DLS 41-point underdogs

[remc]

All assumptions. Without questions MD recruits, so does DLS (and very aggressively). Your claims that everyone knows something you have zero evidence of is not cool.

How do you know who recruits more aggressively?

 

[larry legend33]

To make a statement Mater Dei kids are receiving cash payments without evidence is outlandish. It's clear scholarships, transportation and help with living arrangements are on the table. Cash payments to athletes to attend the school? I will need proof, and it sounds like you have zero.

You guys are all just beating around the bush. So does a kid get an envelope with cash in it after each game? Probably not.
Are they getting to go to school for free, parents are "helped", flown places for showcases, unlimited gear, etc etc. Those things are absolutely happening and probably more. And have been for years. If you don't believe that then you probably believe our far east friends in "CHYNAH" aren't listening in on our calls.

 

[fbjunke1]

You guys are all just beating around the bush. So does a kid get an envelope with cash in it after each game? Probably not.
Are they getting to go to school for free, parents are "helped", flown places for showcases, unlimited gear, etc etc. Those things are absolutely happening and probably more. And have been for years. If you don't believe that then you probably believe our far east friends in "CHYNAH" aren't listening in on our calls.

Well said, it's the exposure, gear, clout, free school. The process builds on itself as it grows. Obviously, Bosco is similar, but not far behind are public schools like Mission Viejo, Cent10, and dare I say Folsom (ramp up the schedule!).

 

[OLCoach51]

All assumptions. Without questions MD recruits, so does DLS (and very aggressively). Your claims that everyone knows something you have zero evidence of is not cool.

I don't know why this turns into an argument or even discussion. Nobody wants to see the labor, everyone wants to see the baby. Even if there is really insidious stuff going on, nobody at the CIF level has the resources or wherewithal to enforce anything of substance. If we set that aside, this is the current state of Ca football as I see it.

Some schools don't give a crap about football, and the way they approach it shows. Those programs are generationally bad, and in the places where they have equity leagues like the peninsula they end up at the bottom. Constant HC turnover. There are many reasons why these schools end up this way but none of that matters. Mills, Lynbrook, etc. If your kid has a shred of ability he never ends up here. You actively find another place for him. There are some schools like this in the SJS too.

Others have a lukewarm approach. They get some decent athletes, committed coaches that bridge the gap and give tons of free time to make sure things get done despite limited resources. These programs can go up or down depending on the admin and whether the HC and his staff are inclined toward indentured servitude (grinding outside the school day for free.)

You will see a playoff run every now and then. May or may not have a few on campus coaches and may or may not have some athletic PE. Homestead good example-was a perennial playoff team under Milo. As soon as they treated him poorly and he left, disaster. His staff carried that school for years despite the lukewarm support.

Then you have 3 more levels.

1. The dedicated publics that intentionally try to maximize their potential. They keep a good amount of their homegrown talent and can often compete with the WCAL schools. Wilcox, Gatos, most SFL schools. They intentionally hire on campus coaches and have dedicated all year athletic PE to ensure development of athletes. Can occasionally sniff the top level of HS football (not national) in this state (see below.)

2. DLS, most WCAL schools, Folsom, Pitt, Lincoln SD, Mission Viejo, Grant, Edison HB and a few others are now in a spot where they can typically whack all the aforementioned schools, but don't have the sheer firepower to beat the teams in the next category. These are state level top tier programs that do some outreach and get kids that come to congregate with other good players and coaches. Most of this is the families voluntarily taking their kids there with maybe a hint of steering/recruiting. Generational success but not national caliber.

3. MD, Bosco, IMG etc. "We want to be good at football at a national level."

Whatever resources that requires, we will find a way. We DO NOT care about public perception, and our constituents and supporters are fully aware of our methodology and stated goals of national prominence.

Would love to hear thoughts on this.

 

[remc]

I don't know why this turns into an argument or even discussion. Nobody wants to see the labor, everyone wants to see the baby. Even if there is really insidious stuff going on, nobody at the CIF level has the resources or wherewithal to enforce anything of substance. If we set that aside, this is the current state of Ca football as I see it.

Some schools don't give a crap about football, and the way they approach it shows. Those programs are generationally bad, and in the places where they have equity leagues like the peninsula they end up at the bottom. Constant HC turnover. There are many reasons why these schools end up this way but none of that matters. Mills, Lynbrook, etc. If your kid has a shred of ability he never ends up here. You actively find another place for him. There are some schools like this in the SJS too.

Others have a lukewarm approach. They get some decent athletes, committed coaches that bridge the gap and give tons of free time to make sure things get done despite limited resources. These programs can go up or down depending on the admin and whether the HC and his staff are inclined toward indentured servitude (grinding outside the school day for free.)

You will see a playoff run every now and then. May or may not have a few on campus coaches and may or may not have some athletic PE. Homestead good example-was a perennial playoff team under Milo. As soon as they treated him poorly and he left, disaster. His staff carried that school for years despite the lukewarm support.

Then you have 3 more levels.

1. The dedicated publics that intentionally try to maximize their potential. They keep a good amount of their homegrown talent and can often compete with the WCAL schools. Wilcox, Gatos, most SFL schools. They intentionally hire on campus coaches and have dedicated all year athletic PE to ensure development of athletes. Can occasionally sniff the top level of HS football (not national) in this state (see below.)

2. DLS, most WCAL schools, Folsom, Pitt, Lincoln SD, Mission Viejo, Grant, Edison HB and a few others are now in a spot where they can typically whack all the aforementioned schools, but don't have the sheer firepower to beat the teams in the next category. These are state level top tier programs that do some outreach and get kids that come to congregate with other good players and coaches. Most of this is the families voluntarily taking their kids there with maybe a hint of steering/recruiting. Generational success but not national caliber.

3. MD, Bosco, IMG etc. "We want to be good at football at a national level."

Whatever resources that requires, we will find a way. We DO NOT care about public perception, and our constituents and supporters are fully aware of our methodology and stated goals of national prominence.

Would love to hear thoughts on this.

Well said and well summarized. I agree

 

[OLCoach51]

Well said and well summarized. I agree

Thanks.

I think community, admin and coaching all determine success. And I think it's in that order.

You get what you allow.

 

[remc]

I don't know why this turns into an argument or even discussion. Nobody wants to see the labor, everyone wants to see the baby. Even if there is really insidious stuff going on, nobody at the CIF level has the resources or wherewithal to enforce anything of substance. If we set that aside, this is the current state of Ca football as I see it.

Some schools don't give a crap about football, and the way they approach it shows. Those programs are generationally bad, and in the places where they have equity leagues like the peninsula they end up at the bottom. Constant HC turnover. There are many reasons why these schools end up this way but none of that matters. Mills, Lynbrook, etc. If your kid has a shred of ability he never ends up here. You actively find another place for him. There are some schools like this in the SJS too.

Others have a lukewarm approach. They get some decent athletes, committed coaches that bridge the gap and give tons of free time to make sure things get done despite limited resources. These programs can go up or down depending on the admin and whether the HC and his staff are inclined toward indentured servitude (grinding outside the school day for free.)

You will see a playoff run every now and then. May or may not have a few on campus coaches and may or may not have some athletic PE. Homestead good example-was a perennial playoff team under Milo. As soon as they treated him poorly and he left, disaster. His staff carried that school for years despite the lukewarm support.

Then you have 3 more levels.

1. The dedicated publics that intentionally try to maximize their potential. They keep a good amount of their homegrown talent and can often compete with the WCAL schools. Wilcox, Gatos, most SFL schools. They intentionally hire on campus coaches and have dedicated all year athletic PE to ensure development of athletes. Can occasionally sniff the top level of HS football (not national) in this state (see below.)

2. DLS, most WCAL schools, Folsom, Pitt, Lincoln SD, Mission Viejo, Grant, Edison HB and a few others are now in a spot where they can typically whack all the aforementioned schools, but don't have the sheer firepower to beat the teams in the next category. These are state level top tier programs that do some outreach and get kids that come to congregate with other good players and coaches. Most of this is the families voluntarily taking their kids there with maybe a hint of steering/recruiting. Generational success but not national caliber.

3. MD, Bosco, IMG etc. "We want to be good at football at a national level."

Whatever resources that requires, we will find a way. We DO NOT care about public perception, and our constituents and supporters are fully aware of our methodology and stated goals of national prominence.

Would love to hear thoughts on this.

Id put Corona Centennial in category 2 as well

 

[OLCoach51]

Id put Corona Centennial in category 2 as well

Yeah they may be the outlier because they flirt with playing at level 1.

 

[fbjunke1]

I don't know why this turns into an argument or even discussion. Nobody wants to see the labor, everyone wants to see the baby. Even if there is really insidious stuff going on, nobody at the CIF level has the resources or wherewithal to enforce anything of substance. If we set that aside, this is the current state of Ca football as I see it.

Some schools don't give a crap about football, and the way they approach it shows. Those programs are generationally bad, and in the places where they have equity leagues like the peninsula they end up at the bottom. Constant HC turnover. There are many reasons why these schools end up this way but none of that matters. Mills, Lynbrook, etc. If your kid has a shred of ability he never ends up here. You actively find another place for him. There are some schools like this in the SJS too.

Others have a lukewarm approach. They get some decent athletes, committed coaches that bridge the gap and give tons of free time to make sure things get done despite limited resources. These programs can go up or down depending on the admin and whether the HC and his staff are inclined toward indentured servitude (grinding outside the school day for free.)

You will see a playoff run every now and then. May or may not have a few on campus coaches and may or may not have some athletic PE. Homestead good example-was a perennial playoff team under Milo. As soon as they treated him poorly and he left, disaster. His staff carried that school for years despite the lukewarm support.

Then you have 3 more levels.

1. The dedicated publics that intentionally try to maximize their potential. They keep a good amount of their homegrown talent and can often compete with the WCAL schools. Wilcox, Gatos, most SFL schools. They intentionally hire on campus coaches and have dedicated all year athletic PE to ensure development of athletes. Can occasionally sniff the top level of HS football (not national) in this state (see below.)

2. DLS, most WCAL schools, Folsom, Pitt, Lincoln SD, Mission Viejo, Grant, Edison HB and a few others are now in a spot where they can typically whack all the aforementioned schools, but don't have the sheer firepower to beat the teams in the next category. These are state level top tier programs that do some outreach and get kids that come to congregate with other good players and coaches. Most of this is the families voluntarily taking their kids there with maybe a hint of steering/recruiting. Generational success but not national caliber.

3. MD, Bosco, IMG etc. "We want to be good at football at a national level."

Whatever resources that requires, we will find a way. We DO NOT care about public perception, and our constituents and supporters are fully aware of our methodology and stated goals of national prominence.

Would love to hear thoughts on this.

I think this is a good start, however, MD and Bosco are not IMG. 90% plus of MD and Bosco are So Cal kids, IMG is grabbing their roster from across the entire nation. The focus at IMG is sports, with school 2nd. This is not the case at MD and Bosco. And would this be a football only situation?

While they have not had the success of MD and Bosco yet, I would put the following schools in the same category as them as far as efforts to win go: Mission Viejo, Orange Lutheran, Cent10, Sierra Canyon, Servite, Santa Margarita, Lincoln (SD), Jserra, Folsom, and Riordan. I would say DLS is not far behind this list, and either is Serra, SI, Saint Francis and Cardinal Newman. The DLS issue IMO is their offensive system, not that they arent doing a lot of the same things others above are doing. Would love to discuss this topic more.

 

[OLCoach51]

I think this is a good start, however, MD and Bosco are not IMG. 90% plus of MD and Bosco are So Cal kids, IMG is grabbing their roster from across the entire nation. The focus at IMG is sports, with school 2nd. This is not the case at MD and Bosco. And would this be a football only situation?

While they have not had the success of MD and Bosco yet, I would put the following schools in the same category as them as far as efforts to win go: Mission Viejo, Orange Lutheran, Cent10, Sierra Canyon, Servite, Santa Margarita, Lincoln (SD), Jserra, Folsom, and Riordan. I would say DLS is not far behind this list, and either is Serra, SI, Saint Francis and Cardinal Newman. The DLS issue IMO is their offensive system, not that they are doing a lot of the same things others above are doing. Would love to discuss this topic more.

I don’t disagree with you. I think you’re right about IMG having a bigger reach. But SoCal is so talent rich I think it balances out.

 

[remc]

Yeah they may be the outlier because they flirt with playing at level 1.

Yeah…… that’s a tough call

 

[ankleassassin]

I think this is a good start, however, MD and Bosco are not IMG. 90% plus of MD and Bosco are So Cal kids, IMG is grabbing their roster from across the entire nation. The focus at IMG is sports, with school 2nd. This is not the case at MD and Bosco. And would this be a football only situation?

While they have not had the success of MD and Bosco yet, I would put the following schools in the same category as them as far as efforts to win go: Mission Viejo, Orange Lutheran, Cent10, Sierra Canyon, Servite, Santa Margarita, Lincoln (SD), Jserra, Folsom, and Riordan. I would say DLS is not far behind this list, and either is Serra, SI, Saint Francis and Cardinal Newman. The DLS issue IMO is their offensive system, not that they arent doing a lot of the same things others above are doing. Would love to discuss this topic more.

Offensive system, and not enough athletes compared to the So Cal.

 

[fbjunke1]

Offensive system, and not enough athletes compared to the So Cal.

Perhaps it's the chicken and the egg also. I know multiple parents at Pitt, most have said their boys would have been at DLS if not for their archaic offensive system. Heck, DLS was all over most of these boys in 8th grade and they went with Pitt over a free private education and the veer.