|
Post by trailcat on Dec 16, 2023 8:25:17 GMT -6
Curious what others think the best teams Aledo played in the playoffs? I have #1 Lubbock Cooper #2 Red Oak and #3 Shoemaker. Thoughts? Lubbock Cooper Red Oak Forney Abilene SV Shoemaker
|
|
|
Post by bearcatsmaxpreporter on Dec 16, 2023 8:26:55 GMT -6
Thank you. I somehow missed that. I got the one at the end of the 3rd and wanted to get the final stats but I never saw it show up on the big screen.
|
|
AledoAlumni
Varsity
Everybody Ropes, Everybody Rides
Posts: 2,091
|
Post by AledoAlumni on Dec 16, 2023 8:46:36 GMT -6
Thank you. I somehow missed that. I got the one at the end of the 3rd and wanted to get the final stats but I never saw it show up on the big screen. I knew our defense played great but I didnt realize how dominant the numbers were. And Aledo rushed for +300 again. I think 5 games in a row?! Has to be an Aledo record.
|
|
|
Post by bubbme on Dec 16, 2023 9:13:47 GMT -6
Very similar to last year, I dont think the score reflects how good Smithson Valley was. If they connect on a couple of those long throws then that would have helped them out. The SV defense played tough at the beginning but eventually got worn down. Aledo was able to connect on their own throws and really loosened up the defense for our RB. For SV the start of the game was perfect, other than the fact you had to settle for field goals instead of touchdowns. When you have the opportunity to jump on Aledo, you have to convert those chances. Great season by SV! Nothing really surprised me other than having to burn some timeouts because the offense was about to get a delay of game. SV was as advertised, great special teams, defense created turnovers, and offense used the playaction and took shots downfield. Obviously they missed their starting RB but I'm not sure how much the result would have changed. Good luck moving forward! I just got done watching the game, I agree with this totally. SV wasn't going to win this game because they lost the LOS the whole game on Offense, and during the 2nd half on defense. It didn't register (to me) the Aledo size advantage on the offensive line until I saw them next to the SV DL. That size advantage isn't always an indicator, as SV can sometimes overcome size with speed - but Aledo was fast enough and had good blocking angles. SV had to get out of what they normally do and had to attack up field with the linebackers, which allowed Aledo to run underneath them and break the long runs - this is what SV did offensively to CS and ACM. The offense not being able to produce yardage and limit Aledo's possessions became a killer for the SV D. Great job by the Bearkats weathering the early storm - coaches and players. Complementary football! Great choice for the MVPs - #3 was unblockable all night, a really special player
|
|
|
Post by Clemensbuff on Dec 16, 2023 15:46:31 GMT -6
Big congrats to Aledo on the W and #12.
What happened was what I was afraid of. SV just didn't have near enough offense to do much against a great defense. I had a feeling Aledo's defense was better than SV's and I think that showed. That was a dominating defensive performance by Aledo for sure.
SV had a great game plan and started strong as hell but Aledo was just too much. The size and speed belonged to Aledo and that showed. SV's defense played well but they wore down big when the offense just couldn't get anything going.
Congrats to SV on a great season and for getting back to the title game.
|
|
AledoAlumni
Varsity
Everybody Ropes, Everybody Rides
Posts: 2,091
|
Post by AledoAlumni on Dec 16, 2023 16:37:25 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by regaleagle on Dec 16, 2023 19:46:26 GMT -6
The team currently losing the 4A-2 championship game is ranked higher than SV. Do with that what you will. What does that say about y'all then? Overrated... The MaxPreps rankings intermix all of the classifications in Texas based on their own ranking of SOS.....which in itself is flawed tremendously.....end of story.
|
|
|
Post by bearcatsmaxpreporter on Dec 16, 2023 23:49:14 GMT -6
What does that say about y'all then? Overrated... The MaxPreps rankings intermix all of the classifications in Texas based on their own ranking of SOS.....which in itself is flawed tremendously.....end of story. Well, you can choose to look at intermixed rankings or not, but obviously in the scenario I was describing, I was looking at the intermixed rankings. I will obviously grant that the relative rankings between classes is going to be statistically less accurate than the in-class rankings, but I think you'd be surprised, the intermixed rankings are pretty good. First of all, they have at least some basis in fact -- classes play against each other in non-district games, so there is something to base the comparisons on. Aledo played 6A Guyer and TAPPS Parish Episcopal in non-district this year, so Aledo's performance added a data point between 5A and 6A and 5A and TAPPS. Additionally, when you look at MaxPreps' rankings in advance of an inter-class matchup, I've found that the result is often very much in line with MaxPreps' relative ranking (and even better, the rating which does a better job of predicting the size of the gap between two teams than a flat ranking). Anyway, you are completely right, there's some slop and inaccuracy in there, but I think it's maybe more useful than you're giving it credit for. It says right now that Aledo would probably be favored against any 6A team other than DeSoto, Duncanville, SLC, and North Shore, which is probably right. And if you look at the ratings, Aledo could conceivably upset North Shore or SLC, but would likely be run off the field by DeSoto or Duncanville. Can't know for sure, but I'd be willing to bet that's probably about right. Obviously the other way divisions intermix is in realignment. Not perfect because it's not the same team year to year, but we will likely get the added datapoint of how badly DeSoto is going to eat Aledo's lunch next year. I'd bet MaxPreps will end up having that about right (i.e. "look out below"). The national rankings, however, I agree are "throw dart at the wall" nonsense. I guess you can take a crack at how many D1 commits a team has or the measurables of their top players, but with no common games between the states, it's real messy guesswork. There are common games between the divisions in Texas though, so there's at least some basis to the intermixed in-state rankings. It's at least not total nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by SouthTexasBloodsport on Dec 17, 2023 11:11:28 GMT -6
My favorite part of the state title games was the pregame stuff when the Cowboy hat man let it slip about all the, "move ins", Aledo gets. It sucks to not have state championships as a Coyote fan but I can't imagine loving my team as much as I do if every season it was being overrun by elite move ins. I'll take no titles over a team loaded with outsiders anyway. This isn't a troll post its just my honest thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by bubbme on Dec 17, 2023 11:59:47 GMT -6
The MaxPreps rankings intermix all of the classifications in Texas based on their own ranking of SOS.....which in itself is flawed tremendously.....end of story. Well, you can choose to look at intermixed rankings or not, but obviously in the scenario I was describing, I was looking at the intermixed rankings. I will obviously grant that the relative rankings between classes is going to be statistically less accurate than the in-class rankings, but I think you'd be surprised, the intermixed rankings are pretty good. First of all, they have at least some basis in fact -- classes play against each other in non-district games, so there is something to base the comparisons on. Aledo played 6A Guyer and TAPPS Parish Episcopal in non-district this year, so Aledo's performance added a data point between 5A and 6A and 5A and TAPPS. Additionally, when you look at MaxPreps' rankings in advance of an inter-class matchup, I've found that the result is often very much in line with MaxPreps' relative ranking (and even better, the rating which does a better job of predicting the size of the gap between two teams than a flat ranking). Anyway, you are completely right, there's some slop and inaccuracy in there, but I think it's maybe more useful than you're giving it credit for. It says right now that Aledo would probably be favored against any 6A team other than DeSoto, Duncanville, SLC, and North Shore, which is probably right. And if you look at the ratings, Aledo could conceivably upset North Shore or SLC, but would likely be run off the field by DeSoto or Duncanville. Can't know for sure, but I'd be willing to bet that's probably about right. Obviously the other way divisions intermix is in realignment. Not perfect because it's not the same team year to year, but we will likely get the added datapoint of how badly DeSoto is going to eat Aledo's lunch next year. I'd bet MaxPreps will end up having that about right (i.e. "look out below"). The national rankings, however, I agree are "throw dart at the wall" nonsense. I guess you can take a crack at how many D1 commits a team has or the measurables of their top players, but with no common games between the states, it's real messy guesswork. There are common games between the divisions in Texas though, so there's at least some basis to the intermixed in-state rankings. It's at least not total nonsense. I agree and disagree about your points regarding the intermixed ratings - In the San Antonio area, they had a 13-2 SV team behind a 14-2 Shiner team from 3A. Ain't no way Shiner was competitive with SV last year. Sometimes it is utterly ridiculous. Top teams from a higher classification will always blow out a top team from two or more classifications lower.
|
|
|
Post by bearcatsmaxpreporter on Dec 17, 2023 13:04:59 GMT -6
I agree and disagree about your points regarding the intermixed ratings - In the San Antonio area, they had a 13-2 SV team behind a 14-2 Shiner team from 3A. Ain't no way Shiner was competitive with SV last year. Sometimes it is utterly ridiculous. Top teams from a higher classification will always blow out a top team from two or more classifications lower. Completely fair. Obviously the reliability of the ranking will depend on how much cross class data there is, and will also be more accurate for the teams that are directly involved in the cross class games. But I've found that the ratings are often really predictive of what type of contest you're about to watch, even cross class. +/- 5 points in the ratings (ratings NOT rankings), odds are you're up for a competitive game. +/- 10 points and the underdog is a real underdog. +/- 15 points and odds are good for a blowout. At 20 points the underdog is completely outclassed and should probably be scheduled for Homecoming. If you look at it this way, I've seen it be fairly accurate. The rankings sometimes mask this, as there can be a 10+ point differential between #1 and #2, or a 5 point differential between #5 and #20. This seems to hold up reasonably well pretty often between classes, but I'm perfectly happy to believe you can find instances of it completely crapping out on itself.
|
|
|
Post by bearcatsmaxpreporter on Dec 17, 2023 14:07:18 GMT -6
I agree and disagree about your points regarding the intermixed ratings - In the San Antonio area, they had a 13-2 SV team behind a 14-2 Shiner team from 3A. Ain't no way Shiner was competitive with SV last year. Sometimes it is utterly ridiculous. Top teams from a higher classification will always blow out a top team from two or more classifications lower. Also, I looked at the MaxPreps rankings for SV and Shiner for last year and SV was in fact #8 and Shiner was #4. But that was in their respective classes. SV was #8 in 5A-1 and Shiner was #4 in 2A-1. Statewide, SV was #50 and Shiner was #118. The gap in their ratings was 11.1 points. The gap today between DeSoto and Aledo is 13.2 points. I expect both matchups would have turned out similarly (SV and DeSoto blowouts over Shiner and Aledo), so I think the rankings/ratings look about right in this case.
|
|
|
Post by Clemensbuff on Dec 18, 2023 6:11:22 GMT -6
Well, you can choose to look at intermixed rankings or not, but obviously in the scenario I was describing, I was looking at the intermixed rankings. I will obviously grant that the relative rankings between classes is going to be statistically less accurate than the in-class rankings, but I think you'd be surprised, the intermixed rankings are pretty good. First of all, they have at least some basis in fact -- classes play against each other in non-district games, so there is something to base the comparisons on. Aledo played 6A Guyer and TAPPS Parish Episcopal in non-district this year, so Aledo's performance added a data point between 5A and 6A and 5A and TAPPS. Additionally, when you look at MaxPreps' rankings in advance of an inter-class matchup, I've found that the result is often very much in line with MaxPreps' relative ranking (and even better, the rating which does a better job of predicting the size of the gap between two teams than a flat ranking). Anyway, you are completely right, there's some slop and inaccuracy in there, but I think it's maybe more useful than you're giving it credit for. It says right now that Aledo would probably be favored against any 6A team other than DeSoto, Duncanville, SLC, and North Shore, which is probably right. And if you look at the ratings, Aledo could conceivably upset North Shore or SLC, but would likely be run off the field by DeSoto or Duncanville. Can't know for sure, but I'd be willing to bet that's probably about right. Obviously the other way divisions intermix is in realignment. Not perfect because it's not the same team year to year, but we will likely get the added datapoint of how badly DeSoto is going to eat Aledo's lunch next year. I'd bet MaxPreps will end up having that about right (i.e. "look out below"). The national rankings, however, I agree are "throw dart at the wall" nonsense. I guess you can take a crack at how many D1 commits a team has or the measurables of their top players, but with no common games between the states, it's real messy guesswork. There are common games between the divisions in Texas though, so there's at least some basis to the intermixed in-state rankings. It's at least not total nonsense. I agree and disagree about your points regarding the intermixed ratings - In the San Antonio area, they had a 13-2 SV team behind a 14-2 Shiner team from 3A. Ain't no way Shiner was competitive with SV last year. Sometimes it is utterly ridiculous. Top teams from a higher classification will always blow out a top team from two or more classifications lower. Yup I do not understand why max preps even does this at all. They do a pretty good job of ranking teams within a classification but once the mix them all in together it gets pretty damn stupid pretty damn fast!
|
|
|
Post by bearcatsmaxpreporter on Dec 18, 2023 8:19:02 GMT -6
I agree and disagree about your points regarding the intermixed ratings - In the San Antonio area, they had a 13-2 SV team behind a 14-2 Shiner team from 3A. Ain't no way Shiner was competitive with SV last year. Sometimes it is utterly ridiculous. Top teams from a higher classification will always blow out a top team from two or more classifications lower. Yup I do not understand why max preps even does this at all. They do a pretty good job of ranking teams within a classification but once the mix them all in together it gets pretty damn stupid pretty damn fast! Check my response to bubbme's example though. It's actually pretty good. SV was actually not ranked lower than a 3A team.
|
|
|
Post by bubbme on Dec 18, 2023 14:39:27 GMT -6
Yup I do not understand why max preps even does this at all. They do a pretty good job of ranking teams within a classification but once the mix them all in together it gets pretty damn stupid pretty damn fast! Check my response to bubbme's example though. It's actually pretty good. SV was actually not ranked lower than a 3A team. I don't know if it persisted throughout the entire playoffs, but at the end of the regular season, SV was ranked below Shiner in the San Antonio Rankings
|
|