VHSL 2A All State Football Team

[piz hokies]

I have said this for years and still believe it, but I think all conference/region/state should be purely on blind stats. I feel that coaches should submit their players names and stats to the conference and when it is time to vote, you should only be able to see the stats. You don't need to see the school or the name, just the stats. I hear to many times how coaches lobby for their kids and talk about how they are a good kid, don't present any stats, and the kid lands 1st team because they are a good kid and played on a winning team. The current process makes even less sense when you reach the region level and not all of the coaches are even invited to come vote. What coach is going to go and represent and speak on the behalf of another schools player when that player is up against his own? And for those who say that all conference/region/state really don't mean anything, you should talk to the kids who unjustly get omitted and you should also talk to college recruiters, who do put stock into these post season awards. Helps them find those kids from smaller, out of the way schools, who could be college worthy. I've had them tell me themselves, that they stumble across a kid because they saw the name on an award list and then looked up their film on hudl.

My only questions is, how about the player who plays for a good team but only plays a half or 3 quarters for the majority of the games during the season due to blowouts, his stats are probably much lower than a kid who plays all 4 quarters each game.

I talked with a volleyball coach once, they played the minimum of 3 sets all year for each game (went undefeated and only played all five sets in the state semi and finals). Her players had half the stats as the other ladies who played 4-5 sets each game. My point is, sometimes stats are not the true indication of the player. If they are the best player at the position, then all the coaches in the meeting will know that, especially ones who have coached against that player. Coaches will vouch for other players who are not on their team. And last, not all coaches go to the meetings to represent their players, that falls back on the coach for not attending.

 

[Gunz41]

My only questions is, how about the player who plays for a good team but only plays a half or 3 quarters for the majority of the games during the season due to blowouts, his stats are probably much lower than a kid who plays all 4 quarters each game.

I talked with a volleyball coach once, they played the minimum of 3 sets all year for each game (went undefeated and only played all five sets in the state semi and finals). Her players had half the stats as the other ladies who played 4-5 sets each game. My point is, sometimes stats are not the true indication of the player. If they are the best player at the position, then all the coaches in the meeting will know that, especially ones who have coached against that player. Coaches will vouch for other players who are not on their team. And last, not all coaches go to the meetings to represent their players, that falls back on the coach for not attending.

I agree. Shouldn't my little experiment earlier in this thread have shown that you can't go by just stats to say who the best player is

 

[AdvocateOfMany434]

I have said this for years and still believe it, but I think all conference/region/state should be purely on blind stats. I feel that coaches should submit their players names and stats to the conference and when it is time to vote, you should only be able to see the stats. You don't need to see the school or the name, just the stats. I hear to many times how coaches lobby for their kids and talk about how they are a good kid, don't present any stats, and the kid lands 1st team because they are a good kid and played on a winning team. The current process makes even less sense when you reach the region level and not all of the coaches are even invited to come vote. What coach is going to go and represent and speak on the behalf of another schools player when that player is up against his own? And for those who say that all conference/region/state really don't mean anything, you should talk to the kids who unjustly get omitted and you should also talk to college recruiters, who do put stock into these post season awards. Helps them find those kids from smaller, out of the way schools, who could be college worthy. I've had them tell me themselves, that they stumble across a kid because they saw the name on an award list and then looked up their film on hudl.

if this is the way u want it done, how does that work for OLineman and D positions? Most schools dont keep stats properly. Not only that, you will have guys that play whole game piling on stats from a subpar team vs a team that pulls players out at halftime.

 

[SWVA FB]

Most times kids that have the best stats arent the best players. Stats can be padded easily against 2 and 3 teams while the team getting blown out keeps their 1's in for an extra 10-12 minutes. The only way to get a true north is to watch games and tape. Tape doesnt lie.

 

[Marshall-Dillon]

Most of the players on these teams came from teams who made fairly deep runs in the playoffs and received a fair amount of ink because of that. And do not get me wrong, they all deserve the recognition they received. Kudos to them all! But let me say this, there are A LOT of players from not so fortunate teams who had incredible years. I'll just use one example I am familiar with:

Madison County's Isiah Smith had 1607 rushing yds (8.5 yds. avg.) and 18 rushing TDs. He had 434 receiving yds on 35 receptions (2 TD). He had 91 tackles on defense, 6 INTs (1 TD) and had 6 kick/punt return TDs. 27 total TDs, played every down; both sides of ball; on a team everyone knew he was who had to be stopped. I doubt there is a more complete football player.

I am sure there are NUMEROUS other examples of players who deserve recognition but for various reasons, did not get it. As much as some people want it, not everyone gets "a trophy"...at least not yet...

 

[SWVA FB]

Most of the players on these teams came from teams who made fairly deep runs in the playoffs and received a fair amount of ink because of that. And do not get me wrong, they all deserve the recognition they received. Kudos to them all! But let me say this, there are A LOT of players from not so fortunate teams who had incredible years. I'll just use one example I am familiar with:

Madison County's Isiah Smith had 1607 rushing yds (8.5 yds. avg.) and 18 rushing TDs. He had 434 receiving yds on 35 receptions (2 TD). He had 91 tackles on defense, 6 INTs (1 TD) and had 6 kick/punt return TDs. 27 total TDs, played every down; both sides of ball; on a team everyone knew he was who had to be stopped. I doubt there is a more complete football player.

I am sure there are NUMEROUS other examples of players who deserve recognition but for various reasons, did not get it. As much as some people want it, not everyone gets "a trophy"...at least not yet...

Im not sure about the stats from the kids that got honors at RB, but that is impressive all the way around. If he averaged 8.5 ypc their O should have not been stopable. To not make the playoffs, that D must have been god awful.

 

[Marshall-Dillon]

Im not sure about the stats from the kids that got honors at RB, but that is impressive all the way around. If he averaged 8.5 ypc their O should have not been stopable. To not make the playoffs, that D must have been god awful.

MC made the playoffs at 5-5. Won the first game and then got throttled by Stuarts Draft.

 

[AdvocateOfMany434]

Most of the players on these teams came from teams who made fairly deep runs in the playoffs and received a fair amount of ink because of that. And do not get me wrong, they all deserve the recognition they received. Kudos to them all! But let me say this, there are A LOT of players from not so fortunate teams who had incredible years. I'll just use one example I am familiar with:

Madison County's Isiah Smith had 1607 rushing yds (8.5 yds. avg.) and 18 rushing TDs. He had 434 receiving yds on 35 receptions (2 TD). He had 91 tackles on defense, 6 INTs (1 TD) and had 6 kick/punt return TDs. 27 total TDs, played every down; both sides of ball; on a team everyone knew he was who had to be stopped. I doubt there is a more complete football player.

I am sure there are NUMEROUS other examples of players who deserve recognition but for various reasons, did not get it. As much as some people want it, not everyone gets "a trophy"...at least not yet...

That is very impressive! On O and D, them stats at superb! He shouldve at least made regionals.

 

[SWVA FB]

Most of the players on these teams came from teams who made fairly deep runs in the playoffs and received a fair amount of ink because of that. And do not get me wrong, they all deserve the recognition they received. Kudos to them all! But let me say this, there are A LOT of players from not so fortunate teams who had incredible years. I'll just use one example I am familiar with:

Madison County's Isiah Smith had 1607 rushing yds (8.5 yds. avg.) and 18 rushing TDs. He had 434 receiving yds on 35 receptions (2 TD). He had 91 tackles on defense, 6 INTs (1 TD) and had 6 kick/punt return TDs. 27 total TDs, played every down; both sides of ball; on a team everyone knew he was who had to be stopped. I doubt there is a more complete football player.

I am sure there are NUMEROUS other examples of players who deserve recognition but for various reasons, did not get it. As much as some people want it, not everyone gets "a trophy"...at least not yet...

There's a DE that made 2nd team (Lee High) all state and his team was 1 and done. Kinda puts a hole in that theory since the RB made it to the 2nd rd.

 

[Marshall-Dillon]

I said MOST, not all.

 

[Jdphil2]

I have said this for years and still believe it, but I think all conference/region/state should be purely on blind stats. I feel that coaches should submit their players names and stats to the conference and when it is time to vote, you should only be able to see the stats. You don't need to see the school or the name, just the stats. I hear to many times how coaches lobby for their kids and talk about how they are a good kid, don't present any stats, and the kid lands 1st team because they are a good kid and played on a winning team. The current process makes even less sense when you reach the region level and not all of the coaches are even invited to come vote. What coach is going to go and represent and speak on the behalf of another schools player when that player is up against his own? And for those who say that all conference/region/state really don't mean anything, you should talk to the kids who unjustly get omitted and you should also talk to college recruiters, who do put stock into these post season awards. Helps them find those kids from smaller, out of the way schools, who could be college worthy. I've had them tell me themselves, that they stumble across a kid because they saw the name on an award list and then looked up their film on hudl.

Thank you!!!!