High School Rankings Nationally

[ThunderRam]

Honestly any game beyond the Open is consolation prize anyway and if NorCal's open isn't elite that game isn't competitive either.

I agree with this too. I mean, it's great for the players/coaches/students/fans to have the games (essentially bowl games) to look forward to, but the Open is "the game".

Kinda like college where teams get excited about playing in the Rose, Orange, Fiesta or Sugar Bowls even though they aren't playing for the National title. They're just glorified consolation games, but still great for the respective teams nonetheless.

 

[future10]

Because of the population difference I think it’s pretty fair.Hell the Southern Section alone has like 35-40% of this States teams.Even though So Cal won the top 5 games last year 4 of them were up for grabs which in my eyes says it’s fair.I think Nor Cal has actually won both bowl seasons 7-6.

Now I pray one day that the CIF and the sections wil come to their senses and have a true playoff system.How hard is it to have the top 8 from the north play and top 8 from south play with winners meeting for state.
If you did that for 13 divisions that’s 208 teams.Teams that don’t make state could still play for a Section championship.Seems so simple

That’s a lot of games and travel for a high school athlete...and I think the gap between so cals top 5 and not cals is going to just widen bosco is just Now becoming a national power I can see calabassas becoming into power soon too...the transferring in so cal is extreme hell even Bishop Gorman gets some LA transfers I feel the only way we can get on a even playing field is if we get more elite private schools in nor cal De La Salle can’t be the lone private that has national respect in all of nor cal..I hope Capital Christian can eventually become that 2nd program rightnow I the closest 1we got to De La Salle is St. Mary’s...

 

[nascar624]

Because of the population difference I think it’s pretty fair.Hell the Southern Section alone has like 35-40% of this States teams.Even though So Cal won the top 5 games last year 4 of them were up for grabs which in my eyes says it’s fair.I think Nor Cal has actually won both bowl seasons 7-6.

Now I pray one day that the CIF and the sections wil come to their senses and have a true playoff system.How hard is it to have the top 8 from the north play and top 8 from south play with winners meeting for state.
If you did that for 13 divisions that’s 208 teams.Teams that don’t make state could still play for a Section championship.Seems so simple

While I too would love to see a true state playoff similar to other states, not possible with the current section playoff formats and we all know politics and $$$ will win when it comes to the current section format.

And totally agree with the one who posted that the winner of the bowl games should just consider it a bowl championship, and don't call it a state championship. With exception to the Open game, which I think we can all agree would be the closest to a state championship. All other games are just bowl games and too watered down to truly know if they were the best in that division. Only a true state playoff could determine that.

 

[RedZone90]

The Southern Section championship is, in many ways, more meaningful to the the winners than a state championship. It's the toughest section in the country.

 

[feedback1]

Want to go to a state game? Win a section title. The bar is pretty clear. Any consternation about high ranked teams that did not win a section and are not able to play for a state title is just whining. It's a tournament. One loss and you are done (except if you play in an Open section title game ala the NCS or CCS).

 

[ChrisRScoreMan]

Want to go to a state game? Win a section title. The bar is pretty clear. Any consternation about high ranked teams that did not win a section and are not able to play for a state title is just whining. It's a tournament. One loss and you are done (except if you play in an Open section title game ala the NCS or CCS).

Yes!

 

[Streak One]

Want to go to a state game? Win a section title. The bar is pretty clear. Any consternation about high ranked teams that did not win a section and are not able to play for a state title is just whining. It's a tournament. One loss and you are done (except if you play in an Open section title game ala the NCS or CCS).

I disagree because teams have a different field. If you want to throw all SJS teams into one bracket and then use the win or go home, that is fine. However, right now a team like Manteca can really maximize the system being in Division IV while a team like Franklin is in a tough spot in Division I.

 

[feedback1]

I choose to accept reality on reality's terms.

 

[nascar624]

I disagree because teams have a different field. If you want to throw all SJS teams into one bracket and then use the win or go home, that is fine. However, right now a team like Manteca can really maximize the system being in Division IV while a team like Franklin is in a tough spot in Division I.

Exactly why some of the bowls are watered down and not truly a state championship

 

[feedback1]

The actual playoffs are the section title games - and they are one loss and done (except the Opens). That is the tournament that I was referring to

If teams want to play in the extra exhibition games that the state refers to as a 'championship', then they should win their section title. Too bad if a bunch of good teams won't win section titles and therefore won't play in state game. IMO, the whining that good teams are left at home is not very productive. And I am not sympathetic.

After all, we have a system where in 2015, a 4-6 Del Oro team that finished 4th in their league, bounced down into a depleted D2 bracket and won a state game (all 7 D1 leagues had to send their champions to the D1 bracket that year).

 

[ChrisRScoreGuy]

Exactly why some of the bowls are watered down and not truly a state championship

Sure. But the college system has a ton of bowl games that people love to watch and teams love to play in. The same applies here. Pointing the negative nelly finger at every bowl other than the open and saying, "ha well that's not the real championship" is childish and doesn't promote the competitive spirit that we teach our kids.

Remember when the system stopped at your section? That sucked, so they went to this. Ironically, people are still complaining.

 

[MC415]

Who cares? Let the kids play another solid team from So Cal they get to travel and have an experience of a lifetime! I’m all for it

 

[observer22]

Who cares? Let the kids play another solid team from So Cal they get to travel and have an experience of a lifetime! I’m all for it

I'm all for playing the games, but to call them state championship games is disingenuous. There is really only one real state championship game, the Open. I could even stomach a small school championship if they want to give the small schools a chance at something.

 

[ChrisRScoreGuy]

I'm all for playing the games, but to call them state championship games is disingenuous.

Is the name all that we care about? We can name them like college bowls if that appeases you. I only care about the match ups. If all you care about is the name and ensuring only one game is called "the championship," than that is your choice, which is fine.

So football is the ONLY sport that should have one championship, the open? What about basketball? Are those champions of D1, D2, D3, not state champions? C'mon.The systems are designed for competitive equity. If you win a state title, you beat the best of the best in your division or "like" teams or similar stature. (enrollment, public, private, etc....) To take away from that is also disingenuous.

I think the games are great and DO represent a championship in their respective divisions, under the current rules. I think those kids who win those games SHOULD be proud and wear their rings with pride. I know I would.

 

[observer22]

Is the name all that we care about? We can name them like college bowls if that appeases you. I only care about the match ups. If all you care about is the name and ensuring only one game is called "the championship," than that is your choice, which is fine.

So football is the ONLY sport that should have one championship, the open? What about basketball? Are those champions of D1, D2, D3, not state champions? C'mon.The systems are designed for competitive equity. If you win a state title, you beat the best of the best in your division or "like" teams or similar stature. (enrollment, public, private, etc....) To take away from that is also disingenuous.

I think the games are great and DO represent a championship in their respective divisions, under the current rules. I think those kids who win those games SHOULD be proud and wear their rings with pride. I know I would.

I hear you, but they are not true state champions. Like the year SRV beat the Ball brothers in the D1 state finals in hoops. SRV actually came in 3rd place in the EBAL that year and didn't win NCS, but won the "state championship" as Monte Vista was moved up to the Open division and they didn't have to play them again. They should be and they surely are very proud of that win, especially now that Lonzo has exploded and I know several kids that were on that team, but the Open division took away the top 16 teams in the state. So it was really like they took 17th place. So yeah I guess its just a name thing.

 

[BigMann08]

I would like to see a true Nor Cal Public Championships. The NCS should push De La Salle out of its Section Championships. And let the public schools duke it out....

Nor Cal Private Schools should be allowed to recruit kids like they do in So Cal. Force the private schools to compete against one another. Schools like Jesuit, St.Mary's, C.B, Capital, DLS, Bellarmine, St. Francis, SI, B.O, ModChr, CenCath, etc.could all duke it out in two divisions.

And let the public's duke it out.

I would also dismantle the SJS. Turn it in to 4 sections. Sac-Elk, Central Valley, Davis-Vallejo, Placer-El Dorado- Folsom etc.,

 

[ChrisRScoreGuy]

I hear you, but they are not true state champions. Like the year SRV beat the Ball brothers in the D1 state finals in hoops. SRV actually came in 3rd place in the EBAL that year and didn't win NCS, but won the "state championship" as Monte Vista was moved up to the Open division and they didn't have to play them again. They should be and they surely are very proud of that win, especially now that Lonzo has exploded and I know several kids that were on that team, but the Open division took away the top 16 teams in the state. So it was really like they took 17th place. So yeah I guess its just a name thing.

"True champions" Is always debatable depending on the State. But I get what your saying.

 

[MC415]

I'm all for playing the games, but to call them state championship games is disingenuous. There is really only one real state championship game, the Open. I could even stomach a small school championship if they want to give the small schools a chance at something.

yeah I guess as a grown man in my late 30's its literally so low on my list of concerns I don't really care, we have the Open championship where the heaviest of heavy weights play so not worried about the little guys out there being called D99AAAA division state champs

 

[joebl]

I would like to see a true Nor Cal Public Championships. The NCS should push De La Salle out of its Section Championships. And let the public schools duke it out....

Nor Cal Private Schools should be allowed to recruit kids like they do in So Cal. Force the private schools to compete against one another. Schools like Jesuit, St.Mary's, C.B, Capital, DLS, Bellarmine, St. Francis, SI, B.O, ModChr, CenCath, etc.could all duke it out in two divisions.

And let the public's duke it out.

I would also dismantle the SJS. Turn it in to 4 sections. Sac-Elk, Central Valley, Davis-Vallejo, Placer-El Dorado- Folsom etc.,

Here we go again with the recruiting talk. It is against CIF rules to have "Undue Influence" aka "recruit" a student for sports. Period! You cannot recruit athletes in any high school in any part of California:
"Undue influence is any act, gesture or communication (including accepting material or financial inducement to attend a CIF-member school for the purpose of engaging in CIF competition regardless of the source) which is performed personally, or through another, which may be objectively seen as an inducement, or part of a process of inducing a student, or his or her parent(s)/guardian(s)/caregiver, by or on behalf of, a member school, to enroll in, transfer to, or remain in, a particular school for athletic purposes."

CIF has already ruled that it will not separate Public vs Private.

 

[ChrisRScoreGuy]

Here we go again with the recruiting talk. It is against CIF rules to have "Undue Influence" aka "recruit" a student for sports. Period! You cannot recruit athletes in any high school in any part of California:
"Undue influence is any act, gesture or communication (including accepting material or financial inducement to attend a CIF-member school for the purpose of engaging in CIF competition regardless of the source) which is performed personally, or through another, which may be objectively seen as an inducement, or part of a process of inducing a student, or his or her parent(s)/guardian(s)/caregiver, by or on behalf of, a member school, to enroll in, transfer to, or remain in, a particular school for athletic purposes."

CIF has already ruled that it will not separate Public vs Private.

I think recruiting would be the wrong term used. Privates operate under different rules and regulations than privates. I believe that is what he is trying to say.

With that said- recruiting is a hot topic. Do privates do it to some extent, whether it be minor or major? Sure. Same goes for a few public programs as well. Not admitting such would be admitting to having your head in the sand for the last 20 years.

I wouldn't necessarily favor separating the two, although I believe it would be fair. Also, some states do this specifically for competitive balance. Just something to ponder. There are other systems out there that seem to work as well.

 

[Ca. Football rules]

I think recruiting would be the wrong term used. Privates operate under different rules and regulations than privates. I believe that is what he is trying to say.

Interesting so what rules are different? You mean there is a special section in the rule book that only private schools get to follow?

 

[nascar624]

Sure. But the college system has a ton of bowl games that people love to watch and teams love to play in. The same applies here. Pointing the negative nelly finger at every bowl other than the open and saying, "ha well that's not the real championship" is childish and doesn't promote the competitive spirit that we teach our kids.

Remember when the system stopped at your section? That sucked, so they went to this. Ironically, people are still complaining.

You basically made my point. College does have a ton of bowl games. Something they didn't have 20 to 30 years ago. Back than only the top teams made it to a bowl game and so it was special when they did, much like the CIF was when they had the Open, D1, D2, D3 and small school game. Yes it wasn't fair for it to have to be a vote for who goes to a regional, as someone always was left home, but I was more excited for the games than, now beyond open and the 2 D1 games, I lose interest. I also realize the only fair way Is to have actual state playoff bracket, but will never happen with the current section format. College is the same way. Their is so many bowl games, I only pay attention to the high profile games.

 

[BigMann08]

Here we go again with the recruiting talk. It is against CIF rules to have "Undue Influence" aka "recruit" a student for sports. Period! You cannot recruit athletes in any high school in any part of California:
"Undue influence is any act, gesture or communication (including accepting material or financial inducement to attend a CIF-member school for the purpose of engaging in CIF competition regardless of the source) which is performed personally, or through another, which may be objectively seen as an inducement, or part of a process of inducing a student, or his or her parent(s)/guardian(s)/caregiver, by or on behalf of, a member school, to enroll in, transfer to, or remain in, a particular school for athletic purposes."

CIF has already ruled that it will not separate Public vs Private.

Athletes are recruited to high schools. The CIF knows that this is going on. It's very prevalent in SoCal and on a smaller scale in Norcal. They just don't have a way of controlling it because so many programs are involved.

The CIF might as well seperate the private and public schools and allow the private schools to recruit. The football in NorCal would get a whole lot better! We'd have more quality teams in Sacramento and the Bay Area. Schools like Jesuit, CB, St.Mary's, Bishop O'Dowd, Bellarmine, St. Francis, etc. can field teams that can compete with De la Salle and Bosco/Mater Dei. Mater Dei and Bosco are recruiting kids. That's easy to see! The Pop Warner circuit in SoCal is unbelievable!

 

[ChrisRScoreGuy]

much like the CIF was when they had the Open, D1, D2, D3 and small school game.

LOL it's not all that different now. Most people enjoy the extra games. As I have said before, we get some interesting match ups that we wouldn't normally see between north and south. It is fun!

 

[nascar624]

LOL it's not all that different now. Most people enjoy the extra games. As I have said before, we get some interesting match ups that we wouldn't normally see between north and south. It is fun!

Oh for sure. I still like the games, but as observer said, just don't like calling a lot those bowl games state championships. Before, although always controversial, had alittle bit more of a state championship feel, much like college bowl games used to only have the elite playing in bowl games. I guess you can say deep down, I hope one day the CIF can figure a way to set up an actual state tournament, but that would require concessions from the sections on how they set-up their playoffs. Don't see that happening anytime soon

 

[ChrisRScoreGuy]

Oh for sure. I still like the games, but as observer said, just don't like calling a lot those bowl games state championships. Before, although always controversial, had alittle bit more of a state championship feel, much like college bowl games used to only have the elite playing in bowl games. I guess you can say deep down, I hope one day the CIF can figure a way to set up an actual state tournament, but that would require concessions from the sections on how they set-up their playoffs. Don't see that happening anytime soon

It all depends on how you look at it. Winners of bowl games are declared the state champion of their respective division. Still no different than other sports. Although I believe you are referring to all the A and AA stuff? That makes sense. I like it short and simple too. Either way, I still enjoy the games.

 

[nascar624]

It all depends on how you look at it. Winners of bowl games are declared the state champion of their respective division. Still no different than other sports. Although I believe you are referring to all the A and AA stuff? That makes sense. I like it short and simple too. Either way, I still enjoy the games.

I also enjoy the games as well and the current setup has more competitive parity with a lot of the lower level games

 

[slick58]

The old Calpreps state tourney proposal is the best one IMO. Basically go to two 16 team regional brackets per division for the north and south, and skip the sections. Don't know if it's economically feasible with how sections are currently financed and structured but it could possibly be a system that's more equatable and overall more exciting. Good teams are still going to get bounced but that's inevitable in a playoff system.

I don't see the proposal for the playoff structure on their site anymore but this is the link to the original one. I swore there is a more updated version or one you can sort by season.

Calpreps playoff proposal

 

[feedback1]

The Calpreps proposal is not really well thought out. It is based on an assumption that all of the changes would be made are solely for the purpose of determining state champions. I don't think the administrators that actually have input into the system are aligned to the same goal.

Specifically, it calls for:
- shortening the season to 9 games to accommodate the large tournament.
- power rankings and seedings
- flexible matchups based on geography (so that future opponents may be adjusted the week prior to the game).
- elimination of section championships.
- Large reduction in the number of playoff teams.
- Inevitable travel costs and time due to the tournament style matchups.

The sections would hate this proposal because state CIF would manage the entire post season. Which of course means no more revenue for the section.

The non-playoff teams would hate it because they are reduced to 9 games - and there would be far fewer teams making it to playoffs. It would also reduce the schools' revenue due to the lost regular season game.

Coaches will hate it because they cannot game plan with an ever-shifting schedule. Imagine if you were anticipating a playing a certain team, and that game was changed to a tougher opponent because they were closer. Or worse, because your anticipated opponent was closer to another school.

The Coaches and Schools would not want the travel burden and costs. Especially in a system where they do not know if and where they will be travelling until the weekend prior to the game. And this goes on every week of the post season. Imagine if your game was changed from a lower ranked opponent (home game) to a higher ranked game (road game) and you had to plan everything that does with the travel in the few days before the game.

Ahh, but the fans would like it - the group that has zero input into how the post-season is managed. Pffft.

 

[joebl]

The Calpreps proposal is not really well thought out. It is based on an assumption that all of the changes would be made are solely for the purpose of determining state champions. I don't think the administrators that actually have input into the system are aligned to the same goal.

Specifically, it calls for:
- shortening the season to 9 games to accommodate the large tournament.
- power rankings and seedings
- flexible matchups based on geography (so that future opponents may be adjusted the week prior to the game).
- elimination of section championships.
- Large reduction in the number of playoff teams.
- Inevitable travel costs and time due to the tournament style matchups.

The sections would hate this proposal because state CIF would manage the entire post season. Which of course means no more revenue for the section.

The non-playoff teams would hate it because they are reduced to 9 games - and there would be far fewer teams making it to playoffs. It would also reduce the schools' revenue due to the lost regular season game.

Coaches will hate it because they cannot game plan with an ever-shifting schedule. Imagine if you were anticipating a playing a certain team, and that game was changed to a tougher opponent because they were closer. Or worse, because your anticipated opponent was closer to another school.

The Coaches and Schools would not want the travel burden and costs. Especially in a system where they do not know if and where they will be travelling until the weekend prior to the game. And this goes on every week of the post season. Imagine if your game was changed from a lower ranked opponent (home game) to a higher ranked game (road game) and you had to plan everything that does with the travel in the few days before the game.

Ahh, but the fans would like it - the group that has zero input into how the post-season is managed. Pffft.

Dont think your assessment is complete:
-Top 64 teams per division
-Teams will be broken up into 4 geographic regions from North to South
-The top 8 teams would host 9-16 with geography being the primary factor for the first round in creating the brackets for the 16 teams. Which means that #1 wont play #16 unless they are geographically the closest team.
-The rest of the regional tournament goes through the seeding, not geography, so if ALL the 1-8 seeded teams win, the second round would be 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5.
-Once you have the 4 regional champions, the top two rated teams would host the semifinals vs their nearest geographic team.

It is true that this would be CIF managed, but no reason why they could not compensate the sections for any home playoff games. Sections can still hold their championship but will do so missing a few teams per section.

I think the idea is good, just need a few minor modifications:
-lower the number of teams to half (32 per division).
-separate into 4 geographic regions first, then select the top 8 teams within each region by division

or, alternatively, let's make this an "Open" tournament only. No divisions, just the top teams in the state into playoff system. top 8 in each of the 4 regions are in. Hypothetically Region 1: San Diego-Orange County, Region 2: LA/Valley, Region 3: Central and SJS, Region 4: CCS/NCS/NS.

 

[slick58]

The Calpreps proposal is not really well thought out. It is based on an assumption that all of the changes would be made are solely for the purpose of determining state champions. I don't think the administrators that actually have input into the system are aligned to the same goal.

Specifically, it calls for:
- shortening the season to 9 games to accommodate the large tournament.
- power rankings and seedings
- flexible matchups based on geography (so that future opponents may be adjusted the week prior to the game).
- elimination of section championships.
- Large reduction in the number of playoff teams.
- Inevitable travel costs and time due to the tournament style matchups.

The sections would hate this proposal because state CIF would manage the entire post season. Which of course means no more revenue for the section.

The non-playoff teams would hate it because they are reduced to 9 games - and there would be far fewer teams making it to playoffs. It would also reduce the schools' revenue due to the lost regular season game.

Coaches will hate it because they cannot game plan with an ever-shifting schedule. Imagine if you were anticipating a playing a certain team, and that game was changed to a tougher opponent because they were closer. Or worse, because your anticipated opponent was closer to another school.

The Coaches and Schools would not want the travel burden and costs. Especially in a system where they do not know if and where they will be travelling until the weekend prior to the game. And this goes on every week of the post season. Imagine if your game was changed from a lower ranked opponent (home game) to a higher ranked game (road game) and you had to plan everything that does with the travel in the few days before the game.

Ahh, but the fans would like it - the group that has zero input into how the post-season is managed. Pffft.

I agree that the plan has it's flaws and would face major hurdles but I do like the fact that they attempt to put a true statewide playoff system in place.

 

[slick58]

Dont think your assessment is complete:
-Top 64 teams per division
-Teams will be broken up into 4 geographic regions from North to South
-The top 8 teams would host 9-16 with geography being the primary factor for the first round in creating the brackets for the 16 teams. Which means that #1 wont play #16 unless they are geographically the closest team.
-The rest of the regional tournament goes through the seeding, not geography, so if ALL the 1-8 seeded teams win, the second round would be 1 v 8, 2 v 7, 3 v 6, 4 v 5.
-Once you have the 4 regional champions, the top two rated teams would host the semifinals vs their nearest geographic team.

It is true that this would be CIF managed, but no reason why they could not compensate the sections for any home playoff games. Sections can still hold their championship but will do so missing a few teams per section.

I think the idea is good, just need a few minor modifications:
-lower the number of teams to half (32 per division).
-separate into 4 geographic regions first, then select the top 8 teams within each region by division

or, alternatively, let's make this an "Open" tournament only. No divisions, just the top teams in the state into playoff system. top 8 in each of the 4 regions are in. Hypothetically Region 1: San Diego-Orange County, Region 2: LA/Valley, Region 3: Central and SJS, Region 4: CCS/NCS/NS.

I like the idea of an open. I don't like less teams. I would use the A/AA system. Top 16 in each division/region A then remaining 16 in AA. That would cut down on the length of the playoffs a little and keep a good amount of teams in the hunt for post season.

 

[ararar]

No way Sections give up Their playoffs.you must have a system that still allows for 52 Sections to have a playoff.
You essentially make all 13(or fewer) divisions opens by taking the top 208 rated teams(104 from north and south) that’s 16 per division.Then all Sections have over 800 teams to chose from for their playoffs