LilBradfords First Ever 5A Top 10

[LILBradford]

I think it's good to be a homie. Hopefully, see you soon.
I can't believe you don't have NS & Pearland in there somewhere. It's not as if they're coming into 2012 without returning talent. I'd take odds on these two on any given weekend.

I wasnt thinking to clearly when i put this together. Economics professor was just pissing me off. I would put North Shore right at the top 10 and not any higher. Yes they are returning alot of players but they still have to come together. I hope to get into this enough and be able to do a top 10 week after week during the season.

[1984Lobo]

12 please. 12. Even better would be to subtract 7 from 5 and put us at -2.

Get us out of any top 10!

I agree with you 07..... but it is what it is........All the teams in this top 10 list have the potential to win it all.....WE Can take the ranking as a compliment or just look at it like everybody else is looking at it.....Fact ...The LOBOS can and will get in your ....and not many want to face us....Even the so called best and most respected teams will at least privately CRINGE at having to play The LOBOS.....

[Fleeman93]

I'm not gonna' take the time to copy/paste your thoughts because they're simply ridiculous. You've yet to answer what makes a better defense. You keep going on back statboy.

I would say the very basic definition of the best defense in football would be the fewest points allowed. Seeing that limiting the number of points a team scores gives your team the best chance to win, I don't see this as an unrealistic standard. I suppose you could use something like yards but a team could give up far more yards and still win so it doesn't really apply. Points allowed is the only thing that makes sense. How's that?

[Fleeman93]

I'm not gonna' take the time to copy/paste your thoughts because they're simply ridiculous. You've yet to answer what makes a better defense. You keep going on back statboy.

Please do copy and paste, and then state what is ridiculous about my opinions. I don't mind you saying that my opinions are ridiculous but at least man up and say which ones are ridiculous and why.

[2000NSMustang!!!]

I wasnt thinking to clearly when i put this together. Economics professor was just pissing me off. I would put North Shore right at the top 10 and not any higher. Yes they are returning alot of players but they still have to come together. I hope to get into this enough and be able to do a top 10 week after week during the season.

I think you have the rankings just right, personally I dont feel like NS is a top 10 team in the state, not to start the season, now with our schedule we have we will see if we can crack the top 10 during the season, but I would rank us as high as 15th and as low as 20th to start the season.

[E-Vol-ution]

I would say the very basic definition of the best defense in football would be the fewest points allowed. Seeing that limiting the number of points a team scores gives your team the best chance to win, I don't see this as an unrealistic standard. I suppose you could use something like yards but a team could give up far more yards and still win so it doesn't really apply. Points allowed is the only thing that makes sense. How's that?

This can be tricky if a team plays a large amount of teams that aren't very good or have low scoring offenses.

[Fleeman93]

This can be tricky if a team plays a large amount of teams that aren't very good or have low scoring offenses.

What if you use criteria like common opponents?

[Shoot2thrill]

This can be tricky if a team plays a large amount of teams that aren't very good or have low scoring offenses.

Which was the case with Abilene in '09 and we caught a lot of grief over that during the regular season. Post season turned out alright though.

[Dawg82]

I would say the very basic definition of the best defense in football would be the fewest points allowed. Seeing that limiting the number of points a team scores gives your team the best chance to win, I don't see this as an unrealistic standard. I suppose you could use something like yards but a team could give up far more yards and still win so it doesn't really apply. Points allowed is the only thing that makes sense. How's that?

Flee--
When you respond in a quote like you did, it's too much of a pain to respond. To try to simplify my response:
I disagree with your "basic definition of the best defense." You'd be more correct if you stated,"The best defense--statistically--is the one that gives up the fewest points when calculated as points allowed minus defensive scores for a total magnitude." This would better provide an insight into the style of D played and the impact on the game without getting into all the minutia.

As far as the comparative scores statements you make, and that--on that day the TEAM was better--you're in a circular A, B, C argument. You have argued many, many times the falsity of this argument.

Your argument about a team having a fantastic offense to help the D is a joke for LP in 2011 and you know it. What LP did in 2011 is a rarity for a defense. LP's offense/kicking game was actually the best D we had. They gave the D a chance to rest a little while where the D could score again.

Does this help clarify?

[Fleeman93]

Flee--
When you respond in a quote like you did, it's too much of a pain to respond. To try to simplify my response:
I disagree with your "basic definition of the best defense." You'd be more correct if you stated,"The best defense--statistically--is the one that gives up the fewest points when calculated as points allowed minus defensive scores for a total magnitude." This would better provide an insight into the style of D played and the impact on the game without getting into all the minutia.

As far as the comparative scores statements you make, and that--on that day the TEAM was better--you're in a circular A, B, C argument. You have argued many, many times the falsity of this argument.

Your argument about a team having a fantastic offense to help the D is a joke for LP in 2011 and you know it. What LP did in 2011 is a rarity for a defense. LP's offense/kicking game was actually the best D we had. They gave the D a chance to rest a little while where the D could score again.

Does this help clarify?

So you are saying that to determine the best defense we need to look at points given up along with defensive scoring. I see why you are doing this because La Porte had a good scoring defense this year but the problem with this is that no schools or papers consistently track scoring defense. In other words if I wanted to compare La Porte's scoring defense with SLC's scoring defense it would be very difficult to impossible to do. For example tell me how many fewer points Katy's defense scored than La Porte's defense.

On the circular A, B, C, argument are you saying that looking at common opponents is less effective than the eyeball test? One of us is using common opponents with stats and the other is using the old "this team looked better to me" argument. I'm not saying team A beats team b and therefor would beat team C. I'm saying that if you look at total points allowed by all common opponents you will have the very best indicator of which team had the best defense.

What I meant about a team having a great offense was that a team could move the ball up and down the field all day long, collecting 1,000 yards of offense, but if they don't score then it is all for not. How few of points a defense allows is the best indicator of how good that defense is.



What this boils down to is that I think Katy and North Shore's defenses were statistically better than La Porte's and you think La Porte's defense looked better than Katy or North Shore's defenses. Good luck with that.

[Dawg82]

What this boils down to is that I think Katy and North Shore's defenses were statistically better than La Porte's and you think La Porte's defense looked better than Katy or North Shore's defenses. Good luck with that.

Actually, no. What it boils down to is that--statistically--Katy and NS's offenses were far superior to LP's. Yet, LP beat both teams with D and plays off of D. You're correct on me thinking LP's D looked better than both. Especially at 00:00 in the 4th.

(I would like to see defensive scores tracked more. It would provide a better picture IMO. It would also give credit to players that can be overlooked.)

[Fleeman93]

Actually, no. What it boils down to is that--statistically--Katy and NS's offenses were far superior to LP's. Yet, LP beat both teams with D and plays off of D. You're correct on me thinking LP's D looked better than both. Especially at 00:00 in the 4th.

(I would like to see defensive scores tracked more. It would provide a better picture IMO. It would also give credit to players that can be overlooked.)

Again you are attributing wins to a defense being better and we both know defense is only a portion of why a team wins a game. Let me ask you this, what do you thing were the 5 biggest factors in La Porte beating Katy.


I would love to see better stat tracking all together but it is what it is.

[Dawg82]

Again you are attributing wins to a defense being better and we both know defense is only a portion of why a team wins a game. Let me ask you this, what do you thing were the 5 biggest factors in La Porte beating Katy.


I would love to see better stat tracking all together but it is what it is.

In no particular order:
Katy overrated (not a slam) due to tradition of excellence--mindset.
LP very solid squad with experience of prior tough games in 21-5A--mindset.
Coaching in 2011 specific game.
Weather
Special Teams play.

***Generic answers. (I guess I should add that it's not like LP & Katy are unfamiliar with each other...)

[Fleeman93]

In no particular order:
Katy overrated (not a slam) due to tradition of excellence--mindset.

- Katy averaged 42.6 points per game while giving up an average of 7.5 points per game. Beat the second best projected team in the R3D2 playoffs by 14 points. I have been watching Katy football for a long time and the only reason I can see that some might have looked at Katy as overrated was because they lost to a decent La Porte team that had a solid defense and horrible offense. Upsets do happen and this was a perfect example.

LP very solid squad with experience of prior tough games in 21-5A--mindset.

Decent football team at best. The offense was horrible and the defense carried the team. If experience is going to play a part then it will be this year. La Porte was far too young to play the experience card in 2011. 21-5A was a good district but nothing great (certainly better than 195A). North Shore was young with a banged up QB all year. La Porte had a horrible offense and a defense that carried them. PAM was loaded with athletes but played a horribly undisciplined brand of football. The rest of the district was below average.

Coaching in 2011 specific game.

This is the biggest factor in the game coupled with the weather. Katy trying to force the pass 50% of the time in that wind was a bad bad idea in my opinion. If Katy runs the ball even 75% of the time they win the game. In the Katy staff's defense I would guess that they didn't think Anderson could take that much punishment from a physical La Porte defense after the Cy Woods game. To me it looked like the La Porte staff's mentality was we are going to run the ball 3 times, punt, play defense, and if we win then we win and if we lose then we lose.

Weather

Pretty big factor based on how Katy approached the game. In 9 of the 13 games La Porte played (excluding the Katy game) the opposing team scored more points than Katy's offense did yet Katy had a much much much better offense than any of those teams. Not real hard to explain.

Special Teams play.

Punting was the biggest factor and La Porte only averaged 1.78 yards per more than Katy. I would certainly give the edge to La Porte on special teams in that game but it wasn't a huge margin like some would suggest.

***Generic answers. (I guess I should add that it's not like LP & Katy are unfamiliar with each other...)

Real surprised you didn't mention La Porte being +3 in turnovers in a 2 point playoff game. Most will say turnovers in the playoffs will make or break a team.

[Dawg82]

Real surprised you didn't mention La Porte being +3 in turnovers in a 2 point playoff game. Most will say turnovers in the playoffs will make or break a team.

Sorry. Thought that was a given. 1 was a turnover, the other 2 were take-aways. You asked for 5. T/O's were a given and accepted.

I felt it more important to point out the attitudes of the teams. My belief is that Katy took LP for granted based on 2 previous games in the prior 3 years and the hype they'd received in 2011. LP took it as motivation.

LP didn't overlook Katy. Katy overlooked LP. (IMHO.)

Quit quoting in the body of the text. All you're doing is pointing out to me that you have to have the last word since I've already mentioned I'm not taking the time to parcel your crap.

[Fleeman93]

Sorry. Thought that was a given. 1 was a turnover, the other 2 were take-aways. You asked for 5. T/O's were a given and accepted.

I felt it more important to point out the attitudes of the teams. My belief is that Katy took LP for granted based on 2 previous games in the prior 3 years and the hype they'd received in 2011. LP took it as motivation.

LP didn't overlook Katy. Katy overlooked LP. (IMHO.)

Quit quoting in the body of the text. All you're doing is pointing out to me that you have to have the last word since I've already mentioned I'm not taking the time to parcel your crap.

I didn't say the 5 biggest factors in La Porte beating Katy minus the givens. Nothing is a given in high school football.

Yeah Katy is in the business of overlooking teams.

Me quoting in the body of the text has nothing to do with getting the last word and more to do with it being the absolute best way to address each of your points. So now not only are my opinions ridiculous but now they are crap yet you haven't given anything to justify La Porte having a better defense than Katy other than the "eyeball test."

[Dawg82]

I didn't say the 5 biggest factors in La Porte beating Katy minus the givens. Nothing is a given in high school football.

Yeah Katy is in the business of overlooking teams.

Me quoting in the body of the text has nothing to do with getting the last word and more to do with it being the absolute best way to address each of your points. So now not only are my opinions ridiculous but now they are crap yet you haven't given anything to justify La Porte having a better defense than Katy other than the "eyeball test."

Pardon me? I've actually pointed out that Katy and NS had a much better offense--statistically--than LP. Your thoughts. I've pointed out that giving up less points isn't the whole story about how good a defense is. You've continued to point out that--in 2011--LP was far less superior in all categories--statistically speaking that you could track--to many other teams.

I see the scoreboard. I didn't claim the eyeball test.

Stats are for losers to justisfy their position. LP didn't use stats to justisfy losing to PAM in R3 Finals rematch. We said they kicked our butt in the rematch. We said it was the first time in history of the schools we'd ever lost to them. We congratulated them. Get over yourself.

[KT2000]

I agree with you 07..... but it is what it is........All the teams in this top 10 list have the potential to win it all.....WE Can take the ranking as a compliment or just look at it like everybody else is looking at it.....Fact ...The LOBOS can and will get in your ....and not many want to face us....Even the so called best and most respected teams will at least privately CRINGE at having to play The LOBOS.....

If the Lobos get more size in the program to go with the skill guys, I wouldn't want any part of that recipe.

[Fleeman93]

Pardon me? I've actually pointed out that Katy and NS had a much better offense--statistically--than LP. Your thoughts. I've pointed out that giving up less points isn't the whole story about how good a defense is. You've continued to point out that--in 2011--LP was far less superior in all categories--statistically speaking that you could track--to many other teams.

I would say Katy had a much better offense than LP. I would say North Shore probably had an offense on par with LP for most of the season. Giving up less points certainly doesn't tell the whole story but it is the most important factor by far. Not once did I say that LP was less superior in any category but points allowed with the reason being that it is very difficult to find other defensive stats. Again, points allowed is the very most important statistic when it comes to determining how good or not a defense is.

I see the scoreboard. I didn't claim the eyeball test.

Again, we aren't debating which TEAM was better on that day as I have already agreed that LP won the game. Simply debating which defense was better.

Stats are for losers to justisfy their position. LP didn't use stats to justisfy losing to PAM in R3 Finals rematch. We said they kicked our butt in the rematch. We said it was the first time in history of the schools we'd ever lost to them. We congratulated them. Get over yourself.

So your opinion is that stats are for losers. So why does every sport played keep stats if all it does is indicate who the losers are? There was no way anything could justify how bad PAM made LP look in that game but then again we aren't debating the whole team but rather just the defenses. Did you really have to say it was the first time PAM ever beat LP? So you congratulated PAM when they beat you LP, funny because I did the same thing to LP when they beat Katy. Why should I get over myself when all I am doing is having a friendly debate about which team had the better defense? What is to get over? Getting frustrated? The "eyeball test" says yes.

So which is a better indicator of a better unit in any sport, stats or the eyeball test?

[LPBulldogBlog]

The scoreboard is all that matters.

Arguing about something that has already been decided on the field is moot. I know the offseason isn't exciting.

La Porte was more than "decent at best".