huh?

So to not waste talent you must not run the spread?

Texans misuse talent...is that what you said?

And if everyone ran the ball every play they would then, and only then, be getting the most of their talent?

Or is it only if you pass it out of a pro set you use your talent appropriately? Or as close to perfectly as YOU want it?

I believe we have a paradox in your comments if you say the spread is at the top of the food chain (wins?) and a waste. Would those teams at the top be better and win more if they dropped the spread and played conventionally, i.e. non-spread? Doubt it.

No paradox. Of course you're going to see a spread team win it all. It's all TX teams ever run now. Also I believe my original statement was made in reference to how we would match up against the elite from other states like STA out of Florida. Not each other.

I'm not saying change the offense. All I'm asking is why aren't most teams able to vary out of it when a game situation or field position clearly calls for it. Same applies to a lot of predominantly running teams. A couple of examples jump out. Wylie in the State final game had clearly no plan b to go to. The offense looked lost that whole game. You were at the Lufkin game last year. Do you think it would have been wise to bring in Eric Wolfe and a Fullback and have Andy McLoud set up from under center at some point during that game to maybe try and put together a time consuming drive to get the D some much needed rest? On the flipside, College Park last year could have aired it out a little bit more , particularly at 3rd and long, in some of those games and set up from the shotgun formation occasionally if for no other reason, to not get Parsons beaten up too much. I'm not a coach so I do not know how difficult or feasible it is to have a multi dimensional offense at the High School level. So essentially what we have is that majority of Texas teams will run the spread hoping that you do not run into a team with the athletes to stop you. Because if they do, evidently nobody has the ability to adjust to it.

toonman
09-18-2009, 04:18 PM
The original question posed "year in and year out the BEST FOOTBALL in this state and the nation is played in 5A, The state champions are the Kings of Texas HS football. So there are 2 issues rolled into one. Is Texas the best in the nation and is 5A the best in Texas.

I certainly think the best high school football experience is to be found in Texas, if look at the facilities of most Texas high schools and in 5A the facilities exceed those of the lower classifications. However you only need to travel to other states and see some of the poor quality stadiums that California high schools play for example and the paltry crowds they have on a Friday night. In terms of a Friday Night Lights experience, Texas is the King of High School Football.

However Texas cannot claim year in and year out to have the best High School Football Team in the Nation, although I am sure this has happened. Year in and year out there are great teams in Florida, Georgia and California to name but a few.

With regard to classification, by and large the best teams will be in 5A, but that is not to say that a great 4A state champion could not beat the 5A champion it is possible but unlikely. It is also highly improbable that a 3A champion could beat a 5A champion, due to sheer weight of player numbers and a greater talent pool. Not many 5A players play both ways, but a lot of 3A players do.

For Friday Night Lights experience Texas is the King of High School Football.

cougmantx
09-18-2009, 04:24 PM
The original question posed "year in and year out the BEST FOOTBALL in this state and the nation is played in 5A, The state champions are the Kings of Texas HS football. So there are 2 issues rolled into one. Is Texas the best in the nation and is 5A the best in Texas.

I certainly think the best high school football experience is to be found in Texas, if look at the facilities of most Texas high schools and in 5A the facilities exceed those of the lower classifications. However you only need to travel to other states and see some of the poor quality stadiums that California high schools play for example and the paltry crowds they have on a Friday night. In terms of a Friday Night Lights experience, Texas is the King of High School Football.

However Texas cannot claim year in and year out to have the best High School Football Team in the Nation, although I am sure this has happened. Year in and year out there are great teams in Florida, Georgia and California to name but a few.

With regard to classification, by and large the best teams will be in 5A, but that is not to say that a great 4A state champion could not beat the 5A champion it is possible but unlikely. It is also highly improbable that a 3A champion could beat a 5A champion, due to sheer weight of player numbers and a greater talent pool. Not many 5A players play both ways, but a lot of 3A players do.

For Friday Night Lights experience Texas is the King of High School Football.

As the old saying goes, "they are ate up with it..."

Theres just not much better things to do on Friday or Saturday night than watch a couple of Texas high school football teams slug it out.

I think most years we could compete with anyone in the nation, even those champs from Florida that we all know recruit...:eek: :rolleyes:

KTFURB
09-19-2009, 12:24 AM
Him and some guy's named Roy Jones Jr. and Floyd Mayweather and Julio Cesar Chavez and Sugar Ray Robinson.

By that logic Mayweather etal could compete with the likes of Ali, Holmes and Louis. While the lighter weights are great fighters/champions, a 160 lb. guy would be badly dominated by the 220 lb. guy. While I do believe that good 4A teams can compete with 5A teams on a game by game basis, the weekly grind of playing bigger and stronger teams with more depth would take a toll on the smaller schools. Could Celina beat some 5A shools. No doubt! There are some BAD 5A teams. Could they compete on a consistent basis in a typical 5A district? Of course not. Their sheer lack of numbers and depth put them at a distinct disadvantage. Even if they didn't have any players going both ways, they couldn't put enough quality players at each position to be competetive. The Katy - Bellevue game was a perfect example. Bellevue is a quality team/program. But, with 6 guys going both ways, by the 2nd quarter they were gassed. Katy was too big, too strong and too deep.

KTFURB
09-19-2009, 12:29 AM
Him and some guy's named Roy Jones Jr. and Floyd Mayweather and Julio Cesar Chavez and Sugar Ray Robinson.

By that logic Mayweather etal could compete with the likes of Ali, Holmes and Louis. While the lighter weights are great fighters/champions, a 160 lb. guy would be badly dominated by the 220 lb. guy. While I do believe that good 4A teams can compete with 5A teams on a game by game basis, the weekly grind of playing bigger and stronger teams with more depth would take a toll on the smaller schools. Could Celina beat some 5A shools. No doubt! There are some BAD 5A teams. Could they compete on a consistent basis in a typical 5A district? Of course not. Their sheer lack of numbers and depth put them at a distinct disadvantage. Even if they didn't have any players going both ways, they couldn't put enough quality players at each position to be competetive. The Katy - Bellevue game was a perfect example. Bellevue is a quality team/program. But, with 6 guys going both ways, by the 2nd quarter they were gassed. Katy was too big, too strong and too deep.

SLC
09-19-2009, 03:10 AM
By that logic Mayweather etal could compete with the likes of Ali, Holmes and Louis. While the lighter weights are great fighters/champions, a 160 lb. guy would be badly dominated by the 220 lb. guy. While I do believe that good 4A teams can compete with 5A teams on a game by game basis, the weekly grind of playing bigger and stronger teams with more depth would take a toll on the smaller schools. Could Celina beat some 5A shools. No doubt! There are some BAD 5A teams. Could they compete on a consistent basis in a typical 5A district? Of course not. Their sheer lack of numbers and depth put them at a distinct disadvantage. Even if they didn't have any players going both ways, they couldn't put enough quality players at each position to be competetive. The Katy - Bellevue game was a perfect example. Bellevue is a quality team/program. But, with 6 guys going both ways, by the 2nd quarter they were gassed. Katy was too big, too strong and too deep.


No doubt at all that about 99% of the time the 5A team will win those games...We all agree on that. In this particular case we are arguing that every champion is equal, meaning the toughest strongest teams aren't just a 5A situation, when looked at relative to their sizes in each classification, they are all equally strong because they all face equal competiton at each level.

Firebird
09-19-2009, 01:44 PM
FB, Thanks for the insight. I guess coaching and teaching this game is a lot more complicated than I thought. Complicated in the sense that it seems to be a real challenge to have a diverse enough offense to change things up from the spread formation to a more traditional WC style and a little play action if the situation and field position calls for it. I guess I can understand it at the less than elite HS level. Although Round Rock in 2006 and the ND Cali team we saw just recently indicated that it can be taught. I don't quite get it at the elite level and certainly not at the level of Texas and OU. Quite frankly that goal line sequence against BYU 2 weeks ago - well, I expected more from a team like OU. It was ugly.

IMO, it comes down to putting most of the emphasis on winning as opposed to teaching kids to play the game better. But coaches do this for a living and I can certainly understand where they're coming from.

twcp, I view this a bit differently, hear me out. The VAST majority of high school players-- even on championship caliber, 5A football teams-- will play their last down of organized football on the last play of their senior season. If you're a coach, you have to remember that this IS the highest level of play that most of the kids you are charged with will ever see. Keeping that in mind, I do think that it's reasonable and appropriate for a HS coach to view winning football games as a higher goal than preparation for the next level. Bottom line is that most of these kids are doing it because it's fun, and it's much more fun to win than lose. For HS coaches, I think the priorities should be:

1. Teaching and serving as an example of the virtues of fair play, hard work, discipline, sportsmanship, competition. Ie, "life lessons."
2. Facilitating your team's performance at the highest possible level (ie, helping them win as many games as they can).
3. Helping kids get scholarships/prepared for the next level.

The Wood
09-20-2009, 09:58 AM
twcp, I view this a bit differently, hear me out. The VAST majority of high school players-- even on championship caliber, 5A football teams-- will play their last down of organized football on the last play of their senior season. If you're a coach, you have to remember that this IS the highest level of play that most of the kids you are charged with will ever see. Keeping that in mind, I do think that it's reasonable and appropriate for a HS coach to view winning football games as a higher goal than preparation for the next level. Bottom line is that most of these kids are doing it because it's fun, and it's much more fun to win than lose. For HS coaches, I think the priorities should be:

1. Teaching and serving as an example of the virtues of fair play, hard work, discipline, sportsmanship, competition. Ie, "life lessons."
2. Facilitating your team's performance at the highest possible level (ie, helping them win as many games as they can).
3. Helping kids get scholarships/prepared for the next level.
I'm good with all of those...in their orders.