Texas Teams...

[Horsefly]

20 hours ago, pied said:

 

 

How do you define quality and deep?  In 6A, there ae the haves and the have nots.  What the playoffs prove is that there are few competitive games and mostly blowouts.  This data is both D1 and D2 for the past six years.

 

2021:

• Regional Final - avg score 43-18 (25 point margin of victory) 5 games, two TDs or less (16 game sample)
• Quarters - avg score 44-19 (25 point margin of victory) 2 games, two TDs or less (8 game sample)
• Semis - avg score 47-15 (32 point margin of victory) one games, ZERO TDs or less (4 game sample)

2020:

• Regional Final - avg score 42-22 (19 point margin of victory) 7 games, two TDs or less (16 game sample)
• Quarters - avg score 44-19 (25 point margin of victory) 2 games, two TDs or less (8 game sample)
• Semis - avg score 37-18 (19 point margin of victory) one game, two TDs or less (4 game sample)

2019:

• Regional Final - avg score 43-23 (20 point margin of victory) 5 games, two TDs or less (16 game sample)
• Quarters - avg score 52-29 (23 point margin of victory) 3 games, two TDs or less (8 game sample)
• Semis - avg score 51-18 (33 point margin of victory) 1 game, two TDs or less (4 game sample)

2018:

• Regional Final - avg score 42-23 (19 point margin of victory) 9 games, two TDs or less (16 game sample)
• Quarters - avg score 37-13 (24 point margin of victory) 2 games, two TDs or less (8 game sample)
• Semis - avg score 44-29 (15 point margin of victory) 3 games, two TDs or less (4 game sample)

2017:

• Regional Final - avg score 42-21 (21 point margin of victory) 6 games, two TDs or less (16 game sample)
• Quarters - avg score 34-16 (18 point margin of victory) 3 games, two TDs or less (8 game sample)
• Semis - avg score 25 13(12 point margin of victory) 3 games, two TDs or less (4 game sample)

2016:

• Regional Final - avg score 44-19 (25 point margin of victory) 6 games, two TDs or less (16 game sample)
• Quarters - avg score 39-19 (20 point margin of victory) 3 games, two TDs or less (8 game sample)
• Semis - avg score 44-24(21 point margin of victory) 2 games, two TDs or less (4 game sample)

The depth is defined by the differing teams that are a part of the ‘haves’ compared to the ‘have nots’.(it’s not the same set of teams yearly)   Here are the different D1/D2 teams represented in your semifinals assessment

2021: Westlake, Duncanville, north shore, guyer, 

2020: Westlake, southlake, cedar hill, Katy

2019: Westlake, Guyer, north shore, Duncanville 

2018: longview, Westbrook, Duncanville, north shore

2017: Cy fair, midway, lake travis, Allen 

2016: Desoto, Steele, woodlands, lake travis 

Thats 16 different schools that have been a part of the Texas “haves” in the past 6 seasons.  (Out of a possible 24) That’s the depth!  

 

[steeler01]

40 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

The depth is defined by the differing teams that are a part of the ‘haves’ compared to the ‘have nots’.(it’s not the same set of teams yearly)   Here are the different D1/D2 teams represented in your semifinals assessment

2021: Westlake, Duncanville, north shore, guyer, 

2020: Westlake, southlake, cedar hill, Katy

2019: Westlake, Guyer, north shore, Duncanville 

2018: longview, Westbrook, Duncanville, north shore

2017: Cy fair, midway, lake travis, Allen 

2016: Desoto, Steele, woodlands, lake travis 

Thats 16 different schools that have been a part of the Texas “haves” in the past 6 seasons.  (Out of a possible 24) That’s the depth!  

 

What if we ranked the top 4 teams instead of finalists from Texas 6A for the last 4 years. How many different teams would there be?

[Horsefly]

2 minutes ago, steeler01 said:

What if we ranked the top 4 teams instead of finalists from Texas 6A for the last 4 years. How many different teams would there be?

I’m answering based on his post, he posted semifinal game score differentials from 2016-2021

[SeaShells21]

7 minutes ago, steeler01 said:

What if we ranked the top 4 teams instead of finalists from Texas 6A for the last 4 years. How many different teams would there be?

It looks like you’re cherry-picking 😒

[steeler01]

5 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

I’m answering based on his post, he posted semifinal game score differentials from 2016-2021

No, you're bringing up that there's differing teams in the semi-finals, which has more to do with the system in place. You're not answering his question.

[Horsefly]

1 minute ago, SeaShells21 said:

It looks like you’re cherry-picking 😒

Exactly.  rankings are too subjective, score outcomes is objective and was the criteria being discussed 

[steeler01]

3 minutes ago, SeaShells21 said:

It looks like you’re cherry-picking 😒

It looks like I'm asking for the depth part

[Horsefly]

Just now, steeler01 said:

No, you're bringing up that there's differing teams in the semi-finals, which has more to do with the system in place. You're not answering his question.

Those teams I listed are the ones that created his large score differentials in the semifinals. There’s nothing to dispute  

[SeaShells21]

1 minute ago, steeler01 said:

It looks like I'm asking for the depth part

There’s different rankings from every site. Which one would be right?

[steeler01]

Just now, SeaShells21 said:

There’s different rankings from every site. Which one would be right?

You could always make a composite

[steeler01]

2 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

Those teams I listed are the ones that created his large score differentials in the semifinals. There’s nothing to dispute  

You made it a point to bring up 17 different teams.  That has to do with your dual system nothing else.  

[Horsefly]

Just now, steeler01 said:

You could always make a composite

Rankings have nothing to do with the mov that were posted in the various rounds 

[Horsefly]

Just now, steeler01 said:

You made it a point to bring up 17 different teams.  That has to do with your dual system nothing else.  

The poster brought up the dual system. Read his post. He stated the mov differentials was for BOTH D1 and D2. 

[steeler01]

1 minute ago, Horsefly said:

Rankings have nothing to do with the mov that were posted in the various rounds 

But they do tell the haves from the have nots. The NIT Championship of lower ranked teams doesn't do that

[Horsefly]

Just now, steeler01 said:

But they do tell the haves from the have nots. The NIT Championship of lower ranked teams doesn't do that

Not according to the poster, the have and have nots are based on mov in the various rounds. 

[steeler01]

2 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

Not according to the poster, the have and have nots are based on mov in the various rounds. 

According to the poster, he asked how do you define the haves and have nots.  You answered because there's differing teams.  That has to do with your system of rotating teams into each division

[Horsefly]

Just now, steeler01 said:

According to the poster, he asked how do you define the haves and have nots.  You answered because there's differing teams.  That has to do with your system of rotating teams into each division

He defined the have and have nots by those that won those rounds by large margins. I put a face to them. 

[SeaShells21]

1 minute ago, steeler01 said:

But they do tell the haves from the have nots. The NIT Championship of lower ranked teams doesn't do that

Top 25 composite ranking of Texas teams, the last 4 seasons:

Maxpreps, Massey and Calpreps 

Westlake, North Shore, Duncanville, Ryan, Carroll, Katy, Longview, Allen, Carthage, Aledo, Guyer, College Station, DeSoto, Atascocita, Highland Park, Cedar Hill, Rockwall, Shadow Creek, Arlington Martin, and Lake Travis.

20 teams. 

I think this is what you were asking for?

[steeler01]

8 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

He defined the have and have nots by those that won those rounds by large margins. I put a face to them. 

He actually didn't define them. He just posted the MOV in each round.  He asked how do you define the Haves and have nots.  You defined them

[steeler01]

5 minutes ago, SeaShells21 said:

Top 25 composite ranking of Texas teams, the last 4 seasons:

Maxpreps, Massey and Calpreps 

Westlake, North Shore, Duncanville, Ryan, Carroll, Katy, Longview, Allen, Carthage, Aledo, Guyer, College Station, DeSoto, Atascocita, Highland Park, Cedar Hill, Rockwall, Shadow Creek, Arlington Martin, and Lake Travis.

20 teams. 

I think this is what you were asking for?

I'd stick with 6A. The CPUs don't seem to be able to distinguish between 4A and 6A in Texas because there's no connectivity

[Horsefly]

3 minutes ago, steeler01 said:

He actually didn't define them. He just posted the MOV in each round.  He asked how do you define the Haves and have nots.  You defined them

👇🏽  Here’s what he said steeler, the evidence he went on to show to back his claim had nothing to do with rankings  

21 hours ago, pied said:

 

 

How do you define quality and deep?  In 6A, there ae the haves and the have nots.  What the playoffs prove is that there are few competitive games and mostly blowouts.  This data is both D1 and D2 for the past six years.

 

 

 

[steeler01]

Just now, Horsefly said:

👇🏽  Here’s what he said steeler, the evidence he went on to show to back his claim had nothing to do with rankings  

 

His evidence was just saying that there's not many competitive games

Let's see what Pied was saying, he's here.

[pied]

1 hour ago, Horsefly said:

The depth is defined by the differing teams that are a part of the ‘haves’ compared to the ‘have nots’.(it’s not the same set of teams yearly)   Here are the different D1/D2 teams represented in your semifinals assessment

2021: Westlake, Duncanville, north shore, guyer, 

2020: Westlake, southlake, cedar hill, Katy

2019: Westlake, Guyer, north shore, Duncanville 

2018: longview, Westbrook, Duncanville, north shore

2017: Cy fair, midway, lake travis, Allen 

2016: Desoto, Steele, woodlands, lake travis 

Thats 16 different schools that have been a part of the Texas “haves” in the past 6 seasons.  (Out of a possible 24) That’s the depth!  

 

 

 

Got it, I think.  Please note, there are 8 teams in the two divisions' semifinals games.  

This data was compiled because of a similar discussion on another site.  A poster with CA ties made the following statements:

 

The only other complaint I have is the format. It makes for lots and lots of boring blowouts with rarely a significant matchup before the season gets deep into the playoffs. Outside of that, Texas football is great.

AND

It was a generalization. Of course you're not all like that. But it most definitely is a thing.

I lived in Texas for a while and went to games when possible. I've been an NFHS subscriber for many, many years and just about every game is available online now from one provider or another. I've also read these forums for a long time, just never posted.

My comment about the format was regarding your divisions and playoff system, not super teams or anything like that. There were 254 teams in 6A as of a couple of years ago, and how many have a realistic chance to win a title this year? Three? Maybe four? The playoffs are way too long and the overwhelming majority of teams have no business whatsoever setting foot in them, but we hear all about how hard it is to win and how many games you have to play and blah blah blah... the top teams worth a damn aren't playing anyone of merit until very late in the season. I mean, Carroll didn't even play a top 10 team in the state last year until week 15. The divisions are weak, the playoffs are too long, and there aren't enough tough matchups of top teams throughout the year.

Death, taxes, and Duncanville, Carroll, Allen Westlake, and Katy only losing to one Texas opponent, at most, all year long in their final game of the season... it has the potential to be great, it's just not. But there sure is some great football for those two or three weeks

 

 

 

When those statements were made I disagreed.  As the playoffs wore on, it appeared to be more correct than not.  Discounting the first Bi-District round, which most agred are typically lopsided, I looked at the next rounds of the Texas playoffs and compiled the data.

 

What it showed CLEARLY was that there are very few good games in the playoffs with each round being an average ~3 touchdown win.  Hard to argue those are good matchups.  

If we don't have good matchups leading to the title game, it's hard for me to argue there is a lot of depth even if the cast of characters change a bit.  

 

 

 

 

[pied]

TLDR version.  If the games aren't competitive, how can you argue depth?

[Horsefly]

2 minutes ago, pied said:

 

 

Got it, I think.  Please note, there are 8 teams in the two divisions' semifinals games.  

This data was compiled because of a similar discussion on another site.  A poster with CA ties made the following statements:

 

The only other complaint I have is the format. It makes for lots and lots of boring blowouts with rarely a significant matchup before the season gets deep into the playoffs. Outside of that, Texas football is great.

AND

It was a generalization. Of course you're not all like that. But it most definitely is a thing.

I lived in Texas for a while and went to games when possible. I've been an NFHS subscriber for many, many years and just about every game is available online now from one provider or another. I've also read these forums for a long time, just never posted.

My comment about the format was regarding your divisions and playoff system, not super teams or anything like that. There were 254 teams in 6A as of a couple of years ago, and how many have a realistic chance to win a title this year? Three? Maybe four? The playoffs are way too long and the overwhelming majority of teams have no business whatsoever setting foot in them, but we hear all about how hard it is to win and how many games you have to play and blah blah blah... the top teams worth a damn aren't playing anyone of merit until very late in the season. I mean, Carroll didn't even play a top 10 team in the state last year until week 15. The divisions are weak, the playoffs are too long, and there aren't enough tough matchups of top teams throughout the year.

Death, taxes, and Duncanville, Carroll, Allen Westlake, and Katy only losing to one Texas opponent, at most, all year long in their final game of the season... it has the potential to be great, it's just not. But there sure is some great football for those two or three weeks

 

 

 

When those statements were made I disagreed.  As the playoffs wore on, it appeared to be more correct than not.  Discounting the first Bi-District round, which most agred are typically lopsided, I looked at the next rounds of the Texas playoffs and compiled the data.

 

What it showed CLEARLY was that there are very few good games in the playoffs with each round being an average ~3 touchdown win.  Hard to argue those are good matchups.  

If we don't have good matchups leading to the title game, it's hard for me to argue there is a lot of depth even if the cast of characters change a bit.  

 

 

 

 

I listed the winners of those semifinals games, the teams responsible for the lopsided wins