My Algorithm on Why Folsom is Gonna Get Bullied By the Big Boys of Concord

[Goldmember]

17 hours ago, Blueliner said:

They don’t call it hyper-improvement...that’s a PG/Rivals term used to minimize the efforts of DLS.

To minimize the efforts of DLS?

The greatest purveyor of that term is Pops who I can assure you is not trying to minimize their efforts. In fact he's trying to to the exact opposite.

[Goldmember]

17 hours ago, World Citizen said:

I may of missed it but I don't think I heard mention of DLS being the only team that improves and would win every rematch at the end of the season.  And as I said before, everyone improves but certain schemes lend themselves to more improvement than others and for DLS, it's the line play that is most evident during the season.  It doesn't matter if it's a baby seal or whatever, when the line starts to figure it out, it is a different team and that everyone who is watching recognizes.   Those of us that follow DLS are looking for one thing every single year and that is that game where they figure it out. 

De La Salle wins 100% of the time against bad-to-mediocre teams and wins about 40-50% of the time against good-to-great teams.

Regardless of when the game is played.

[Goldmember]

16 hours ago, CCBlackhatter said:

On many occasions, huh? You mean like a handful of times in 3+ decades...

Exactly.

The can cite about 3 times in 30 years.

[Goldmember]

16 hours ago, CCBlackhatter said:

That post was full of nonsense. Grasping at straws if you will.

The QB literally reads one defender on any given play... How long do you need to learn that.

If it's that difficult to learn to get the veer down, then it would explain why DLS has not changed their offense in decades. They would struggle mightly if they had to perfect the more intricate and complex schemes being run at many programs today. Kids would play their entire HS career and not have it perfected with that rate of progression.

I think this argument undermines their claim that Lad and his staff are the best ever. If so, why do they need almost a full season to gel?

It's preposterous.

You don't win 151 games in a row because it takes you 2 months to learn the veer. They were rolling people from August to December.

[FolsomPrisonBlues]

Just now, Goldmember said:

I think this argument undermines their claim that Lad and his staff are the best ever. If so, why do they need almost a full season to gel?

It's preposterous.

You don't win 151 games in a row because it takes you 2 months to learn the veer. They were rolling people from August to December.

We will see if this holds true. They face a big test in week 0 versus the #1 preseason team in NorCal.

[Goldmember]

16 hours ago, Blueliner said:

We just have differing opinions is all. And as I said, you don’t understand DLS. Thanks, bro!

But your opinion is fanboy cornball nonsense clouded by delusion.

Nothing that you've said so far makes any sense.

[CCBlackhatter]

3 minutes ago, Goldmember said:

I think this argument undermines their claim that Lad and his staff are the best ever. If so, why do they need almost a full season to gel?

It's preposterous.

You don't win 151 games in a row because it takes you 2 months to learn the veer. They were rolling people from August to December.

It's fabricated nonsense in order to explain CA being exposed as a whole.

Sammy is now questioning the validity of hyper improvement with Socal's newly found success against Sparty in the Open games. He too had to support the bullshit theory when DLS was beating the best from the Trinity League after being exposed OOS.

They're all frauds.

[FolsomPrisonBlues]

1 minute ago, CCBlackhatter said:

It's fabricated nonsense in order to explain CA being exposed as a whole.

Sammy is now questioning the validity of hyper improvement with Socal's newly found success against Sparty in the Open games. He too had to support the bullshit theory when DLS was beating the best from the Trinity League after being exposed OOS.

They're all frauds.

LMFAO DLS would pound Colquitt by 60. You'd have to call the game at halftime.

When you dominate ANY state for 30 years, get back to me.

 

[Goldmember]

2 hours ago, World Citizen said:

Enough to where it becomes a yearly thing.  Yearly. 

What? You're obviously thinking of somebody else.

In their last 2 championship seasons (2014-15) they didn't have a single close game against a California team all the way to the Bowl game.

If you're trying to argue for 2016-17 the answer is simple. DLS wasn't that good so they struggled with a lot of teams (early and late).

[Goldmember]

1 hour ago, Pops said:

Sorry, I should have said DLS’s hyperimprovement results are undeniable to all but Goldmember 

you wanna go year by year from ‘04?  Hard to support either way if you look earlier as they didn’t lose T all for the 12 prior years 

The results are due to weaker competition.

It's no surprise that St. John Bosco and Mater Dei are 3-0 against DLS in bowl games.

Has very little to do with De La Salle's fake hyper-improvement. It has almost everything to do with the quality of the opponent.

[Goldmember]

1 hour ago, Pops said:

you wanna go year by year from ‘04?  Hard to support either way if you look earlier as they didn’t lose T all for the 12 prior years 

No, because I've already done this song and dance.

I know the truth already.

You should probably spend your time trying to sway the feckless and easily manipulated.

[Pops]

32 minutes ago, Goldmember said:

No, because I've already done this song and dance.

I know the truth already.

You should probably spend your time trying to sway the feckless and easily manipulated.

I didn’t think so

its undeniable unless you stick your head in sand and avoid facts 

there certainly aren’t any years with big wins early and losing to Cooper City later 

[Goldmember]

25 minutes ago, Pops said:

I didn’t think so

its undeniable unless you stick your head in sand and avoid facts 

there certainly aren’t any years with big wins early and losing to Cooper City later 

Pops, your game isn't cute anymore. It's just tired.

There's nothing in De La Salle's past that can't be explained by:

1) they weren't very good (2004-05, 2008-09, 2016-17)

or

2) they didn't play anybody good (or that matched up with them) late in the season (2010-2012, 2014-15)

[World Citizen]

6 hours ago, Goldmember said:

De La Salle wins 100% of the time against bad-to-mediocre teams and wins about 40-50% of the time against good-to-great teams.

Regardless of when the game is played.

That sounds about right except the last sentence, which is speculative.  And I speculate that they would have won a few more of those good-to-great games.

 

[World Citizen]

6 hours ago, CCBlackhatter said:

It's fabricated nonsense in order to explain CA being exposed as a whole.

That is a ridiculous statement.  It's a big ruse eh? 

Sammy is now questioning the validity of hyper improvement with Socal's newly found success against Sparty in the Open games.   He too had to support the bullshit theory when DLS was beating the best from the Trinity League after being exposed OOS.

So what?  And Socal's newly found success?  You mean all-star teams?

 

They're all frauds.

Taking this kind of serious aren't you?  Frauds is kind of over the top imo.

Look, I'll explain it in a different way.  No matter if they win or lose, early or late in the year.  What does matter is HOW they win or lose.  When they beat a baby seal, as you say, that says absolutely nothing about the improvement that were talking about.  If you were to watch them you would understand.  

Btw, my opinion that DLS would have won a few more of those OOS games at the end of the year shouldn't upset you so much.  It's just an opinion.

 

[Goldmember]

21 minutes ago, World Citizen said:

That sounds about right except the last sentence, which is speculative.  And I speculate that they would have won a few more of those good-to-great games.

How is it speculative when I can just look at the results?

It's the truth.

[Goldmember]

22 minutes ago, World Citizen said:

And I speculate that they would have won a few more of those good-to-great games.

Without much evidence, sure. You could do that.

[World Citizen]

1 minute ago, Goldmember said:

How is it speculative when I can just look at the results?

It's the truth.

You said "regardless of when the game was played." 

That is speculative. 

[World Citizen]

2 minutes ago, Goldmember said:

Without much evidence, sure. You could do that.

Evidence is not required in order to speculate.  I have stated my reasons for this already.  If you disagree with it that is fine. 

[NYHSFAN33]

41 minutes ago, World Citizen said:

You said "regardless of when the game was played." 

That is speculative. 

I disagree.  Included in that “loss % to elite teams” are games from early in the season and in the CA open bowl.  How is it speculative when the results include both the first and last games of the year?

[ECHS05]

DLS....

The only team in America thats found the secret formula to "hyper-improvement"... 😂

Thats much more likely than they are just playing weaker teams later.

Stranger though that... Most of their losses are to OOS teams. So many coincidences it almost beggars belief.

[ThunderRam]

50 minutes ago, ECHS05 said:

 

Stranger though that... Most of their losses are to OOS teams. So many coincidences it almost beggars belief.

Why is it that you're the one almost always leading the charge for the truly dense on this topic? It's really not hard to see that there's no connection to playing out of State. It's the level of opponent regardless whether it's OOS or within CA.

DLS has 8 OOS losses since 2004. How many of those 8 weren't top 25/50 in the Nation? How many weren't top 100?

In the same time span since 2004, DLS has 9 losses and 2 ties in CA. 5 of those were in State title games and the other 6 were during the dark days of 2004/05.

Point is, with the notable exception of 2004/05, it has typically taken top Nationally ranked team or a CA State champ to beat them (they also win those games sometimes too).

How you can consistently take that info and spin it into what you do is beyond comical.

If DLS relocated to GA next season, they'd only lose when facing a team capable of winning State -- just like what happens in CA now.

In case you hadn't noticed, DLS is 7-5 in State title games in CA. The 7-8 record against elite OOS means that they are give or take 1 game away from being around .500 for each. Pretty close.

So as demonstrated, crossing the CA border doesn't matter. Their record against teams of their own caliber is around .500 regardless where those teams are located.

Perhaps one day soon you'll wake up to this reality rather than believe the fantasy you keep selling yourself.

BTW, if 2018 Folsom is truly a top 25/50 National team and/or a team capable of winning the CA Open -- they will have a legit chance to beat DLS just like every other team of that same caliber has. If they aren't of that caliber, they'll lose. Just like every other non-elite team has. It won't have anything to do with their school being based in CA.

 

 

[ECHS05]

19 minutes ago, ThunderRam said:

Why is it that you're the one almost always leading the charge for the truly dense on this topic? It's really not hard to see that there's no connection to playing out of State. It's the level of opponent regardless whether it's OOS or within CA.

DLS has 8 OOS losses since 2004. How many of those 8 weren't top 25/50 in the Nation? How many weren't top 100?

In the same time span since 2004, DLS has 9 losses and 2 ties in CA. 5 of those were in State title games and the other 6 were during the dark days of 2004/05.

Point is, with the notable exception of 2004/05, it has typically taken top Nationally ranked team or a CA State champ to beat them (they also win those games sometimes too).

How you can consistently take that info and spin it into what you do is beyond comical.

If DLS relocated to GA next season, they'd only lose when facing a team capable of winning State -- just like what happens in CA now.

In case you hadn't noticed, DLS is 7-5 in State title games in CA. The 8-9 record against elite OOS means that they are give or take 1 game away from being around .500 for each. Pretty close.

So as demonstrated, crossing the CA border doesn't matter. Their record against teams of their own caliber is around .500 regardless where those teams are located.

Perhaps one day soon you'll wake up to this reality rather than believe the fantasy you keep selling yourself.

BTW, if 2018 Folsom is truly a top 25/50 National team and/or a team capable of winning the CA Open -- they will have a legit chance to beat DLS just like every other team of that same caliber has. If they aren't of that caliber, they'll lose. Just like every other non-elite team has. It won't have anything to do with their school being based in CA.

 

 

Let me spare you the drama... They arent.

Another overrated CA team DLS homers will pound their chest about.

The only real team they play... Will come from Nevada.. And DLS will add to their sub-.500 record OOS.

[Sammyswordsman]

8 minutes ago, ECHS05 said:

Let me spare you the drama... They arent.

Another overrated CA team DLS homers will pound their chest about.

The only real team they play... Will come from Nevada.. And DLS will add to their sub-.500 record OOS.

Very few Calif teams are overrated but the devil is an exception. 

[DLS350]

1 hour ago, ThunderRam said:

Perhaps one day soon you'll wake up to this reality rather than believe the fantasy you keep selling yourself.

 

 

 

He’ll never wake up. His distain for DLS and California plus the recognition DLS receives and has received blinds him. He can only hope and wish that one day a Goergia team will travel OOS as much as DLS and have an equivalent record. That’s not gonna happen though since Georgia teams don’t travel much, especially cross country. When they dare to, they get Norcrossed!