Jump to content

The 2014 SoCalRule explained

frankyjames

By frankyjames
in Varsity Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

frankyjames Rising Star

frankyjames

Posted
Posted

Ladies & Gents- My full explanation on the 2014 rule, referred to as the #SoCalRule, which changed the playoff format for the CIF playoffs. 

Bottom line- Don't believe the trolls. The real explanation is below. 

In 2014, A few Folsom parents DID complain to local media outlets in regards to getting sent home after losing to DLS. This is a fact.

I think you would all agree that ALL parents complain (you should see SoCal parents in the stands for games). Parents can write letters to Saco (SJS section commissioner). Parents have ZERO standing with the section. Saco act(ed) on behalf of the section constituents - the schools and leagues. If you knew Pete Saco, you would know that the thought that he did the bidding of Folsom parents is ridiculous. BTW- Sac has ONE vote for the entire CIF. He fake news being spread by SoCal posters that Saco changed it all on his own is a blatant lie, and just another excuse for some of their teams getting embarrassed. 

Folsom's losses to DLS were the example that highlighted the broken system. Of course Folsom had to be mentioned in the articles. Who else were they going to mention? The fact that the Folsom fans were complaining just made it a better story. And message board fodder. But make no mistake, this change was to head off the private vs. public debate. And rightfully so- they play under different rules, despite the propaganda pushed by others with an agenda and axe to grind for Folsom stuffing it up their nose for a decade. 

From the CIF press release:

This return to the original format began with the CIF Football Advisory Committee at their April 2014 meeting and was also unanimously supported by the 10 CIF Section Commissioners at their summer 2014 meeting along with the CIF Executive Committee.

“Following two years of the expanded Open Division Football Regional Bowl Championships, the votes by both the football coaches’ advisory committee and the 10 Section Commissioners indicated the strong desire to return the Open Division Football Bowl Game to its original format,” stated Roger L. Blake, CIF Executive Director. “As with all State Championship events, each year there is always a thorough review by various committees. Modifications are forwarded when there is a majority that believes the changes will better serve our membership and their students.”

Note the unanimous votes by the 10 section commissioners, the CIF Executive Committee and the advisory committee. Note there is no mention of parental or fan input.

Any Questions? :)

Another note" Notice that TEN section commissioners (SoCal and Norcal), the CIF Executive Committee, AND the advisory committee ALL voted to change the playoff format to its current state. Sounds like those Folsom moms really pulled some weight. :) 

Also- ALL SOCAL section commissioners voted for this rule. What was their angle? Sounds like they wanted certain teams to be able to legally duck certain NorCal teams in Bowl Games! :)

Those teams include: Cen10, MV, Servite, JSerra, etc................................................... :)

 

This quote is directly from CIF Executive Director Roger Blake, a SoCal guy himself-  “Following two years of the expanded Open Division Football Regional Bowl Championships, the votes by both the football coaches’ advisory committee and the 10 Section Commissioners indicated the strong desire to return the Open Division Football Bowl Game to its original format,” stated Roger L. Blake, CIF Executive Director. “As with all State Championship events, each year there is always a thorough review by various committees. Modifications are forwarded when there is a majority that believes the changes will better serve our membership and their students.”

Roger Blake is a SoCal guy. :) See below :) We now come to find out that this rule was SoCal driven and the "Lincoln Newspaper moms theory" was just smoke and mirrors for SoCal troll banter. 

Winning! :)

"Blake probably is known most to Inland residents for the 23 years he spent as a coach and administrator in the Lake Elsinore Unified School District. Blake was the boys basketball coach at Elsinore High School for 17 years (1978-94) and the school’s athletic director for 11 years (1984-94). Blake then served as the LEUSD’s director of district athletics from 1994 to 2001. He also was a teacher and coach at Cajon High School in San Bernardino from 1977 to 1978."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frankyjames Rising Star

frankyjames

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, DLS_Spartan said:

The way SoCal handled transfers is bogus. Completely ruined HSFB

Agreed to some extent, but people also said this about the Golden State Warriors when they picked up Durant and were essentially an all-star team. Everything is cyclic. MD and SJB are today's latest and greatest. Nothing lasts forever. It will eventually shift, as will rules/policies/etc...

My point to all this is more "why would EVERY SoCal commissioner vote UNANIMOUSLY in favor or the current format (SoCal rule), where SoCal's 2-whatever go home, while NorCal sends their #2 to go 7-0 against them? Why would they vote for that?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frankyjames Rising Star

frankyjames

Posted
  • Author
Posted

1. Words is the SoCal schools and commissioners lobbied for the rule prior to Folsom moms every saying anything. There was a "desire" to return to the original format, as evidenced in the article :)

2. SoCal schools benefited from the rule- They're schools are 0-7 against Folsom. Why play them? They cried and got out of it.

3. The unanimous SoCal vote confirms everything I have said.

Winning! :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rippers Collaborator

Rippers

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, frankyjames said:

SoCal schools benefited from the rule- They're schools are 0-7 against Folsom. Why play them? They cried and got out of it.

Once again, "they're" means "they are".  You still cannot get that right.

Also, what was SoCal's record against Folsom before 2014?

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AztecPadre Veteran

AztecPadre

Posted
Posted
On 11/5/2019 at 11:59 AM, frankyjames said:

Agreed to some extent, but people also said this about the Golden State Warriors when they picked up Durant and were essentially an all-star team. Everything is cyclic. MD and SJB are today's latest and greatest. Nothing lasts forever. It will eventually shift, as will rules/policies/etc...

My point to all this is more "why would EVERY SoCal commissioner vote UNANIMOUSLY in favor or the current format (SoCal rule), where SoCal's 2-whatever go home, while NorCal sends their #2 to go 7-0 against them? Why would they vote for that?  

LOL!.  You're really talking to your self?  HAHAHAHA

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DLS350 Community Regular

DLS350

Posted
Posted

Blockhead is so worthless, he created a thread then replied to it? This creep is in such need of attention he replies to his own post. Truly pathetic!! Het C**s R**t, I wonder if Folsom HS, Sac Sate and Max Preps knows what you’re truly like. I think I start sending all three of them your shit from this board and NCP so they really know who they have working/representing them..

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rippers Collaborator

Rippers

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, DLS350 said:

Blockhead is so worthless, he created a thread then replied to it? 

Instead of giving him fodder, why don't we try to hold him accountable to these few things:

1) What was SoCal's record versus Folsom as of April of 2014?  It had to be so bad that they were scared to send their second best D1 team to a D2 bowl.  Block, what was it?

2) So because of the vote, Socal #2 goes home but Norcal #2 (who gets to avoid #1 because of the vote) gets to play on?  And this benefits SoCal how?  Block, care to address?

3) Given Folsom's record versus SoCal teams as of April 2014, why would CIF want "certain Socal teams to be able to avoid certain NorCal teams"?  In 2014, the only relevant Norcal team was DLS.  JSerra and Servite were in the same league as MD and SJB.  Block, do you really think that the CIF voted to save 4 teams from the same league, much less same section,  from playing in a State Bowl game that three of any of the four teams would not have deserved to play in?  Why play league?

4) How about this angle?  Socal voted the way they did-  actually, screw it, I have no idea how they voted since Block only posted excerpts from the article- so that their best played in the Open and because they did not give a crap about any other bowl results.  Welcome to state, not section, playoffs.  Folsom and their lard assed moms wanted no part of that equation and pressured the powers that be to allow their little boys to avoid DLS so that they could get their D1AAAA trophies and parade.  Block?

5) But lets go back to question #1, since that is the crux of Block's attempt to spin the Folsom rule into the SoCal rule.  Simple question, cupcake.  Actually, two questions.  Please answer.  #1)  What was Folsom's record against SoCal schools as of April 2014?  #2)  What was Folsom's record against the teams, that you listed, as of April 2014?  For that matter, what was their record versus any Los Angles area team as of April 2014?

To quote you.... "we'll wait".

 

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
THEOC89 Grand Master

THEOC89

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Rippers said:

Instead of giving him fodder, why don't we try to hold him accountable to these few things:

1) What was SoCal's record versus Folsom as of April of 2014?  It had to be so bad that they were scared to send their second best D1 team to a D2 bowl.  Block, what was it?

2) So because of the vote, Socal #2 goes home but Norcal #2 (who gets to avoid #1 because of the vote) gets to play on?  And this benefits SoCal how?  Block, care to address?

3) Given Folsom's record versus SoCal teams as of April 2014, why would CIF want "certain Socal teams to be able to avoid certain NorCal teams"?  In 2014, the only relevant Norcal team was DLS.  JSerra and Servite were in the same league as MD and SJB.  Block, do you really think that the CIF voted to save 4 teams from the same league, much less same section,  from playing in a State Bowl game that three of any of the four teams would not have deserved to play in?  Why play league?

4) How about this angle?  Socal voted the way they did-  actually, screw it, I have no idea how they voted since Block only posted excerpts from the article- so that their best played in the Open and because they did not give a crap about any other bowl results.  Welcome to state, not section, playoffs.  Folsom and their lard assed moms wanted no part of that equation and pressured the powers that be to allow their little boys to avoid DLS so that they could get their D1AAAA trophies and parade.  Block?

5) But lets go back to question #1, since that is the crux of Block's attempt to spin the Folsom rule into the SoCal rule.  Simple question, cupcake.  Actually, two questions.  Please answer.  #1)  What was Folsom's record against SoCal schools as of April 2014?  #2)  What was Folsom's record against the teams, that you listed, as of April 2014?  For that matter, what was their record versus any Los Angles area team as of April 2014?

To quote you.... "we'll wait".

 

I can answer #1 before they turn the internet back on at the Folsom Prison Psych Ward and you get a bunch of Nonsense....🤣

Folsom was 1-0 vs So Cal before 2014... The only team they played was Serra Gardenia in 2010 in the D2 SBG and won....

Prior to that they were getting their Doors Blown off By teams like Napa and Vacaville....🤣🤣

They Opened up 2011 with another Blowout loss to grant and played nobody...

In 2012 and 2013 they played no one and lost 2 non competitive games to DLS...

In 2014 they knew they had their Best team ever and scheduled No One and then they lobbied the CIF for the Folsom Rule so their “Golden Boy” QB wouldn’t have to go through DLS to play for a State Championship.....

So there you have it.... Folsom was 1-0 against So Cal prior to 2014 because they were not even competitive enough to even play So Cal Teams....🤣🤣🤣

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
frankyjames Rising Star

frankyjames

Posted
  • Author
Posted
23 hours ago, Rippers said:

Instead of giving him fodder, why don't we try to hold him accountable to these few things:

1) What was SoCal's record versus Folsom as of April of 2014?  It had to be so bad that they were scared to send their second best D1 team to a D2 bowl.  Block, what was it?

2) So because of the vote, Socal #2 goes home but Norcal #2 (who gets to avoid #1 because of the vote) gets to play on?  And this benefits SoCal how?  Block, care to address?

3) Given Folsom's record versus SoCal teams as of April 2014, why would CIF want "certain Socal teams to be able to avoid certain NorCal teams"?  In 2014, the only relevant Norcal team was DLS.  JSerra and Servite were in the same league as MD and SJB.  Block, do you really think that the CIF voted to save 4 teams from the same league, much less same section,  from playing in a State Bowl game that three of any of the four teams would not have deserved to play in?  Why play league?

4) How about this angle?  Socal voted the way they did-  actually, screw it, I have no idea how they voted since Block only posted excerpts from the article- so that their best played in the Open and because they did not give a crap about any other bowl results.  Welcome to state, not section, playoffs.  Folsom and their lard assed moms wanted no part of that equation and pressured the powers that be to allow their little boys to avoid DLS so that they could get their D1AAAA trophies and parade.  Block?

5) But lets go back to question #1, since that is the crux of Block's attempt to spin the Folsom rule into the SoCal rule.  Simple question, cupcake.  Actually, two questions.  Please answer.  #1)  What was Folsom's record against SoCal schools as of April 2014?  #2)  What was Folsom's record against the teams, that you listed, as of April 2014?  For that matter, what was their record versus any Los Angles area team as of April 2014?

To quote you.... "we'll wait".

 

1. The SoCal record against Folsom prior to 2014 was 0-1. Serra of Gardena was blown out in an SBG despite being heavily favored.

2. I cannot speak for the SoCal commissioners. Since there are so many SoCal posters on here, maybe they can explain the unanimous votes? All they have offered so far is zero knowledge and trolling. Impressive. I'd like an answer like you. All I was told is that "they wanted to return to the original format." 

3. Ok, you got way off topic here. Instead of adding some insight into why SoCal voted the way they did, you decided to go the troll route and blame it on a few soccer moms who "supposedly" managed to get every single commissioner and committee in the state of CA to vote a certain way. Doesn't add up. You can look at it as Folsom didn't want to play DLS, but look at it this way- SoCal managed to basically ensure that none of their top teams would ever be "forced" to play Folsom. Interesting angle, however I don't believe this was the primary motivation. 

4. You keep asking for Folsom's records. Well, they are 7-0 against SoCal all time, and were 1-0 prior to 2014. By my math, that is undefeated. :)

The whole "Folsom moms complained and got the entire state on board to change the rule!" argument is cute and funny....But it makes absolutely zero sense, considering SoCal has more votes and more power due to sheer voting numbers. That is why it is the #SoCalRule.

If the SoCal commissioners wanted to change it, they have enough sway where they probably could. But they will not. Unless a legit SoCal, non troll, poster can explain to us why they voted the way they did, UNANIMOUSLY, we shall chalk this up to a massive troll job perpetuated by a few SoCal trolls using multiple handles. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frankyjames Rising Star

frankyjames

Posted
  • Author
Posted
22 hours ago, THEOC89 said:

In 2014 they knew they had their Best team ever and scheduled No One and then they lobbied the CIF for the Folsom Rule so their “Golden Boy” QB wouldn’t have to go through DLS to play for a State Championship.....

Why would EVERY SINGLE SoCal commissioner who UNANIMOUSLY voted for this, care about Jake Browning not having to play DLS?  :)

By the looks of it- After Serra got the brakes blown off them in 2010, SoCal had seen enough and wanted no part. :)

I am still waiting for any insight from any poster to explain any of this.

So far, we have just gotten the "soccer mom theory." Sounds legit. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THEOC89 Grand Master

THEOC89

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, frankyjames said:

Why would EVERY SINGLE SoCal commissioner who UNANIMOUSLY voted for this, care about Jake Browning not having to play DLS?  :)

By the looks of it- After Serra got the brakes blown off them in 2010, SoCal had seen enough and wanted no part. :)

I am still waiting for any insight from any poster to explain any of this.

So far, we have just gotten the "soccer mom theory." Sounds legit. :)

Well... Since The Real #1 Public Cen10 didn’t have their parents and Fans Writing letters, Leaving Voice Mails and Threatening Lawsuits against the section because it was “Unfair” that Cen10 had to beat the best teams in their region to play in a SBG.... So why  would they Vote any other way???....

Cen10 Moved into the Toughest Playoff Bracket in the Country (PAC 5) and won it in Back to Back Years over the Power Private Schools....

I am figuring the so cal commissioners were tired of Sacco’s whining and said “Fine, if you guys in Nor Cal Need Folsom to Avoid DLS so be it.... Our Best teams play each other anyway so who cares”.....

So there you have it... The Explanation for why So Cal Commissioners Voted Unanimously for the Folsom Rule.... They were tired of the SJS commissioner crying about Soft And Scared Folsom having to play DLS to go to a SBG...

This is why we have “The Folsom Rule”....🤣🤣🤣
 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ararar Mentor

Ararar

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, THEOC89 said:

Well... Since The Real #1 Public Cen10 didn’t have their parents and Fans Writing letters, Leaving Voice Mails and Threatening Lawsuits against the section because it was “Unfair” that Cen10 had to beat the best teams in their region to play in a SBG.... So why  would they Vote any other way???....

Cen10 Moved into the Toughest Playoff Bracket in the Country (PAC 5) and won it in Back to Back Years over the Power Private Schools....

I am figuring the so cal commissioners were tired of Sacco’s whining and said “Fine, if you guys in Nor Cal Need Folsom to Avoid DLS so be it.... Our Best teams play each other anyway so who cares”.....

So there you have it... The Explanation for why So Cal Commissioners Voted Unanimously for the Folsom Rule.... They were tired of the SJS commissioner crying about Soft And Scared Folsom having to play DLS to go to a SBG...

This is why we have “The Folsom Rule”....🤣🤣🤣
 

Doesn’t even matter why other sections voted the way they did.

There is no vote at all without Folsom whining 

thats the only relevant point

the rest is smoke and mirrors 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rippers Collaborator

Rippers

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, frankyjames said:

3. Ok, you got way off topic here.

No, this is the topic.  You claimed that the "SoCal rule" got created so that "certain schools could avoid certain schools", implying Socal avoiding Folsom.  But as of 2014, Folsom was only 1-0 versus a meaningless SoCal team.  So why would the SoCal CIF even have Folsom on their radar and worry that their top teams would be "forced" to play Folsom?  Your logic does not add up.  If the powers that be were worried about their top teams playing a dangerous NorCal team, they would focus on the only NorCal team that has done serious damage to SoCal's elite.  And that team was definitely not Folsom.  

If it was not for the 2014 vote, Folsom would have had to play DLS in the NorCal Open Regional game, probably each year since. This was the lose and go home game, of which Folsom was 0-2 with two blow out losses in. Folsom got their first SoCal win before the Regional Open game was created.  Without that 2014 vote, how many parades would your lovely city had?  So who benefited the most from the vote?  Folsom, despite being a very good team, would just have been regulated to the forum fodder board as another "Norcal Baby Seal Slapdick". But, no.  Because of the vote, Folsom got to play in the lower level "title" games.  Did SoCal's second best team get that opportunity? No, they did not.  Did SoCal do this to "save" their second best team?  Save them from what?  A team that has been crushed by the only elite Norcal team?  Seriously, what has Folsom ever done and who have they ever beaten to have the SoCal CIF worry that their elite teams would even risk breaking a sweat versus them?  Nothing.  But they got to benefit by playing lesser teams that they were able to go 6-0 since then.  Does DLS crow about beating La Costa Canyon the way you tout Folsom's "acheivements"?

Wanna try to spin some more?  We'll wait.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sammyswordsman Mentor

Sammyswordsman

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Rippers said:

No, this is the topic.  You claimed that the "SoCal rule" got created so that "certain schools could avoid certain schools", implying Socal avoiding Folsom.  But as of 2014, Folsom was only 1-0 versus a meaningless SoCal team.  So why would the SoCal CIF even have Folsom on their radar and worry that their top teams would be "forced" to play Folsom?  Your logic does not add up.  If the powers that be were worried about their top teams playing a dangerous NorCal team, they would focus on the only NorCal team that has done serious damage to SoCal's elite.  And that team was definitely not Folsom.  

If it was not for the 2014 vote, Folsom would have had to play DLS in the NorCal Open Regional game, probably each year since. This was the lose and go home game, of which Folsom was 0-2 with two blow out losses in. Folsom got their first SoCal win before the Regional Open game was created.  Without that 2014 vote, how many parades would your lovely city had?  So who benefited the most from the vote?  Folsom, despite being a very good team, would just have been regulated to the forum fodder board as another "Norcal Baby Seal Slapdick". But, no.  Because of the vote, Folsom got to play in the lower level "title" games.  Did SoCal's second best team get that opportunity? No, they did not.  Did SoCal do this to "save" their second best team?  Save them from what?  A team that has been crushed by the only elite Norcal team?  Seriously, what has Folsom ever done and who have they ever beaten to have the SoCal CIF worry that their elite teams would even risk breaking a sweat versus them?  Nothing.  But they got to benefit by playing lesser teams that they were able to go 6-0 since then.  Does DLS crow about beating La Costa Canyon the way you tout Folsom's "acheivements"?

Wanna try to spin some more?  We'll wait.

BOOM SHAKA LACKA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...