The Power Lies On The East side of the State

[F5seekshelter]

[coach77]

I don't remember anyone including ICM say CPA would whip Alcoa. I said the game would be closer than you guys thought and it was. But clearly Alcoa was the better team that night. Clearly you've been a great team for many years for a number of reasons including coaching, hard work, etc. i'm not taking that away. I'm just looking at statistical data that suggests the open

enrollment system helps an already strong program. If it was only 2-3 kids that didn't make an impact you could declare those kids ineligible and keep rolling but if it is as much as a third of the roster that lives OOZ or even as little as 5-10% then the multiplier should be applied. those kind of numbers make a difference if those kids are making plays.

 

CPA is a 1A school in population playing up to 3A because of the multiplier. We do not have numbers to avoid playing kids both ways. Every team we've played in 3A until Alcoa plays kids both ways. Alcoa had almost no one going both ways in the champ game. The difference in depth was obvious.

 

If 36% of your student population is OOZ then clearly some of those kids are playing sports and playing football. It gives Alcoa an advantage over smaller schools.

 

If you applied the multiplier I think Alcoa would be very competitive in 4A or 5A and probably still win championships. But the numbers of players on the rosters of both teams would be more in line.

 

I'm not whining or crying. I'm not hating. I have much respect for Alcoa. I'm trying to make a logical point. If i am wrong please Disprove my point with logic by disclosing the exact number of guys that play in the top 22 on each side of the ball that are OOZ. People close to that community know who lives there and who drives in. If it truly is only a few players and they did not make plays and you can prove it then you can put this to rest. But if you have starters on either side of the ball making plays zoned to another school then the multiplier should apply. It becomes an advantage when OOZ kids are starters or in the 2 deep.

 

I'm surprised more public schools that do not have open enrollment haven't brought this up before. Most of this board I've read targets private schools who have the multiplier.

 

There was 1 out if 12 teams in champ games that were private and that team lost. Seems like the open enrollment issue makes a bigger impact than private versus public. Treat open enrollment same as private. That's all I am saying.

 

Worthwhile discussion.

[BCsportsfan]

O'man.......Cynid.....uh......ICM is getting owned!hehe!

[F5seekshelter]

[F5seekshelter]

I don't remember anyone including ICM say CPA would whip Alcoa. I said the game would be closer than you guys thought and it was. But clearly Alcoa was the better team that night. Clearly you've been a great team for many years for a number of reasons including coaching, hard work, etc. i'm not taking that away. I'm just looking at statistical data that suggests the open

enrollment system helps an already strong program. If it was only 2-3 kids that didn't make an impact you could declare those kids ineligible and keep rolling but if it is as much as a third of the roster that lives OOZ or even as little as 5-10% then the multiplier should be applied. those kind of numbers make a difference if those kids are making plays.

 

CPA is a 1A school in population playing up to 3A because of the multiplier. We do not have numbers to avoid playing kids both ways. Every team we've played in 3A until Alcoa plays kids both ways. Alcoa had almost no one going both ways in the champ game. The difference in depth was obvious.

 

If 36% of your student population is OOZ then clearly some of those kids are playing sports and playing football. It gives Alcoa an advantage over smaller schools.

 

If you applied the multiplier I think Alcoa would be very competitive in 4A or 5A and probably still win championships. But the numbers of players on the rosters of both teams would be more in line.

 

I'm not whining or crying. I'm not hating. I have much respect for Alcoa. I'm trying to make a logical point. If i am wrong please Disprove my point with logic by disclosing the exact number of guys that play in the top 22 on each side of the ball that are OOZ. People close to that community know who lives there and who drives in. If it truly is only a few players and they did not make plays and you can prove it then you can put this to rest. But if you have starters on either side of the ball making plays zoned to another school then the multiplier should apply. It becomes an advantage when OOZ kids are starters or in the 2 deep.

 

I'm surprised more public schools that do not have open enrollment haven't brought this up before. Most of this board I've read targets private schools who have the multiplier.

 

There was 1 out if 12 teams in champ games that were private and that team lost. Seems like the open enrollment issue makes a bigger impact than private versus public. Treat open enrollment same as private. That's all I am saying.

 

Worthwhile discussion.

You need to go back and read almost all of Cyanidemetal's comments beginning about three to four weeks ago. At least the ones he couldn't delete before the dogs hit the porch. I know you read them. You guys sure do have short memories......lol!

 

 

By the way, BC copied many of them! You can read them at the very beginning of the Alcoa vs CPA thread....

Edited December 12, 2013 by F5seekshelter

[alcoafan72]

 Alcoa had almost no one going both ways in the champ game. The difference in depth was obvious.

 

95+% of Alcoa's championship teams had players going both ways. Do better research!

Edited December 12, 2013 by alcoafan72

[alcoafan72]

Depth @ Alcoa= new phenomenon

[F5seekshelter]

 

 

Alcoa had almost no one going both ways in the champ game. The difference in depth was obvious.

 

95+% of Alcoa's championship teams had players going both ways. Do better research!

Just excuses 72, just excuses. They knew what was coming, ran those flaps and got it handed to them on a big ole silver platter! A platter to match that big silver ball they took home! Lol!

[F5seekshelter]

Depth @ Alcoa= new phenomenon

Not to mention the 1 stud that broke off 49 carries for 278 yards. Lol! Hum, I wonder who's gonna get the ball? I think #2 just scored again! Lol!

[alcoafan72]

Not to mention the 1 stud that broke off 49 carries for 278 yards. Lol! Hum, I wonder who's gonna get the ball? I think #2 just scored again! Lol!

Lol, everyone who saw the game knew who was going to get the ball. The real funny thing is that this coach guy really believes that they would have been able to stop him on a dry surface-ha! If they concentrated on #2, then #1 would have unleashed his arm as well as his legs (first score). Not to mention trying to stop a non-hypothermic Malik...oh boy!!!

 

 

This is what I texted to #2 before the game: "This is it! It's what you've worked all season and the last two years for...you are the leader. Run hard, keep the ball high and tight-leave it on the field!"  Boy oh boy did he listen!

[BCsportsfan]

Sitting here thinking how great its was beating CPA and how funny it is knowing CynideMetal KNEW he could NOT back up all his talk! Classic! To go to all the trouble to completely erase his account and all post maybe the funniest thiing on the "t" in a log time! One word for that...........OWNED! Ha!

[F5seekshelter]

Lol, everyone who saw the game knew who was going to get the ball. The real funny thing is that this coach guy really believes that they would have been able to stop him on a dry surface-ha! If they concentrated on #2, then #1 would have unleashed his arm as well as his legs (first score). Not to mention trying to stop a non-hypothermic Malik...oh boy!!!

 

 

This is what I texted to #2 before the game: "This is it! It's what you've worked all season and the last two years for...you are the leader. Run hard, keep the ball high and tight-leave it on the field!" Boy oh boy did he listen!

Man did he! Lol! The man was on fire!

 

On a dry field,

 

Alcoa 49 (at least)

CPA 7

Edited December 12, 2013 by F5seekshelter