293 replies to this topic

[Bluetiger76]

falconfan84, on 27 August 2014 - 08:35 PM, said:

I'm not sure why a school like Riverdale can't get a few more kids out. I know there are some out there that argue that you can't have soccer and football and be competitive in both in a small school, but I don't buy that. I think we are the third-largest school in the BVC (we're still small, though). L-B, VB, and Riverdale all have football, cross country, golf, and soccer, yet the participation in each of those sports at Riverdale (except soccer) is not nearly as big as at L-B or VB. I'm not convinced that soccer has a negative influence on our football program as much as the kids that are just sitting on their duff that could have an impact. I really believe that year-round specialization in a single sport, video games, jobs, and just the lack of school spirit that used to be more prevalent in earlier generations has really hurt participation in HS sports.

Not sure I agree that the other fall sports don't impact the competitive edge at some of the D7-D5 level schools. LB has been very fortunate to have some talent walking the halls for the last ten years or so. That will run in cycles, but in the case of Riverdale and VB......Riverdale has just been bad and VB has never made the playoffs. Falcon, you can say for certain that soccer and golf hasn't impacted that? I can't.

Edited by Bluetiger76, 28 August 2014 - 01:05 AM.

[falconfan84]

I'm not saying there isn't an impact, but if you look at our soccer team, there aren't many (if any) kids over 6' tall, and we might have one kid (goalie) at 200 lbs. And for our golf and cross country...we only have like 7 guys COMBINED for those 2 sports. I'd say that if we didn't have soccer, a third of those kids would probably play football (as an offensive or defensive back...and we watched our kids struggle far too often when there isn't a strong line in front of them), and a third would run cross country. We might get a kid to try golf, and that would leave maybe 4-5 kids that wouldn't do anything. We just aren't growing them very big over here lately.

Like you said, things go in cycles. L-B has had quite a few years of having fine athletes. I'm gonna show my age a bit here, but back in the 70's & early 80's L-B was usually an easy win for us. We had some fine football in the 60's and basketball in the 70's. Back then, nobody had soccer, and we were bigger then than L-B is now (and everybody keeps whining that they are "too big" for the BVC...Ha). It's obvious that we haven't had success in football for years. We're usually good for 1 team every decade that has a good record...we're actually overdue for that. I think the move to the BVC, and the way the divisions are split will help with our win-loss record.

Success breeds success, and I also believe lack of success breeds complacency to being mediocre. It is hard to get out of that rut of losing so often and turn things around to build a strong program. You need the right recipe of coaches, athletes, parents, and sometimes even administration to come together. L-B found that recipe back in the mid-80's when a couple of girls named Horne and Bish and a coach named Wagner started a dynasty over there. Not much time passed and a guy named Williman was hired. The proximity to Findlay has certainly paid its dividends as well. It has made for some "tasty cooking" for many years. The unfortunate thing is that when this cycle takes its downward turn, it's not going to taste so good...because nobody over there remembers what it was like before all the success came their way.

It's good to actually remember what it is like to experience both failure and success, because that way the success is appreciated when it comes your way instead of being taken for granted.

[Bluetiger76]

falconfan84, on 27 August 2014 - 09:56 PM, said:

...because nobody over there remembers what it was like before all the success came their way.

Falcon, I would have to agree with this comment when directed at me.......I moved to Findlay in 2001.

[bob22]

falconfan84, on 27 August 2014 - 08:31 PM, said:

It looks like Hardin Northern has 29 kids, which would give them more than North Baltimore (26 listed in Courier tab), but Riverdale (I'm assuming this is the other new member you are speaking of) has 33 kids out this year. There are only 27 in the picture, but there are 32 players listed in the caption beneath the picture, and I know of another kid that joined the team a day or two before school started.

I might be wrong, but wasn't there mention some time back that HN's JH and midget teams actually had kids out, it was just their upperclassmen the past couple of years that kept their numbers so low? Couple that with the fact that football may be the only options for a boys' fall sport, and the excitement of entering a new, more competitive league, and numbers are bound to be up.

I stand corrected. I just counted heads.

[Bluetiger76]

falconfan84, on 27 August 2014 - 08:31 PM, said:

but Riverdale (I'm assuming this is the other new member you are speaking of) has 33 kids out this year. There are only 27 in the picture, but there are 32 players listed in the caption beneath the picture, and I know of another kid that joined the team a day or two before school started.

The 5 or 6 missing from the picture are at soccer practice. I'm just kidding Falcon, I couldn't pass that up.

[falconfan84]

Bluetiger76, on 28 August 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

The 5 or 6 missing from the picture are at soccer practice. I'm just kidding Falcon, I couldn't pass that up.

....good one!

[3rd & Long]

falconfan84, on 27 August 2014 - 09:56 PM, said:

I'm not saying there isn't an impact, but if you look at our soccer team, there aren't many (if any) kids over 6' tall, and we might have one kid (goalie) at 200 lbs. And for our golf and cross country...we only have like 7 guys COMBINED for those 2 sports. I'd say that if we didn't have soccer, a third of those kids would probably play football (as an offensive or defensive back...and we watched our kids struggle far too often when there isn't a strong line in front of them), and a third would run cross country. We might get a kid to try golf, and that would leave maybe 4-5 kids that wouldn't do anything. We just aren't growing them very big over here lately.

Like you said, things go in cycles. L-B has had quite a few years of having fine athletes. I'm gonna show my age a bit here, but back in the 70's & early 80's L-B was usually an easy win for us. We had some fine football in the 60's and basketball in the 70's. Back then, nobody had soccer, and we were bigger then than L-B is now (and everybody keeps whining that they are "too big" for the BVC...Ha). It's obvious that we haven't had success in football for years. We're usually good for 1 team every decade that has a good record...we're actually overdue for that. I think the move to the BVC, and the way the divisions are split will help with our win-loss record.

Success breeds success, and I also believe lack of success breeds complacency to being mediocre. It is hard to get out of that rut of losing so often and turn things around to build a strong program. You need the right recipe of coaches, athletes, parents, and sometimes even administration to come together. L-B found that recipe back in the mid-80's when a couple of girls named Horne and Bish and a coach named Wagner started a dynasty over there. Not much time passed and a guy named Williman was hired. The proximity to Findlay has certainly paid its dividends as well. It has made for some "tasty cooking" for many years. The unfortunate thing is that when this cycle takes its downward turn, it's not going to taste so good...because nobody over there remembers what it was like before all the success came their way.

It's good to actually remember what it is like to experience both failure and success, because that way the success is appreciated when it comes your way instead of being taken for granted.

I would agree with everything you've said.... LB got a taste of what failure was like though in 2009 when they went 6-4 (and by standards that would be considered a horrible season) after the state runner-up finish in 2008. It's very easy to get "comfortable" with success and players/coaches/parents can take that forgranted. That being said, LB really shouldn't finish any lower than that 6-4 mark with the teams they play year in/year out, but if you aren't making the playoffs then the season is considered a failure by the current standards. Like you said earlier I believe, "Success breeds Success" which is so true and it's good to have those standards. LB has been very fortunate over the last 12 years or so to have had success on a consistent basis. The hardest thing about being successful is remaining successful and meeting those standards that have been set. It can take time to turn a program around, but it's comes down to an environment change and EVERYONE buying into the system and believing they can win. As you all have probably seen, so many teams go into games with the outlook that there's no chance they have a chance and they're beaten before the game even starts and that's all attitude and that environment change I was talking about.

[bob22]

_{Anything less than 11 wins by the returning members and 3 for the newbies the first two weeks is unacceptable. Less than that and the league might as well have stayed at 10 members in regards to Harbin points.}

[cropduster]

What is the division break down of the new and wonderful BVC? After looking at the Courier Football, you people think what happened at HN is an isolated incident- I think not. The administrations of the larger schools acted on emotions, rather than logic. Those schools got their money and game except the all mighty L-B, which is the horse that has driven this wagon called the BVC . I remember when they were the bottom dwellers for years, yet nobody called for them to leave. You look at Arcadia, Vanlue, C-R, N.B, Riverdale, P-G they certainly don't pass the eye test which means there will be some ugly games on Friday nights, and expansion was suppose to be the cure all, when in turn it will be the down fall.

[bob22]

duster... see page 1

[cropduster]

bob22, on 29 August 2014 - 07:58 AM, said:

_{Anything less than 11 wins by the returning members and 3 for the newbies the first two weeks is unacceptable. Less than that and the league might as well have stayed at 10 members in regards to Harbin points.}

Thanks and your correct here as well!

[Bluetiger76]

bob22, on 29 August 2014 - 07:58 AM, said:

_{Anything less than 11 wins by the returning members and 3 for the newbies the first two weeks is unacceptable. Less than that and the league might as well have stayed at 10 members in regards to Harbin points.}

Not sure I understand this post Bob. Are you assuming all the wins will be D7 wins (both first and second tier) like when the league was all D7 (D6 in years past). If so the logic is not necessarily valid. Some of the teams brought on to the BVC team's schedule (now that they can schedule two at large game) are D2, D3 etc. If those teams are beaten by the BVC teams any teams they beat will be garnered as 2nd tier points. Last year Cleve East Shaw and Bowling Green beat D2's, D3's, D4's and D5's. Those points will add up nicely for LB and Arlington if they beat those teams. Couple that with the fact that Riverdale and Hopewell are D6, not D7....the move to split the league in to two conferences and add two teams is most likely a prudent decision when it come to the Harbin points.

[Casual_fan]

bob22, on 29 August 2014 - 07:58 AM, said:

_{Anything less than 11 wins by the returning members and 3 for the newbies the first two weeks is unacceptable. Less than that and the league might as well have stayed at 10 members in regards to Harbin points.}

I would say with three D7 and one D5 schools making the playoffs last year and only nine teams in the conference, then anything less than four teams in the playoffs this year can be looked at as unacceptable. I would almost say anything less than five will be unacceptable with one D5, three D6 and eight D7 schools in four different regions is unacceptable, but I'm not sure there are enough strong teams to make the playoffs. And with only one team last year making past week 11, then anything less than two teams getting past week 11 this year is unacceptable.

[Bluetiger76]

Casual_fan, on 29 August 2014 - 05:04 PM, said:

I would say with three D7 and one D5 schools making the playoffs last year and only nine teams in the conference, then anything less than four teams in the playoffs this year can be looked at as unacceptable. I would almost say anything less than five will be unacceptable with one D5, three D6 and eight D7 schools in four different regions is unacceptable, but I'm not sure there are enough strong teams to make the playoffs. And with only one team last year making past week 11, then anything less than two teams getting past week 11 this year is unacceptable.

I think you are right C-fan....the 4 different region point is well taken. I also don't see many teams going deep in the playoffs either. JMHO, but it seems the BVC has had a history of 3 to 4 teams in the playoffs each year. I don't see adding No. Baltimore nor Hopewell adding to that number anytime soon.

Edited by Bluetiger76, 29 August 2014 - 05:36 PM.

[bob22]

Bluetiger76, on 29 August 2014 - 02:30 PM, said:

Not sure I understand this post Bob. Are you assuming all the wins will be D7 wins (both first and second tier) like when the league was all D7 (D6 in years past). If so the logic is not necessarily valid. Some of the teams brought on to the BVC team's schedule (now that they can schedule two at large game) are D2, D3 etc. If those teams are beaten by the BVC teams any teams they beat will be garnered as 2nd tier points. Last year Cleve East Shaw and Bowling Green beat D2's, D3's, D4's and D5's. Those points will add up nicely for LB and Arlington if they beat those teams. Couple that with the fact that Riverdale and Hopewell are D6, not D7....the move to split the league in to two conferences and add two teams is most likely a prudent decision when it come to the Harbin points.

I look at it this way. The BVC averaged 5.7 wins in week 1 the last 10 years and were guaranteed 5 wins in week two (until 2013). So basically 1.1 win per team. With the added teams, 14 wins increases that average just a hair regardless of the differences in Harbin values. In the simplest terms...an equal number of wins or more is needed to justify expansion from a Harbin perspective. And not all league schedules are equal now so more wins are likely needed to make up for that. A 6-18 record the first two weeks would be a disaster of epic proportions, beating Shaw might not make up for that for Arlington. Their average loss last year was by 48 points

Arlington or any else could have scheduled "up" for week one before if they were really worried about computer points. Except for L-B playing Elida twice and Bryan Adams High that one year, no one ever really did. And they didn't need to. Did anyone who deserved the playoffs not get in after the playoff expansions of 94 and 99? Maybe Arlington in 2000 (8-2 and finished 9th in R22).

btw Shaw and Parkway last season combined would've been worth 12 second level points to Arlington. Pandora, who the Devils don't play, was worth 21.5

[bob22]

Casual_fan, on 29 August 2014 - 05:04 PM, said:

I would say with three D7 and one D5 schools making the playoffs last year and only nine teams in the conference, then anything less than four teams in the playoffs this year can be looked at as unacceptable. I would almost say anything less than five will be unacceptable with one D5, three D6 and eight D7 schools in four different regions is unacceptable, but I'm not sure there are enough strong teams to make the playoffs. And with only one team last year making past week 11, then anything less than two teams getting past week 11 this year is unacceptable.

Agreed. Though with those 8 compromising more than 25% of the same region. I think it'd actually be hard not to get at least two teams in.

[Week 10 All-American]

As the Duster said- Half the BVC does not pass the eye test when you look at the pictures in the preview. Yikes.

[davidson33]

bob22, on 29 August 2014 - 07:58 AM, said:

_{Anything less than 11 wins by the returning members and 3 for the newbies the first two weeks is unacceptable. Less than that and the league might as well have stayed at 10 members in regards to Harbin points.}

So anything less than three wins in the first two weeks is unacceptable?

Here was the schedule for the first two weeks on the first page of this thread:

Arcadia- Lakota, Riverside
Arlington - Open, Parkway
Cory-Rawson - Bluffton, USV
Hopewell Loudon- Calvert, Elmwood
Leipsic - Spencerville, Fremont St. Joe
Liberty-Benton- Wynford, Bowling Green
McComb - Lancaster Fisher Catholic, Pandora Gilboa
North Baltimore - Holgate, Fairview
Pandora Gilboa- Columbus Grove, McComb
Riverdale- Cardington, Carey
Van Buren- Ottawa Hills, Bluffton
Vanlue- Ridgemont, St. Wendelin


Honestly, Bob.....North Baltimore got the win at Holgate. So there is one. Their game with Fairview can't be considered anything more than a coin toss at best.but let's say they win that. So there is two wins.

Riverdale was not going to win either of those 2 games. They play Carey this week, and Carey just beat D4 Upper by 21. So no wins from Riverdale probably.

As for Hopewell, it was pretty well assumed they wouldn't beat Calvert, which is what occurred. As for Elmwood, that game is also a coin toss.

Pretty good chance there is no 3 wins.

To me, what occurred with the league is that the smaller, weaker schools got an easier schedule. I could even see a school like Arcadia win 6-7 games possibly, even with low numbers. Their schedule is that weak.

If the BVC is upset that the quality of football is weak in the league, they had a chance in the expansion meetings to take Tiffin Calvert.

The BVC took North Baltimore instead.

Drive would have been longer, but the football would have been better.

It is what it is......

Edited by davidson33, 30 August 2014 - 05:29 PM.

[harry419419]

bob22: some stats for you through week #1

2013 Week #1 BVC had a better than normal week and went 6-3 as a league
This brought in 22.5 1st level points to the league which is an average of 3.75 pts per win

2014 Week #1 BVC was average and went 6-6 in week #1
This brought in 24.5 1st level points to the league which is an average of 4.08 pts per win

Future numbers:
2013 Week #2 BVC went 4-5 as a league
This brought in 14.0 1st level points to the league which is an average of 3.5 pts per win

2014 Week #2, I can see the BVC going 7-5 with a possibility of 28 1st level points brought into the league which is 4.0 pts per win

2 Non-league games for each team will almost always bring more possible points into the league (not as extreme as the MAC but still better). This year will be the first example and I feel the top teams were better last year and would've benefited even more than this year. Weaker league this year but more points to share starting week 3 instead of sharing week 2. BVC was always limited in the Harbin points after week 1. New set-up gives more opportunities for all, including the weaker teams having a chance to win more games (i.e. Vanlue vs. St. Wendelin, Arcadia vs. Riverside, CR vs. USV, NB vs. Fairview all in week #2) BVC won't win all of these but I like some of the match-ups instead of LB vs. Vanlue, Leipsic vs. Arcadia, Arlington vs. NB, VB vs. CR etc......none of those games will happen this year and it is best that they don't!!!!!

[bob22]

harry419419, on 30 August 2014 - 11:20 PM, said:

bob22: some stats for you through week #1

2013 Week #1 BVC had a better than normal week and went 6-3 as a league
This brought in 22.5 1st level points to the league which is an average of 3.75 pts per win

2014 Week #1 BVC was average and went 6-6 in week #1
This brought in 24.5 1st level points to the league which is an average of 4.08 pts per win

4.08 was skewed by Arlington's win over Shaw. Is Arlington going to play Shaw for the next 30 years? I think not. Will there be a D2 team on someone's schedule every year? No

Future numbers:
2013 Week #2 BVC went 4-5 as a league
This brought in 14.0 1st level points to the league which is an average of 3.5 pts per win

2014 Week #2, I can see the BVC going 7-5 with a possibility of 28 1st level points brought into the league which is 4.0 pts per win

3.5 of those points would have happened under the old format(Mc vs. PG). And you have to win them before you can count them. There is also, as far-fetched as it might be, the possibility of zero points. That'd make those 14.0 look really good.

2 Non-league games for each team will almost always bring more possible points into the league (not as extreme as the MAC but still better). This year will be the first example and I feel the top teams were better last year and would've benefited even more than this year. Weaker league this year but more points to share starting week 3 instead of sharing week 2. BVC was always limited in the Harbin points after week 1. New set-up gives more opportunities for all, including the weaker teams having a chance to win more games (i.e. Vanlue vs. St. Wendelin, Arcadia vs. Riverside, CR vs. USV, NB vs. Fairview all in week #2) BVC won't win all of these but I like some of the match-ups instead of LB vs. Vanlue, Leipsic vs. Arcadia, Arlington vs. NB, VB vs. CR etc......none of those games will happen this year and it is best that they don't!!!!!

The more points to share is a little dubious. North Baltimore's win does nothing for Arlington, Liberty-Benton, and McComb unless those schools get into a third level point situation and those are rare. The MAC got it right imo by just missing just one league opponent.

Also if your 7-5 for week 2 holds (and that's the way it looks to me), that's just 1 off my 14 and remember that I rounded up from 5.7. I arrived at 3 for the newbies by rounding down. Those three averaged 3.2 or 3.3 wins the first two weeks over the last ten seasons. Can't help it R-dale put Carey on the schedule. And I know why FF84...no need to comment.

Edited by bob22, 31 August 2014 - 05:25 AM.