I disagree with that. I think most of us knowledgeable posters/coaches/ex-coaches/Monday morning QB's here wish Folsom well but we would like to see Coach Richardson do a better job at challenging the program. Speaking for myself this is what I would like to see. He does this I will give him the same praise/credit I gave coach Galli on his Pitt schedule.
I'm more referring to the handful of trolls on here. Not a large majority.
Right nobody wished folsom fails and nobody could predict years ago that folsom would be getting transfers. Transfers are getting them by how much different would they look than oak ridge or gb if it wasn’t for the express and some Elk Grove kids...Folsom is doing what it needs to do to stay relevant which we understand now we want to see them challenge themselves or else it looks like they need transfers to compete in the sjs. But kudos to Richardson if in fact he does line up a schedule like Pitt we all agree if any year next year is the year to go aggressive and I’ll promise the forum will be rooting on folsom
Agreed accept for transfer rules are changing a bit within the district. It will be interesting if this causes any changes. @H.E.A.T. has boasted that these rules will be the end of Folsom as we know it. Should be interesting.
I say every three years they are Trosin and Graves good. Not a state or national power but a SJS section power and perhaps a NorCal power. However, a little better than both GB and OR most years. They smoked OR in 2008. They smoked both GB and OR in 2009. Smoked OR again in 2010. Owned OR again in 2011. Embarrassed OR in 2012. They destroyed OR twice and smoked GB as well in 2013. In 2014 the building of a super Folsom team had come full circle. So even though Folsom wasn't in super mode in the mid to late 2000's they were better than both OR and GB.
Do you think he really cares what people on this forum would like to see? I highly doubt he even knows or cares about these forums!
I agree with Jimmy. He could care less. He just keeps winning.
Since 2010 the highest ranked they ever faced was dls but that was because they had to other than that grant was their best team they ever faced let’s be real I believe Now he wants to face a good opponent but their previous schedules say the we’re content with being a good local team...you can’t always assume you’d get some really good players via transfers
Good local teams don't won 3 state titles in 7 years.
I'm not looking down on anything. I'm just stating a fact! He could care less about what you think? I would like to see them play the best and win, but at the end of the day, do you really think, they care about you tipping your hat to him?
He was forced to play DLS and was forced to play Grant the second time around at Sac State. The initial scheduling of Grant was to try to catch Grant a few years after the State Championship run in their rebuilding period. Smart move. So if you look at the big picture Folsom has been very selective in scheduling teams with a stronger roster than theirs over the past decade. It's time to break that tired habit and schedule teams that are proven state and national powers.
Fake news again. You left out the part where Grant, a D1 team was beat by Folsom, a d2 team that year at Sac State, handily. The initial scheduling was one of the biggest games in SJS history and was on ESPN, national TV. I don't think anyone was catching Grant off guard. Lol. C'mon Junkie, you're better than That!
Finally some real news! Junkie was way off on this one.
Just as you say they don't care about what I think, I don't care if the coach cares if I tip my hat to them or not for challenging his program. All I'm saying is he cannot say his program is on the same level as the Cali programs that have challenged themselves. Long Beach Poly went to Florida in 2008 and beat the breaks of Florida national power NorthWestern. DLS went out of state and beat national powers from many states. St. John Bosco schedules out of state national powers yearly and plays in state powers yearly as well. Cen10 and Mater Dei does the same as SJB. As a matter of fact, Vista Murrieta has a more challenging schedule than Folsom and they're a bottom dweller in the SouthWestern conference. They scheduled Colquitt County, Mission Viejo, Orange Lutheran and JSerra. However you slice it, it's sad when a non Cali state champion has a better SOS than Folsom.
Interesting since Folsoms SOS was darn close to DLS without playing any of the out of state or socal powers you mention. Just say something about their league and non league schedule. I like to go off the numbers and not emotions.
Ahhh more fake news for the day.
Fake news is yours.Did not The Folsom community complain? Did not 9 months later the rule get changed?Ahhh more fake news for the day.
Commendable.
If an entire section rule was able to be changed by parents of one team out of hundreds, then I think you and the other handful of Folsom fan posters should get together and also write a letter to him. If it was that easy to change, I'm sure he'd gladly switch it back for the NorCalPreps community
100 percent false. Although there were parents quoted to say in a newspaper article that they were unhappy about the system as it was. And rightfully so. But there is zero evidence of ANY parents writing letters. And the SJS would not change a rule on a playoff format based on a few letters from parents from one school out of hundreds. Fake news.
This is you're chance. Re-read my post and then post an article where it says the parents from Folsom wrote letters(didn't just complain in an article) to the SJS, which caused the SJS to change the rule.
I agree and I never said Grant's 2010 team wasn't loaded. All I was saying is Folsom probably wasn't expecting Grant to be so loaded when they scheduled them.
Lol the game was on ESPN and billed as the best match up in the SJS in decades. Nobody was catching anyone off guard. Grant had NFL players. We had Dano Graves. Lol
By the way- The Folsom Telegraph is a local newspaper. It is not the CIF office. Fake news.
You stated "Folsom parent(s) wrote letters to the CIF and got them to change the rule. I am struggling to read where it says parents(s). Your article cited ONE parent. No rules are changed based on "Jennifer's letter."
So, now it's only one parent? And that ONE parent changed a rule for an entire section?
