The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

ringer
Posts: 1672
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:13 am

The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by ringer »

Reasonable minds can differ on the exact order after the first two spots, but it seems like they have the top 10 teams correctly included.....

http://ocvarsity.freedomblogging.com/20 ... 11/229103/

1. Servite (Trinity) 8-1

2. Mission Viejo (South Coast) 7-2

3. Long Beach Poly (Moore) 8-1

4. Santa Margarita (Trinity) 8-1

5. Alemany (Serra) 7-2

6. San Clemente (South Coast) 8-1

7. Loyola (Serra) 7-2

8. Edison (Sunset) 7-2

9. St. John Bosco (Trinity) 6-3

10. Lakewood (Moore) 7-3

Others: Huntington Beach (Sunset); Crespi (Serra); Notre Dame/SO (Serra); Orange Lutheran (Trinity); Tesoro (South Coast)
Old School
Posts: 1613
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:19 pm

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by Old School »

I think Edison should be ahead of Loyola...better wins
There should be an OC Connect Trinity Board...
RPW
Posts: 6001
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:11 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by RPW »

Old School wrote:I think Edison should be ahead of Loyola...better wins
Can you explain that a little further please?
I am The Voice of Reason
Luca
Posts: 6668
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by Luca »

Long Beach Poly annually benefits from what can be called the "Moore League effect."

They are a notoriously slow starting team in the preseason with a decent enough schedule such that even when they lose you hear the "We're-just-slow-starters-we-have-27-D1-players-and-Lara's-a-crappy-coach-but-we'll-hit-our-stride" refrains.

After a frequently sluggish preseason (this year they were 3-1 with a loss to a Mission Viejo team devoid of running backs and a one-point victory over 7-3 Grant and a three point win over 6-3 Narbonne) they go into the Moore League and inevitably kick the crap out of 5 doormats plus Lakewood - which is never as good as Poly, but makes it appear like a "quality" win for them. Then, after 6 blowouts (this year the average score has been 53 – 11) we hear the "We're-peaking-now-for-the-playoffs-look-out-everyone" chorus.

But you never know if it's legitimate or not. The last 2 years it hasn't been, but the 2 years before that it was. I have no idea exactly how good Poly is, but I don't believe they are the 3rd best team in Pac-5. They will have an easier trip to the quarters or semi's because they'll get an automatic high seed, but at that point we will see how misleading the Moore League effect was this year. Luca
THETRUTH
Posts: 4119
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:35 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by THETRUTH »

Luca wrote:Long Beach Poly annually benefits from what can be called the "Moore League effect."

They are a notoriously slow starting team in the preseason with a decent enough schedule such that even when they lose you hear the "We're-just-slow-starters-we-have-27-D1-players-and-Lara's-a-crappy-coach-but-we'll-hit-our-stride" refrains.

After a frequently sluggish preseason (this year they were 3-1 with a loss to a Mission Viejo team devoid of running backs and a one-point victory over 7-3 Grant and a three point win over 6-3 Narbonne) they go into the Moore League and inevitably kick the crap out of 5 doormats plus Lakewood - which is never as good as Poly, but makes it appear like a "quality" win for them. Then, after 6 blowouts (this year the average score has been 53 – 11) we hear the "We're-peaking-now-for-the-playoffs-look-out-everyone" chorus.

But you never know if it's legitimate or not. The last 2 years it hasn't been, but the 2 years before that it was. I have no idea exactly how good Poly is, but I don't believe they are the 3rd best team in Pac-5. They will have an easier trip to the quarters or semi's because they'll get an automatic high seed, but at that point we will see how misleading the Moore League effect was this year. Luca

The only explanation for Poly being ahead of SM is that they lost before SM did.
MDDad
Posts: 12141
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by MDDad »

THETRUTH wrote:

The only explanation for Poly being ahead of SM is that they lost before SM did.
That's a good point, and it's an error made at all ranking levels. The only thing stronger than Luca's patented MLE (Moore League Effect) is the IYGTLAGYBLIEE (If You're Going To Lose A Game, You'd Better Lose It Early Effect).
User avatar
Notorious
Posts: 11909
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:56 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by Notorious »

MDDad wrote:
That's a good point, and it's an error made at all ranking levels. The only thing stronger than Luca's patented MLE (Moore League Effect) is the IYGTLAGYBLIEE (If You're Going To Lose A Game, You'd Better Lose It Early Effect).
I think that acronym might need some shortening.
Never Underestimate The Fart Of A Monarch
AllGasNoBrakes
Posts: 264
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:10 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by AllGasNoBrakes »

MDDad wrote:
That's a good point, and it's an error made at all ranking levels. The only thing stronger than Luca's patented MLE (Moore League Effect) is the IYGTLAGYBLIEE (If You're Going To Lose A Game, You'd Better Lose It Early Effect).
yeah.... or its because Poly's only loss was 17-12 to the 2nd ranked team on their field while RSM lost to a 3-6 unranked non playoff team.

lol. ridiculous.
THETRUTH
Posts: 4119
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:35 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by THETRUTH »

MDDad wrote:
That's a good point, and it's an error made at all ranking levels. The only thing stronger than Luca's patented MLE (Moore League Effect) is the IYGTLAGYBLIEE (If You're Going To Lose A Game, You'd Better Lose It Early Effect).

The only problem with the MLE, is the Rishard Matthews factor, when a person or team is good, they are just good despite what league, CIF, County or state. Long Beach Poly, while not has good this year and I truely believe SMCHS is better, has enough big school CIF titles to back itself up, just like Matthews had a 3 TD and 505 all-purpose yard game and a season that included 22 TD's, 11 interceptions in addition to plenty of catches and recieving yards in 11 total games.
THETRUTH
Posts: 4119
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:35 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by THETRUTH »

MDDad wrote:
That's a good point, and it's an error made at all ranking levels. The only thing stronger than Luca's patented MLE (Moore League Effect) is the IYGTLAGYBLIEE (If You're Going To Lose A Game, You'd Better Lose It Early Effect).

The only problem with the MLE, is the Rishard Matthews factor, when a person or team is good, they are just good despite what league, CIF, County or state. Long Beach Poly, while not has good this year and I truely believe SMCHS is better, has enough big school CIF titles to back itself up, just like Matthews had a 3 TD and 505 all-purpose yard game and a season that included 22 TD's, 11 interceptions in addition to plenty of catches and recieving yards in 11 total games.
MDDad
Posts: 12141
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by MDDad »

THETRUTH wrote:

The only problem with the MLE, is the Rishard Matthews factor, when a person or team is good, they are just good despite what league, CIF, County or state. Long Beach Poly, while not has good this year and I truely believe SMCHS is better, has enough big school CIF titles to back itself up, just like Matthews had a 3 TD and 505 all-purpose yard game and a season that included 22 TD's, 11 interceptions in addition to plenty of catches and recieving yards in 11 total games.
I agree that the Richard Matthews Factor is legitimate -- when you're good, you're good, regardless of what league you play in. But the MLE provides two distinct advantages: (1) Poly is all but guaranteed a seeded playoff spot every year, along with the easy first-round game that comes with it, and (2) after playing Lakewood in WEEK 6, Poly could have rested it's starters for the next FOUR WEEKS in order to have them healthy for the playoffs. No contender in any other league in the Pac-5 has those two luxuries.
User avatar
Notorious
Posts: 11909
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:56 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by Notorious »

MDDad wrote:
I agree that the Richard Matthews Factor is legitimate -- when you're good, you're good, regardless of what league you play in. But the MLE provides two distinct advantages: (1) Poly is all but guaranteed a seeded playoff spot every year, along with the easy first-round game that comes with it, and (2) after playing Lakewood in WEEK 6, Poly could have rested it's starters for the next FOUR WEEKS in order to have them healthy for the playoffs. No contender in any other league in the Pac-5 has those two luxuries.
MV sorta does, imo. Maybe they can't rest all their starters like Poly but they're often given a high seed without having to prove it, and for a large part they can play with a good amount of starters out and still win.
Never Underestimate The Fart Of A Monarch
THETRUTH
Posts: 4119
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:35 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by THETRUTH »

MDDad wrote:
I agree that the Richard Matthews Factor is legitimate -- when you're good, you're good, regardless of what league you play in. But the MLE provides two distinct advantages: (1) Poly is all but guaranteed a seeded playoff spot every year, along with the easy first-round game that comes with it, and (2) after playing Lakewood in WEEK 6, Poly could have rested it's starters for the next FOUR WEEKS in order to have them healthy for the playoffs. No contender in any other league in the Pac-5 has those two luxuries.
Very true, Luca does have a valid point. Matthews is predicted to be a 3rd or 4th round pick next Spring. If I told you his life story, you would be floored, one could very easily make it into a screen play.
User avatar
Notorious
Posts: 11909
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:56 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by Notorious »

THETRUTH wrote:
Very true, Luca does have a valid point. Matthews is predicted to be a 3rd or 4th round pick next Spring. If I told you his life story, you would be floored, one could very easily make it itnto a screen play.
A crappy movie I'm sure.
Never Underestimate The Fart Of A Monarch
THETRUTH
Posts: 4119
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:35 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by THETRUTH »

Notorious wrote: A crappy movie I'm sure.
Go ahead and take shots at me, but Rishard has come a long way and deserve a lot of credit for it, not your BS.
User avatar
Notorious
Posts: 11909
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:56 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by Notorious »

THETRUTH wrote:
Go ahead and take shots at me, but Rishard has come a long way and deserve a lot of credit for it, not your BS.
He's a bum.
Never Underestimate The Fart Of A Monarch
THETRUTH
Posts: 4119
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:35 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by THETRUTH »

Notorious wrote: He's a bum.

Really, the guy is in college, playing football and is slated to be drafted this Spring, yet you think he is a bum, ok, why?
The hoax
Posts: 180
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:11 pm

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by The hoax »

THETRUTH wrote:

Really, the guy is in college, playing football and is slated to be drafted this Spring, yet you think he is a bum, ok, why?
Wow, since the thought police thought my last reply was so offensive, I figured I restate in in milquetoast terms: don't bother with Notorious. He really is here to chum the waters and see who he can bait into a response. As he has rarely offers an original thought, one would surmise that his sole purpose is to attempt to be witty, sharp and biting. Kinda not working. Don't bother with him.

How's that?
User avatar
Notorious
Posts: 11909
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:56 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by Notorious »

The hoax wrote:
Wow, since the thought police thought my last reply was so offensive, I figured I restate in in milquetoast terms: don't bother with Notorious. He really is here to chum the waters and see who he can bait into a response. As he has rarely offers an original thought, one would surmise that his sole purpose is to attempt to be witty, sharp and biting. Kinda not working. Don't bother with him.

How's that?
For the record, I didn't report your comment and I don't remember it being that inflammatory although I only read it once.

Although I don't really consider your opinion of any value or merit because you're a pretty forgettable poster. No substance, no personality, like the kid very top of the bell curve. Outliers are remembered even if they're bad. People don't remember boring people.

From your previous post I do not imitate or try to be like any other poster or former poster. That's just silly, I never found any of those people to be all that entertaining, I actually found most of their comments to be too juvenile even for my taste. Talking about syrup and nipples, just seems well boring to me. Same with my night with rollo, etc. I don't hate on people who enjoyed them, they just weren't for me. If anything I model myself after every other anonymous poster on 4chan with slightly more reddit infused humor.

Some things I post for humor, some things I post in seriousness, sometimes I'm only trolling other times I'm not, it's up to you to decide when those are occurring, but truly the opinions that have gotten me into the most hot water on both boards are the ones I truly felt.

My top 3 are
- the issue of a certain MD RB that everyone wanted to keep quiet because it was a poster's child
- the issue of me telling a kid to get over his own father's death
- the issue of me saying I don't care if kids get high on marijuana before practice and that it happened on my team

Sorry it's hard for you and other posters to determine when I'm joking or when I'm being serious, it's fairly easy I think for someone my age to understand when I'm joking and when I'm not. Also, I'm really not here anymore to provide insight as I think for most people here their time for actual insight into the state of HSFB has passed. Sure they can talk about it, and give their opinion, but most of this is a fairly shallow discussion on things that hardly concern sports and are more arguing with the person than debating the subject matter.
Never Underestimate The Fart Of A Monarch
THETRUTH
Posts: 4119
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:35 am

Re: The latest (Nov. 7) PAC-5 rankings

Post by THETRUTH »

The hoax wrote:
Wow, since the thought police thought my last reply was so offensive, I figured I restate in in milquetoast terms: don't bother with Notorious. He really is here to chum the waters and see who he can bait into a response. As he has rarely offers an original thought, one would surmise that his sole purpose is to attempt to be witty, sharp and biting. Kinda not working. Don't bother with him.

How's that?
You just might be more offensive than Noto, it is the game we play, and most off us already know what you just posted. Seriously, I am sure most of the regular posters get off line and do not give this ting another thought, it is just us having a little fun. Yeah, he gets out of hand sometimes, and is A-hole for it, but o well, we do live in America.
Post Reply