Once again, congratulations to all of the CIF sectional/divisional champions. Also once again, I will start with a discussion, then move onto the two sets of potential games (one with Clovis North in NorCal and one with them in SoCal).
Clovis North - Yes, geographically, it makes more sense to have Clovis North in NorCal, but in terms of competitive equity, I feel the Broncos should be placed in SoCal.
Serra and Clovis North - Serra has wins over the NCS Open (DLS) and SJS D-I (Folsom) champs. Clovis North has a win over the CS D-II champ (Central Valley Christian) and JSerra out of the SS. CalHi has the Padres higher while Calpreps has nudged the Broncos higher. I think the overall resume will favor Serra for the NorCal Open bid (NorCal version).
Mission Viejo - Ultimately, I don't think it matters where Clovis North is placed as far as D-1AA is concerned. I don't see anyone beating the Diablos.
La Serna and St. Bonaventure - These teams are the SS D-4 and D-3 champs, respectively, however La Serna has the higher Calpreps rating. I think that unless these two are matched up (see SoCal version below), the SS will push for the Seraphs to be placed higher. They have a common opponent win (Warren) and I suspect the SS will try to keep divisional integrity to a certain degree, particularly since the Calpreps numbers are so close and the difference probably doesn't matter much.
McClymonds - The Warriors' Calpreps rating really took a massive hit due to their poor league and playoff structure. Although it stands at 26.2 at the moment, I think it would be more fair to only consider the four non-league games that really matter. In those games, they have an average rating of 34.2. I think that is a better representation of the team and I am guessing that the CIF is not going to want this team all the way down in D-4AA. Clovis North's presence in the NorCal roster pushes them down to D-3A, but I think that is just one of the examples of why the Broncos belong in the South. CalHi is projecting them to be in D-2A and while I do think they could be competitive there, it's only because the 2A and 3AA teams are so close. I see the CIF giving them a boost from their rating, but 12 points? I'm not so sure about that.
Orland, Miramonte, Palo Alto, and Colusa - If you were to combine the enrollments of Orland and Colusa, you still wouldn't reach that of Palo Alto. I think the CIF has generally disregarded this criterion as part of the discussion, but it still looks kind of bad. Could the Vikings be moved up in division to meet Miramonte? Yes, I could see that. In review of Colusa's schedule, a couple of their wins were not so different than those of Orland. But would the CIF want to pit the two NS teams together when there is an 8.3 gap? Would the NS want to see this take place to guarantee one of their teams in a state final? Would the NS want to risk the elimination of both teams if they don't do this? Could the CIF move Palo Alto up to face Orland and Miramonte down to play Colusa? I can see that, too. Is Colusa's 6.9 rating real? Miramonte just beat St. Bernard's by 22 and their final rating is 6.0.
El Cerrito and Marin Catholic - Yes, there is a divisional integrity aspect to placing El Cerrito higher. But deep down in the decimal places, Calpreps has them ahead, too. I decided to play along. In the SoCal version, it doesn't matter. The NCS could try to split the teams by suggesting McClymonds should be higher, but then you have the same philosophical questions as with the Northern Section teams. But, with identical ratings, who could deny the potential for competitive equity?
Birmingham and Simi Valley - Again, Calpreps has Birmingham ahead down the decimal line. Plus, I think the CIF would want to indicate a little respect to the LA City Section (deserved or undeserved). In the SoCal version, again/of course, it doesn't matter.
Ramona and Torrance - Here is another divisional integrity questions for two SS teams. Ramona won the D-11 title, while Torrance won D-10, but the Calpreps ratings are reversed (15.2 and 13.2, respectively). In this case, however, I can see the LA City Section protesting about moving Ramona down to face Banning (NorCal version). A Calpreps rating gap of 4.4 might be ok, but that would certainly be more desirable than 7.4. In the SoCal version (you guessed it), it doesn't matter.
Clovis North - Yes, geographically, it makes more sense to have Clovis North in NorCal, but in terms of competitive equity, I feel the Broncos should be placed in SoCal.
Serra and Clovis North - Serra has wins over the NCS Open (DLS) and SJS D-I (Folsom) champs. Clovis North has a win over the CS D-II champ (Central Valley Christian) and JSerra out of the SS. CalHi has the Padres higher while Calpreps has nudged the Broncos higher. I think the overall resume will favor Serra for the NorCal Open bid (NorCal version).
Mission Viejo - Ultimately, I don't think it matters where Clovis North is placed as far as D-1AA is concerned. I don't see anyone beating the Diablos.
La Serna and St. Bonaventure - These teams are the SS D-4 and D-3 champs, respectively, however La Serna has the higher Calpreps rating. I think that unless these two are matched up (see SoCal version below), the SS will push for the Seraphs to be placed higher. They have a common opponent win (Warren) and I suspect the SS will try to keep divisional integrity to a certain degree, particularly since the Calpreps numbers are so close and the difference probably doesn't matter much.
McClymonds - The Warriors' Calpreps rating really took a massive hit due to their poor league and playoff structure. Although it stands at 26.2 at the moment, I think it would be more fair to only consider the four non-league games that really matter. In those games, they have an average rating of 34.2. I think that is a better representation of the team and I am guessing that the CIF is not going to want this team all the way down in D-4AA. Clovis North's presence in the NorCal roster pushes them down to D-3A, but I think that is just one of the examples of why the Broncos belong in the South. CalHi is projecting them to be in D-2A and while I do think they could be competitive there, it's only because the 2A and 3AA teams are so close. I see the CIF giving them a boost from their rating, but 12 points? I'm not so sure about that.
Orland, Miramonte, Palo Alto, and Colusa - If you were to combine the enrollments of Orland and Colusa, you still wouldn't reach that of Palo Alto. I think the CIF has generally disregarded this criterion as part of the discussion, but it still looks kind of bad. Could the Vikings be moved up in division to meet Miramonte? Yes, I could see that. In review of Colusa's schedule, a couple of their wins were not so different than those of Orland. But would the CIF want to pit the two NS teams together when there is an 8.3 gap? Would the NS want to see this take place to guarantee one of their teams in a state final? Would the NS want to risk the elimination of both teams if they don't do this? Could the CIF move Palo Alto up to face Orland and Miramonte down to play Colusa? I can see that, too. Is Colusa's 6.9 rating real? Miramonte just beat St. Bernard's by 22 and their final rating is 6.0.
El Cerrito and Marin Catholic - Yes, there is a divisional integrity aspect to placing El Cerrito higher. But deep down in the decimal places, Calpreps has them ahead, too. I decided to play along. In the SoCal version, it doesn't matter. The NCS could try to split the teams by suggesting McClymonds should be higher, but then you have the same philosophical questions as with the Northern Section teams. But, with identical ratings, who could deny the potential for competitive equity?
Birmingham and Simi Valley - Again, Calpreps has Birmingham ahead down the decimal line. Plus, I think the CIF would want to indicate a little respect to the LA City Section (deserved or undeserved). In the SoCal version, again/of course, it doesn't matter.
Ramona and Torrance - Here is another divisional integrity questions for two SS teams. Ramona won the D-11 title, while Torrance won D-10, but the Calpreps ratings are reversed (15.2 and 13.2, respectively). In this case, however, I can see the LA City Section protesting about moving Ramona down to face Banning (NorCal version). A Calpreps rating gap of 4.4 might be ok, but that would certainly be more desirable than 7.4. In the SoCal version (you guessed it), it doesn't matter.
Last edited:
