Leaderboard

I don't see it that way. Your statement is that p/p advantage pretty much dissipates after 3A. The folks that pointed out the flaw in your reasoning weren't, IMO, addressing the flaw with your reasoning by claiming that p/p enjoys an advantage at all classes, but that your premise seems not to be definitive in its own right in that there were three programs that did well in that 4A grouping.

So I conducted an interesting experiment here. My hypothesis appears to be correct. The construct is that the P/P faithful will argue tooth and nail that enrollment is the only measure needed to fairly slot schools into classification for HS football. They have lamented time after time here that there aren't any P/P advantages in high school football. Then, interestingly, when presented with the prospect that once a public get's big enough the advantages dissipate, they will pivot and argue that P/Ps always have an advantage at any level of HS football. There is an interesting dichotomy here, not sure if it is more Freudian or Sabater. It appears they need to have it both ways. I mean "need" in the most literal sense.

Time to turn the page and look ahead. Heard today that Xavier Watts is officially returning. National Defensive Player of the Year. That’s a BBBIIIGGGG get!

yea, saw those other threads after I posted, so it goes. Win or Lose Monday, I think Coach Harbaugh is heading to the NFL, rightfully so, where he belongs after he did what he set out to do. That I can applaud, not a big Michigan guy per se, but Jim Harbaugh is an OUTSTANDING leader and Coach and yes has made mistakes, some may have that be a deal breaker for them, I get that too, but I am able to look past a lot of the noise and just see the coaching product, with coach lens, vs all the other talking head blah blah tv stuff

When different p/p's still monopolize their enrollment advantages Thanksgiving weekend (particulary 1A-3A) I'd strongly disagree. The Yo-Yo factor of different p/p's taking advantage when another is SF'd up is, at best, and unforeseen, consequence of fixing the issue with ONLY the current SF system. Trading one school with the p/p enrollment advantage for another is not (IMHO) the same as saying "mission accomplished". I would remove ALL p/p's from 1A at a minimum.

I'm not the one who typed the responses....it's there in plain English And within that framework...enrollment alone doesn't adequate work to classify the teams who do all of those things well into groups. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

? I'm here, and have said my peace on the issue. And the last time I checked there is no ice cream stand in Rossville. The Milky Way in Frankfort is where it's at.

Well stated post except for the part I highlighted. When you get to this point in the comparisons, it becomes an apples and oranges thing. What struggling private schools are dealing with is nothing even close to what struggling public schools are dealing with; whether we are talking about on the field or in the classroom.

Friday: Sheridan @ Tri-Central - I'm gonna go with Sheridan as well. Honestly, the two games against Eastern and Clinton Prairie could have gone very differently. Sheridan just needs to avoid the "Live by the 3" game that they fall into sometimes. Rossville @ Taylor - Taylor. Rossville has been stout in the past, but I think Taylor gets it this year. Delphi @ Carroll - Carroll going away Clinton Central @ Eastern - Eastern going away Saturday: Clinton Prairie @ Northwestern - I think it's close, but Northwestern pulls it out at home. Rossville @ Sheridan - Sheridan gets the W. Oak Hill @ Eastern - Oak Hill. They have been tested much more. Still want to see more out of Eastern. Tri-Central @ Wes-Del - Tri-Central gets the bounce-back win after losing on Friday. 😉 Caston @ Delphi - Caston gets the win. Delphi only beats teams with 2 or fewer losses this season.

Those days are long gone, and they ain’t coming’ back. Economics dictated the rise of the current open market. There’s no putting that genie back in the bottle.

Doyel is CNN/MSNBC/and Fox rolled into one. He wishes HE had someone he could “cheat” on. Sensationalist journalism. “Thousands will die if there are fans at the Indianapolis 500 and if college football is played.” NO ONE has held him accountable. “Journalism” is full of hacks in the modern era.

There is a lot of preventative officiating that takes place throughout the game. Alignment is a key area where that takes place. Most wideouts do know to check with the wings when they get lined up, but not all do. A common question we'll get is "am I good?" usually referring to on or off the line. The challenge with that is we don't know which they are supposed to be. To be an eligible lineman you need to be breaking the waist of the snapper. The snapper's waist is about a yard behind the ball generally so if the ball is snapped at the B23, as long as part of your body is breaking the B24, you are considered on the line. To be a back you need to be behind the nearest lineman. Since that could be another eligible receiver or an interior lineman their waist could legally be the B25 using the previous example. But a wing back is often behind the waist of the snapper but breaking the waist of the tackle. And the wideouts may be one off/one on but both close enough the one who is off is not far enough back to meet the legal definition of a back. As long as they are staggered enough you'll put one on and one off. We use the term "make them legal". Where that can get tricky is if putting one of them back creates 5 in the backfield you have a foul for an illegal formation. Putting him on creates a covered up eligible number but legal formation. If the inside player goes downfield and there is a legal forward pass beyond the NZ you now have an ineligible receiver downfield and possibly illegal touching if he's the first to touch the pass. These are all possibly going to cause warnings the first time it's seen by that team. You'll want to warn both the players involved and their coach. But if both wideouts come out and indicate to the wing they are on or off you have no choice but to treat it that way. You need to be careful letting them know they need to move to be legal especially if the snap is imminent. If they move forward and the ball is snapped before they get set you have an illegal motion (moving forward at the snap). If they move back from the LOS and the ball is snapped before they get set you have an illegal motion (lineman in motion at the snap). As for lining up in the neutral zone, again you are going to be more lenient the further they are from the ball. Many receivers think they are fine if they are behind the front of the ball (the defense's line of scrimmage). In the example above with the nose of the ball on the B23, they'll line up with their toes close to the B23. If they are that close, we'll probably warn them the first time. I've told several receivers they need to be behind the BACK of the ball, and they are surprised. I then explain if they need to be on the line, they have a full yard they can line up and still be legally on the line if that's where they are supposed to be. The same courtesy is extended to the defensive line. If they are just breaking their side of the neutral zone, it's probably a warning and communicated through the umpire or referee to ask the DL to back up on the next play. The DBs often ask to make sure they are not in the neutral zone if they are trying to legally press the receiver. We'll let them know if they need to back up. In the KC play, you can see the ball is clearly behind the B49. It's likely the ball was spotted with the nose of the ball on the B49 so that would be the actual location of the neutral zone. If the snapper changes the position slightly especially tipping it like you see in the photo. Thanks to the lines on the field, you can see the receiver's foot is clearly beyond the back of the B49. This is what put him BEYOND the NZ. If he was 6 inches behind the B49 he's still technically in the NZ, but that's likely only a warning. I know the NFL has made this a point of emphasis this year so maybe they would still be expected to call it.

The procedure is exactly the same at all 3 levels of football. If it’s close, you may give the offender the courtesy of a warning. But if it’s blatant, you’ve got to call it … especially in a nationally televised game at that level. I mean, think what the narrative would have been like today if he doesn’t throw that flag. Do you think no one is going to pick up on the fact that Toney lined up in the NZ? It would be going viral before the crew got off the field. Think about sitting in the film room with your supervisor having to watch it on video … over and over and over …. In other words, think about it from the official’s perspective. It’s a no brainer.