You are right. This forum is for discussion, not for resolutions.
I just thought if you were putting them on blast like that, you would at least take the time to counter my points if you deem them invalid.
Folsom possibly being exiled from SFL
- Thread starter cookie530
- Start date
I just thought if you were putting them on blast like that, you would at least take the time to counter my points if you deem them invalid.
I reject your whole premise that there is an “issue” to begin with.
I would like to hear your stance on running up scores, as mentioned in the Sac Bee article. It stated coaches had data compiled on this.
Your team was just down 56-0 at halftime. Folsom starters were out with 3 minutes left in the 3rd and the entire 4th quarter. Folsom coaches took the foot off the gas on the offense the entire second half. The second string recovered a fumble in the red zone in the 4th quarter and made zero attempt to even try to score.
Honest question- how is this running up the score?
Don't bother. TALENT separates programs. Coaching is good across the board in the SFL, it's the talent that separates a Folsom from a Whitney and everyone in between. It's why colleges put so much into recruiting. They know it's talent not their coach egos that are gonna win games. The bottom line is some fans look at high school football as a level playing field (Folsom and DLS supporters) and others know better. Don't bother.
I have no issue of Folsom running up scores. We have played Folsom relatively close the prior two seasons. This year, they have the guns that separate them from everyone else in the SJS. I really believe we are in the top 5 of SJS this season and they took us to the shed 62-6. I have never been apart of a loss like that before. Even with their star power they ran reverse pass and hook and ladder special plays for scores. They wanted to prove a point this season and they did. In the spirit of competition, I’m okay with it...it all happened in the first half. The issue of running up the score is a non-issue with OR. It’s one thing and one thing only...open vs closed enrollment.
Like I said before, I will respond to prior comments for the sake of good discussion after the weekend when I have more time. Thanks
If you don’t have an issue with trick plays why bother bringing it up in this post? Hoping that a neutral fan that didn’t watch the game will read this and dislike Folsom more?
What is your problem?
I was suggesting they gave us everything the first half to get to 56-0. It’s been competitive the two prior years and they wanted to go for it, as would we have. We had ZERO problem with it. I was responding to Cookie530 specifically about his question regarding Folsom running up scores.
How do you tell players not to score? They have so many weapons that can go the distance at any given play called.
Hopefully, this is clear for you.
This is embarrassing for other coaches. Step-up. Compete. Wanting to change the rules because you fail to win is a loser's mentality. I look at Folsom's record at the youth, Freshman, and JV levels and I see a team that just WINS.
Simply saying Folsom did anything they wanted, including trick plays which don't have a high success rate, and it all worked for scores. OR was clearly outmatched as MCIC admitted. The only issue they have is with enrollment (level playing field). Tonight OR plays DO who doesn't have issues with enrollment because they allow anyone outside their boundaries to play. They have starters from GB, Rocklin, Roseville, etc. If not, they are average at best.
Clearly there is nothing to settle. It was stated that the SFL vote to remove Folsom would have to be unanimous - with Folsom having a vote. In other words, only Folsom can decide if they are to go independent. And the principal gave the answer emphatically (NO).
So to continue the debate is just whining.
As for the open enrollment thing, that is just a diversion. It is a school DISTRICT policy that is not tied to athletics. As the Coach Richardson mentioned, ANY and EVERY team would play the kids that attend their school and are eligible.
I would suggest that these SFL teams look inward for answers since that is all they really control. Maybe the complaining head coaches should look at themselves to see if they might be part of the problem and competitive imbalance?
I look forward to your post. I really do.
I am just not sure what there is to argue. Other schools have open enrollment, to include Del Oro in the SFL and not a word about them. In terms of normal standards, they have been overall quite dominant for a long period of time. No mention of them? And for the record, I have nothing against Del Oro and love their program and everything they are about.
El Dorado Hills has ONE High School. It is a very desirable area to live, with a premium high school that MANY parents would kill to send their kids to. With that said, can you imagine what the flood gates of open enrollment would do to a school like that? I understand Oak Ridge is already at or near max as it is. Would that be fair to the current residents and students? No.
Folsom has TWO High Schools. Folsom is part of the Folsom-Cordova school district. They SCHOOL DISTRICT has an open enrollment policy, not Folsom or Vista High Schools. The district includes Cordova High School. I might add that there is plenty of room at Cordova High and you can get in there, via open enrollment at ANY time.
In the districts eyes, it would not be fair to have an open enrollment policy at one of their schools and not the others. Soooooooooooooooooooo- technically there IS AN OPEN ENROLLMENT POLICY for Folsom and Vista High Schools. But, if you care to read the fine print, you will notice it is space available. Meaning, first come first serve basis. The problem is that both Folsom HSs are at or near capacity. Bottom line up front is that you are NOT getting into a Folsom HS in the near future via open enrollment. Now, if you move into Folsom and can prove a full family move to the CIF, you can attend. Simple as that.
I wanted to clear this up before anyone else attempts to muddy the waters or insinuate that things are happening that really aren't. Hard to argue your case about open enrollment when the policy lead to ZERO players on this years Folsom team coming in on it. The one transfer they got, actually moved to Folsom and had to sit out 4 games! Imagine that! And people are still complaining!
The rhetoric is comical- "All your players are transfers!" "Your players aren't homegrown!" "Open enrollment is benefiting you!"........... and this is all after the trolling, stating that Folsom needs to "step up" their scheduling and play MD, SJB, etc.....all of which have 50-70 transfers on ONE TEAM! Then, turn around and say, "we don't want you in our league!"
Bad look for a few of the SFL programs. Really disappointing.
Exactly my point. And I believe the Del Oro program is great and truly respect them. They do nothing wrong and adhere to all the rules at all times. They attract great kids from the greater surrounding area because of who they are and what they represent. Not that different from the school with the blue turf about 10 miles or so away.
No problem at all, I have no dog in the fight. I just found it interesting that you had absolutely no problem with it, but you still felt the need to bring that in to the conversation when nobody was talking about that.
I appreciate all of the points you made. Great info, thanks for sharing.
I only quoted the one item above since I believe it's the real key to all of this. And connects to another point that had been discussed in another thread in recent weeks about things such as video on the sidelines and in-ear communication. IMO, the underlining point was about having a level playing field across the board.
Nobody should be allowed a distinct competitive advantage beyond one's own skill level and athleticism. Sure, some programs have more $$ and can afford better equipment and better facilities. But those advantages have been proven to be nowhere near as significant as say, teams not having equal practice time or open enrollment. I realize that advantages will always exist and the CIF, sections and leagues themselves can't legislate them all. IMO it's about identifying the most egregious then finding a solution.
In this case, open enrollment is an obvious and significant advantage. I don't find it a coincidence that the many of the programs have been area powers for quite some time have open enrollment. That's not to say that there aren't open enrollment schools with floundering sports programs, as I'm sure there are. But I believe anyone with an average IQ can recognize the potential for competitive imbalance -- especially once a program establishes itself as a perennial winner.
In a response I posted in the duplicate thread I created last night, I mentioned the idea of these opposing schools petitioning for Open enrollment. Or working with these Open enrollment programs in the SFL to try to close it. I don't pretend to understand the politics of how possible or impossible any of that is, but that's where I'd start. And according to @MCIC that's what's going on. Totally understandable to me.
Silly question, but if open enrollment continues for some and isn't available for others, could this thing boil down to lumping open enrollment schools of similar size into their own leagues? I ask w/o even knowing how many schools/districts even have it. I know the SJUSD had open enrollment when I attended school oh so many years ago. But beyond that and learning from the article that Folsom, Grant Union and Del Oro have it -- I'm clueless.
In summary, I completely understand these coaches/schools complaints about open enrollment and a level playing field. That's a fair discussion IMO. But I detest the motivation of wanting to 86 a program because they've just been too good the past 4 years they've been in the SFL and nobody else can win league.
Last edited:
About 10,000 houses are going in right across Hwy 50. How long do you think Open Enrollment is going to last?
I don’t think a school district should be basing their enrollment policies on how they affect their sports teams one way or the other.
I'm not saying they should. But given that sports are such a $$ maker for schools to help with budget, it's at least something that should be discussed. There's just simply got to be a fair solution somewhere in this. I certainly don't have the answer, but I know discussion is where it all starts.
Perhaps not much longer than the water supply.
https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/05/21/folsom-ranch-water-worries/
That hit at the end was garbage, hopefully the player was suspended. Watch the Rocklin safety get cracked from behind by that coward.
Hard to believe any open enrollment would be happening with this amount of influx into two already packed high schools. And the new high school to be built is at least 10-15 years away.
The water source is of great political intrigue. A long story over beers would be suiting for that subject.
Unless my eyes are deceiving me, that was actually Joe Ngata. I attended that game, but didn't see this hit until watching it just now.
Terrible act by Ngata. I gotta believe it's out of character. I surely hope Coach Richardson lets him know how unacceptable it was. I'm sure he doesn't want to hurt his recruitment by suspending him for a game, so I doubt that happens. But he should crack down on him -- for the integrity of the game if nothing else. There's simply no place for that kind BS.
Shame on those that are posting this as something funny (I've heard something about a video of a hit from this game going viral). This should be Exhibit A of what not to do -- especially in this day and age of player safety.
Last edited:
Was also at this game. Was shocked the player wasn’t ejected. Was also surprised by how much trash talking and personal foul penalties that were thrown. Hopefully this gets fixed for the safety of the players!
That kind of BS could get a kid seriously injured. Total chump move. No place for that in high school sports. Totally agree with you brother.
The player was not ejected? That's ridiculous. I at least hope the other coach sent in this video clip to the league for review.
Agreed. Many more other things to consider. Football is way down on the list.
By the looks of the over population in the city, the district will likely be forced to restrict this policy even more than it is restrictive now.
Just a thought. Since I’ve read things such as Open enrollment being bigger and more complicated than sports, what about just eliminating open enrollment for sports participation?
Meaning, schools/districts can still have open enrollment to attract students and those interested in proprietary programs outside of sports (e.g., auto, agriculture), but if someone wants to also participate in sports, they have to qualify as if the school/district didn’t have open enrollment.
That way the schools/district can still get the kids primarily focused on their academics/programs that want the benefit of a better school or fit, while also weeding out the athletic motivated transfers that don’t qualify within guidelines of enrollment via school boundaries.
I’m sure there’s no perfect answer to this. And there will always be loopholes. But I feel the more they can level things, the better.
Meaning, schools/districts can still have open enrollment to attract students and those interested in proprietary programs outside of sports (e.g., auto, agriculture), but if someone wants to also participate in sports, they have to qualify as if the school/district didn’t have open enrollment.
That way the schools/district can still get the kids primarily focused on their academics/programs that want the benefit of a better school or fit, while also weeding out the athletic motivated transfers that don’t qualify within guidelines of enrollment via school boundaries.
I’m sure there’s no perfect answer to this. And there will always be loopholes. But I feel the more they can level things, the better.
My understanding is that the player remained in the game. I would be willing to bet that Benzel and staff have been steamed about this, thus the animated quotes in Sac Bee. For the record, kids make bad judgements and it’s a passionate game but geez, that hit could have caused some serious damage. I couldn’t help but be pissed when I saw that.
As for the trash talk etc, I get it, but after all the personal fouls in this lopsided game, late hits and general disrespect for an opponent e.g. lining up at the home teams side 40 yd during pregame, throwing up whatever signs, cursing at sidelines and staff...
That bs is on the coaching staff. It’s just lame in my opinion but I digress.
Cookie what is your take on this hit by JOE NAGATA. I was not in attendance but just saw the video clip. I have heard that was Joe's second personal foul, which I think calls for ejection with suspension for the following game? Since you seem to be inside Folsom football, what was Coach Richardson's response to such a cowardly cheap shot? I don't need to know about what happened in Texas.....by all accounts this flagrant foul seems to be what riled up the Rocklin community not losing a game which was aforgone conclusion..
Wonder if the Rocklin folks ever talked with their defensive coordinator and asked him how he behaved before the game even started? Wonder if they asked him about the vulgar language and physical threats he directed to his opponent before the game even started while on the field with his kids? And ask him if any of those vulgarities were directed specifically at a player named Ngata? Not excusing the hit but things happen for a reason and its a shame when an adult is the cause of it.
That's exactly what they are saying, and I agree. Folsom is not playing with the same rules as everyone else in the league is. With the exception of DO and Grant, all other teams in the SFL don't have open enrollment.
I'm not sure how Folsom Coaches think this is the same playing field. Coming from a one high school town with kids that grow up there and play together since they have been 6 years old and watching the same kids at the Varsity level win games, league championships, section titles, 2 state appearances and one state win is something to be very proud of knowing it was with your own. And win or lose, they did it with there own. I'm not sure how the coaching staff at Folsom could be proud of beating the teams in the SFL by 50 points a game, while all the time knowing you just recruited kids to make an ALL STAR team. Or even if they aren't all recruites, just knowing these kids moved from out of state and other towns to make up that all star team. The other SFL teams don't stand a chance. I guess Folsom feels a win is a win no matter how it gets done. Sad way to look at it. I would have a hard time feeling proud of the beat downs knowing you have kids from all over playing for you, yet most other teams in the SFL have to play with there own. If Folsom had to play college teams week after week, I don't think hey would think it's fair. They could never win. This is how the SFL league feels about Folsom. To all of the SFL teams that play with their own, hats off to you.
I was waiting for someone else to mention it. I wanted to see who attended the game and who didn't. It is now clear.
Thank you for clearing this up.
I have addressed this in multiple threads if you go back and read. Folsom does not have open enrollment. Folsom Cordova Unified School district has an "open enrollment policy." This applies to Cordova High, Vista, and Folsom. However, Folsom and Vista are at capacity and only take kids on a first come first serve basis via open enrollment. Do to the capacity issues at both Folsom schools, almost nobody gets in via open enrollment. You have to live in Folsom to play there, period. If you look at their roster this year, you won't be able to find one "open enrollment student."
You can't be serious. There are been a handful of teams in the SJS alone in the last 40 years who have dominated, won titles, and beat teams regularly by 50 plus. And most of them weren't SFL teams! Not a peep. No threats to axe anyone from a league.
Bulldog nation has been proud of their program, win or lose, for its inception. The coaches work harder than any coaches I know and push those players to new heights. That attracts talent. If you don't like it, push your school to do the same. This is 2018, not 1975.
Here's a rather bold statement- NO SFL TEAMS play with all of "their own" kids. Not every kid was born down the street from the school. Del Oro and Grant have open enrollment. Oak Ridge and Granite Bay do not, BUT I challenge you to look at both of their rosters....(hint) over half the roster was not born in the school boundaries and moved their at some point! Big deal.
Funny fact- Folsom has lost more kids to Oak Ridge in the last 3 years than they have received in any type of transfer.
I would encourage people to look at the facts and not read into the propaganda being spread by the same usual pack of posters, looking to tear down one of the best teams this region has ever seen. Have some respect and cheer them on. Bulldog nation would do the exact same for any other program. And we do. Stay classy.
"STEP UP" Really? It's like Folsom playing against college teams week after week and not winning one game all season. Folsom wouldn't have a chance. Folsom couldn't even score against DLS. Whitney, Rocklin, Granite Bay, Oakridge don't' have open enrollment and will never be able to get the caliber of football players like DLS and Folsom can. So they will never be able to " STEP UP" as you put it.
