I spent some time last week checking into the claim that Section 1 and school administrators were scheduled to vote on adopting a four-team playoff structure (among other things) for the 2011 football season. The vote was snowed out last week but has been rescheduled for Feb. 18 — and several angry coaches say trimmed-down playoffs are a real possibility.
One coach I spoke to extensively on Friday morning was Somers’ Tony DeMatteo. Not only is Section 1’s all-time wins leader concerned about four fewer playoff teams, he said decision-makers have not sought the input of coaches.
“I’ve done this for 41 years,” DeMatteo said. “Maybe I’m not making that much sense, but at least listen to me.”
Currently, Classes C and D have playoff systems with four teams or fewer because neither class has eight participants in Section 1. However, Classes AA, A and B all held eight-team playoffs last season.
The reason for change has been spurred, in part, by a desire to provide more equitable scheduling. The number of programs that opted for an alternative, or independent, schedule last season increased exponentially. Although those players and coaches were not eligible for all-section honors, the Class A and C independent leagues held playoffs and rewarded champions.
Coaches involved in Section 1’s championship division have been critical of the alternative leagues. But multiple coaches from the independent teams have praised the experience. Even more teams have shown interest in withdrawing from the championship division and playing an independent schedule.
To counter that, part of the new proposal up for vote on Feb. 18 is the return of the Piner System used on Long Island. The system has been used previously in Classes A and B, but DeMatteo said the system would be implemented in its entirely under the new proposal.
Although the Piner System requires teams to be ranked in the preseason — a major aspect that led to its eradication in the system’s previous incarnation — DeMatteo said coaches are not overwhelmingly opposed to it.
“If it is the Piner System or a four-team playoff, I’ll take the PIner System,” DeMatteo said.
Last season, New Rochelle coach Lou DiRienzo, the head of the coaches association, told me he opposed a six-game regular season. That became a fact of life when Section 1 superintendents voted to start the season a week later than the rest of the schools in the NYSPHSAA. Starting the regular season the same weekend as the rest of the state — DiRienzo’s recommendation — is not believed to be part of the new proposal. Instead, Section 1 schools would play a seven-game schedule and a two-week postseason.
“I think it would be devastating,” DeMatteo said. “They just don’t understand because they’re not out on the field.”
DiRienzo’s program may offer an example of the benefits of an eight-game playoff. New Rochelle lost its season opener to White Plains in 2003 and entered the postseason seeded fifth. Of course, the Huguenots went on to win the only state championship in program history.
Coaches said an explanation of the new proposal said Section 1 is the only section with an eight-team playoff. However, as an example, Class AA state champion Rush-Henrietta participated in a three-week playoff structure this season in Section 5. Here’s Rush-Henrietta’s schedule.
The sub-committee responsible for recommending the proposal for the upcoming football season could present it to Section 1’s athletic council as soon as today. The ultimate vote, however, is believed to lie with Section 1’s executive committed on Feb. 18.
Withdrawing from the state-playoff format is not believed to be part of the proposal. However, DeMatteo is one coach so committed to the eight-team playoff structure that he would rather it remained in place and Section 1 withdrew from the state tournament.
“If that’s the only way we can play an eight-team playoff, I’d be for it,” DeMatteo said. “If it came between the two, I’d rather have the eight-team playoff.”
49 Comments
Some people like building mountains out of mole hills,leave well enough alone
I am a coming back for my senior season next year, and to see this happening breaks my heart. I love the game of football and lowering the chances of making the championship game makes it hard on me and all the players on my team and other teams. You guys have done enough in taking out a game from our season, why cant you just stop at that?
Im going to be playing one more season in my life and I want to play as much as I can, feel the vibe of the game and play for reason.
The end of revenue producing sports in Section 1. Next step, pay to play.
What team u play for HS football player?
Anybody know who is on Section 1 executive comittee that will be voting on this issue? Any football coaches involved?
section 1 should opt out of the state playoffs
Here is a link to the Section 1 Constitution, which explains the hierarchy of these “special committees”, how certain administrators get on them, and the protocal that should be followed in making a decision like this under Section 1 rules.
http://www.swboces.org/files/filesystem/Section%20One%20Constitution%20July%202008.doc
This is a link to a document that explains how leagues are supposed to be aligned and scheduling completed according to Section 1 officials.
http://www.swboces.org/files/filesystem/Basic%20Concepts%20of%20Athletic%20Alignment%202010-11.doc
This one is a link to the minutes from a meeting of the Section Athletic Council that lists the members of the committee at the top.
http://www.swboces.org/files/filesystem/acmin112310.doc
I’m sure if you dig around a little more you can find out who serves on all the other committees as well, its all public information on the southwest boces website.
Can somebody explain to me why in other sports like Basketball, Baseball, and Soccer they have a 16 team playoffs that can even include out-bracket games that give up to 20 teams the opportunity to compete in the post-season, but for football we want to cut it down to just 4? Of course, I would never want to see football have that watered down of a playoff, where below .500 teams make the post-season and just about every one gets in, but 4? Out of all those teams only 4 get the chance to experience the excitement of the post-season? Doesn’t sound much like something that has the kids best interest in mind. “Lucy, you have some explainin to do.”
“Treasurer’s Report – Jen Simmons
•Current balance is $330,042.17
•Most of the fall bills have been paid”
Wow, is that money going to be used to pay Jenn Simmons bonus this year. Let’s see according to her she deserve 10% bonus on $250k, ahh, $25k Bonus. Good for her,
another blow to new york football!!..... SHM!....can we get anything right!... when will it be about the kids!!
Amazing… Only in America can someone get a $25,000 raise for being bad at what the do. Who does Jen Simmons answer to???
Her phone number is on the NYSPHSAA website – 914.592.2526
Someone told me that the Ad’s were meeting today… anyone know anything about this?
This story was up on the hudsonvalleysportsreport.com web site last night (still up there now) and tweeted at 9:30 this morning.
In case anyone was wondering, the Exec Director for NYSPHAA, in 2008 made $180k. Pretty cush job. Got to love guidestar.org & See thru NY
I am the first to say make as much as you want, but stop crying about bus costs, when you are making CEO salaries. Find the money and let the kids play 10 games.
Alright here is more (
):
Sandra Simpson, COO of SW Boces $231k
Nancy Jorgensen, Asst Super for Human Resources $193k
Stephen Tibbetts, Asst Super Business Admin $142k
Jenn Simmons, Director Inter scholastic for Sect 1 $130k(I was off.. a little)
Just,
Nice research. Bottom line, administrators like Jen Simmons make far too much money to make such terrible decisions. The most amazing part, an 8 team playoff would not result in any additional cost for section 1. If their only going to allow 9 games anyway, what difference does it make if for the top 8 teams weeks 7,8, and 9 include 7 playoff games instead of 4 regular season games and 2 playoff. Thats still 7 games in either scenario regardless of what they’re called. Time to do right by the kids. What a joke.
Piner can’t fix this. Great, rank the teams pre-season with the Piner. Then what? What do these clowns intend to do with those rankings? They sure got this one wrong, so whats to say they won’t make a mess of re-aligning the leagues and creating equitable schedules too? Can’t even imagine what the criteria for making the playoffs will be by the time they figure the rest out. Maybe we’ll be determining tie-breaker protocal after week 5 again. Another brilliant idea that clearly hasn’t been thought through…unless that is the administrators of section 1 athletics have a much larger agenda than creating opportunities for student athletes to compete.
I meant to include 1 crossover with 4 team playoff scenario to make 7.
DC, they need to add the 10th game with the 8 playoff team schedule. What could be a reason not to? Costs? You have 3 people above making a combined $566k and that does not include payroll taxes and benefits.
As for re-aligning the leauges to make it more competitive, Josh could put up a voting polls on the side of the blog and we could figure this all out. And the best thing, it wouldn’t cost a dime!
Its not really even adding a game. When you consider that every other section in NYS has a 10th game for the sectional championship its really just allowing what should already be in place. The problem is, to have a 10th game section 1 would have to start the season on time. Not early, on time. The rest of NYS starts on a Monday, while section 1 waits until Friday. Makes you wonder, is it really that improtant to the administrators to have 4 more days of vacation at the expense of their student athletes?
has anyone heard anything about the upstate-downstate game??
Get your own name, or pay a commission!
Cutting to four teams play-offs is a disgrace. The six game seasons is also an embarrassment. Teams should be playing a 7-8 games plus 3 rounds of play-offs. Other sections, states, Catholics, etc all play more games than section 1.
Football requires probably the most off season work than any sports, kids lift and do speed drills all off season, lift together in summer, do 2 a days when practice starts, practice 2-3 hours every day after school and than only have a few games.
I am more familiar with class B. Edgemont is a great example, lot of seniors who had misfortune of playing both class B finalists their first two games, after that they ran the table winning last 4 games. They won first play-off game and than played Croton tough in semi’s. If play-offs were only four teams, their season would be over with no chance after two games, would it have been fair for those seniors to not be rewarded with a final play-off experience for bouncing back so strong.
The other thing is section 1 is depriving kids of potential scholarship opportunities. Schools look at cumulative stats so while most teams elsewhere are playing at least two more cumulative games than section 1, for the section 1 kids that means for a good back 200 less yards, 300 plus less passing yards for QB, 10-15 receptions less for receivers, 10-20 less tackles on defense. Now when kids in section are finally getting more visibility the folks who run the section are sabotaging their future college playing opportunities for no logical reason.
As far as the Upstate-downstate game, check with your head coach, they have been given all the information.
Josh if you check Rush-Henrietta’s schedule, they actually played in a 4 week playoff structure (16 total teams in playoffs). They have something called AAA (9 teams) and AA (9 teams) up there and both “divisions” have an 8 team playoff. RH played 3 weeks of playoffs (AAA), then their 4th week was the Section V Championship game (AAA vs AA). The two champions then play for the Section V Championship and the ticket to the State Tourny. Check out these links:
http://www.sectionv.org/football/svfb10/Procedures10.pdf
http://www.sectionv.org/football/svfb10/classifications10.pdf
http://www.sectionv.org/football/leagues10.pdf
kmar1… I agree with everything you said, but most Section 1 players are not denied games. All teams in the state can play nine games, including Section 1. However, teams that compete for sectional championships around the state can play a 10th game — except for in Section 1. That ninth game is the sectional final. Now, according to some of the info I’ve compiled over the last few days, only about 20 percent of the schools in the section (almost all in Class AA) played nine games. The rest did not. However, the section does not prevent the other 80 percent from playing a ninth game, but the schools have to schedule it. So players should not be — and could not be — at a statistical disadvantage.
Fact,
You didn’t even mention the most disturbing thing about the salaries paid to those who make these awful, anti-student decisions at Section 1.
ANYONE who observes the CHSAA/CHSFL and Section 1 locally would agree the CHSAA/CHSFL is run much better, more efficiently and makes decisions better for the interests of its student/athletes. The leaders organizers in the CHSAA/CHSFL are almost all volunteers and if there is any money in place for leadership it is miniscule stipends. Coaches in each sport get together and make the decisions, led by an executive committee. Taxpayers are probably paying close to $1mil/year for the salaries and benefits of Ms Simmons and her staff/colleagues, yet they still can’t make a good decision. And some politicians are belaboring the point of added school funding – how about eliminating the waste first!
here is a great idea , why dont we eliminate those paid positions , and organize a volunteer football committee. and if every sport does the same , look at all those salaries that would be eliminated , then lets see them change their tune
Hoops, how dare you criticize our VERY VERY VERY hard working meddlers of Section 1
.
They work so hard at blowing every important decision.
Seriously look at the numbers above for just 3 people, lets add in the payroll taxes, medical and pensions, my guesstimates brings the number close to another $75k, so that is $641k for those keeping track at home. Seriously 3 people can cost that much, but those damn
school busses? – what $200 a game tops – included with the deal the districts cut with school bus companies.
Or the insurance on the games? – one extra game, the carriers are going to gauge you after they insure the rest of district, think not. Probably no additional charge and if so, minimal. like adding an extra driver on your car insurance.
equipment repair from the extra games? lol
the refs? again lol
Plus I did not add Jenn Simmons to the $641k number. Plus there is another asst Super not included above because I did not find her salary. Add those two positions, and we are approaching 1 Million for 5 workers.
They got some nerve!
Time to bring out the pitchforks and protest signs.
My suggestion is to make phone calls to your athletic directors and find out what there position is on this issue. Coaches have different levels of influence in their districts so it would be good to find out what they are thinking and get them involved.
School board members are also an option. Call or email them. They are all in the initial stages of budget development and are looking for ways to cut expenses and may be in interested in some of the solutions for eliminating bureaucracy.
This really is unfair to the kids and to the communities that support them. ScottnRye may be correct that one of the next moves is pay to play. I will certainly not support that idea in my district.
You can find emails and phone numbers for AD’s, coaches, Jen Simmons and board members on websites.
Todd Rd. – What are you talking about? Why would we opt out of an opportunity to play for a New York State Championship?
Wing T, the phone calls never get made.
If a reporter, and it does not have to be Josh, were to do a front page article, bringing out the pay of these guys and the remedial costs they cry about to withhold the 10th game from kids, then maybe it would reach enough people who might pick up the phone. Will it change anything? Probably not. But exposing these frauds is a 1st step!
I’d love to read some ideas on how the readers of this blog would solve the problem.
Here’s the problem: Create a system where you have 4 or 8 teams in the playoffs (depending on how many schools are in a particular Class), play the Sectional Championship game as the 10th game, and have competitive balance (meaning you don’t have the New Rochelle’s of the World playing the Lincoln’s of the World).
Class AA: 18 Schools
Class A: 27 Schools
Class B: 11 Schools
Class C: 10 Schools
Class D: 4 Schools
I can’t wait for the responses!
To make that much money and have such poor judgement is almost a crime. You can’t make it up.
Like Just a Fact wrote, Someone at the JN….......... Please do a front page article about these clowns..
Just,
I have the emails ready to go. Phone calls won’t help today, all the schools are closed. If people aren’t willing to make phone calls, then they should not complain about the results.
I agree that a front page article would be a good start, but we probably can’t hope for that. So activism is the way to go. I am still a 60’s guy. Take it to the streets…
Just curious, there have been different ideas on how to handle this issue on this site almost every year. You are correct in thinking that it is not easy, but cutting games, eliminating playoff berths, etc, etc are not the way to go.
This should be about the kids, not about the adults. And far too often it is about the adults. Just a fact has identified an interesting take on the finances. We pay high salaries to multiple people to make decisions about $200 bus rides. I will be happy to serve on a volunteer (expenses only) committee/board to guide the process of section 1 athletics.
We have school boards who work long hours for no pay. They make huge decisions that impact our kids and taxes. Why not have appointed members to guide the decisions rather than pay $1 million for them. The decisions couldn’t be as bad as the ones we are paying for.
Just my opinion…
Just Curoius,
Be careful with the condescending tone…we might just be led to believe you are one of the clown administrators who helped devise this terrible idea. I think you are really missing some of the main points the readers of this blog are attempting to make.
1. With all the $ these administrators make they need to their own job, which includes creating the schedule for all 5 classes in the best interest of the kids.
2. You need to stop trying to create “competitive” schedules and shift the focus to equitable ones. The Lincolns of the world should not be protected from the New Rochelles. They need to take the steps required to improve their programs and become competitive on their own. Why would anyone be a proponent of a system that rewards teams for their failures and punishes teams for their achievements? Teams like New Rochelle have quality coaches that motivate kids and garner community support. Teams like Lincoln need to learn from the model of these schools and then they wouldn’t be crying the blues year after year.
3. Get in line with the rest of NYS. Start the season when it is supposed to start to create more room for that all important 10th game, which will make protecting an 8 team playoff even easier. (Still it can be done with only 9) 50% of the sections in NYS have an 8 team playoff, which breaks down to any section with a class of over 14 teams has an 8 team playoff, any section with a class under 14 teams has 4. In section 1 AA has 18 teams and A 27, so they should both have an 8 team playoff. Classes B, C, and D are all under 11, so 4 is sufficient.
And heres my response for AA and A, since you asked.
Start by creating equitable leagues. Doesn’t matter if its 2 leagues or 3. For arguments sake I’m going to say 3. AA would have 3 leagues of 6 A would have 3 leagues of 9.
Then, you divide the leagues using an S-Curve after the teams have been ranked 1-18 in AA and 1-27 in A. Rankings could be done using your precious piner, or any other power ranking formula.
Each league would then be tiered into 3 levels: highly successful, moderately successful, poorly performing. In AA you would have 2 teams in each tier in each of the 3 leagues in A you would have 3.
Then, in AA you have a league schedule that allows the poorly performing teams to have a reasonable chance in 3 of 5 league games. Since AA has only 5 league they would then have a crossover, where teams could play someone from the same tier as themselves in another league, so now they have a “competitve” game 4 out of 6 weeks in the regular season. After that, the top teams will be in the playoffs and out of the way. Those who are out of the playoffs can play 3 more crossovers with similarly ranked teams, giving them “competitve” games in 7 out of the 9 weeks of the schedule. I think that sounds pretty fair.
In A, it would work much in the same manner. Only now with the tiers include 1 extra team each there would be even greater opportunity to play “competitve” games with similarly ranked opponents.
Sure beats creating a super-league and a joke-league and then watching the winner of the joke-league get whacked out of the playoffs before they took the spot of a more deserving team.
An equitable league does not help. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. If you have 2 great teams, 2 average teams, and 2 bad teams, they’ll continue to stay at that level because the fact is, you’re not going to turn a program around going 1-7 every year.
Set it up with piner, and do a premiership type thing. 3 leagues of 9. Ranked 1-27.
Teams that finish 1-6 in league 1 make the playoffs, the top two teams in league 2 make the playoffs.
League 1 champion and runner up are seeded 1 and 2. League 2 champion and runner up are seeded 3 and 4. Remaining league 1 teams are 5-8. This gives league 2 a chance to host a playoff game.
Playoffs commence as usual.
Then, teams are reranked again or you can do bottom two teams in league and 1 and 2 drop a level, and top two teams in leagues 2 and 3 move up a level.
Two comments-1 a piner system only works with a specific number of teams you can’t just do it with 18, 20 16 teams. The man who designed it in Long Island knew that when he created it. 2-we have had 4 team playoffs and teams haven’t complained. In 96 when Roosevelt won the state championship it was a 4 team playoff, when Spring Valley won their only section championship in football it was a 4 team playoff. The sad part is teams number 5 or 6 are teams which can possibly win it all (New Ro)
Maybe scrap all the leagues in AA and do divisions by geography and have a four team playoff that way. Rockland, Westchester, Dutchess and Putnam. Whoever wins their league advance to the playoffs. These people making decisions make a ton of $$$$ and call themselves trying to save $$$$ so satisfy them with a decision like this that could be made by the coaches and eliminate the middle men
Just curious,
does it really take Einstein to figure out to make AA more equitable, split up the North? If you want more scientific reasoning, couldn’t a math teacher(statistician) set up an equitable schedule? What does that cost $100 bucks?
In all seriousness, I am thinking about calling a friend who could give a statistcal equation that would design 4 game schedule of 9 teams so that they are mathematically fair(assuming 2 league set up). The teams would be weighted based on ranking 1-9. Maybe I will post the results if I do it.
DC, got a great idea above about ranking teams within the league. Here would be my changes to what he has.
-2 team leagues of 9 teams.
-all 18 teams ranked based on prior year results and a final vote by whichever Board does
the scheduling. So if for example Y-Town is not expected to be good in 2010(hypothetical), they would drop down in ranking.
– once teams are ranked, the leagues are split using the s-curve
-4 league games to determine playoffs
-top 4 teams from each league go to playoffs
-tie breakers on points scored in first half only(tough luck if your team starts slow)
-in a 10 game season, playoffs start week 8.
– this opens up one cross over game between other league of team with same ranking. Team #1 from League 31 plays Team #1 from League #2.
), bring it on!
– the 2nd cross over is chosen by the team. If New Ro wants to play Don Bosco (
All that and it is free. Lets see what 1 Million can get us, lol!
***In a 10 game season playoffs based on 5 league games or you have 3 cross overs. That means a New Ro could play Don Bosco and Bergen Catholic! (I would take any 2 of St. A, Iona, Step, Fordham Prep, MW)
Exit 14,
The leagues are divided geographically under the current system, and have been for the last several years. That is part of the problem, there is no equity with geographically based leagus. AA- North is by far more competitive top to bottom than the Central, West, or South. Geographical leagues is art of what got us in this mess to begin with.
Twitter,
I like your idea, but its only good for 1 year. Would be impossible to re-rank the teams at the end of th year, because there are no common opponents. In theory, the last place team in League 1 should be able to beat every team in leagues 2 and 3. So , unless proven otherwise on he field it wouldn’t be fair to move them down for the following year. I do like te idea of a league that is ineligible for the playoffs though. I would be a fan of splitting the teams into a “super”-league and a “competitive” league provided at least 6 of the playoff spots came from the “super” league. Again, at some point teams are gonna want to move up though, which will be difficult to do fairly.
I also think you’re wrong about 1-7 team being able to turn it around playing high-caliber opponents. I’ve already listed several examples of teams who have done it in recent years.
Just,
With only 4 league games crossovers have to count. Problem again, lets say the 9th ranked team in league 1 goes 3-0 in crossovers against 7, 8, and 9 from league 2. They also manage a win or 2 within the league. Are they more desrving of the playoffs then a #1 ranked team that splits their league games and goes 1-2 in crossovers because they played 1, 2, and 3 from the other league.
I still say they have to stop trying to build a system around accomodating bad teams. Why are they only looking to do this for football? I dont see anybody crying about Mt. Vernons dominance in basketball. When are they going to create a league in AA Basketball that has Mt. Vernon, New Rochelle, Poughkeepsie, North Rockland all in 1 league with limited playoff spots and then Arlington, Beacon, Lourdes, RCK in another with just as many playoff births.
Just,
DC presented a reasonable solution for the play-offs. Especially about starting a week early to get a 10th game, like the majority of NYS.
Now they(the clowns) don’t have to do any work at all, just present DC’s ideas to the comittee, so they can take credit for it, collect those fat pay checks, and take a nice vacation ….....business as usual.
DC Bleacher Creature wow are we a little sensative? And where in the world do you get condescending tone from? I’m just a Mom who doesn’t want to see her son get screwed over again by mindless administrators. I asked the readers of the blog to do something these administrators either are unable, or unwilling to do, and I didn’t think I coud do. So, i turned to the blog to help me create intelligent information that I could bring to my school’s athletic director, possibly the principle, and if need be, the superintendent. Many bloggers so far have answered my question, without commenting on my tone I might add. Please do us all a favor in the future and spare us the dime store holier-than-thou attidude and if you’d like to respond, respond.
Correction: 2003 NRHS State Championship was the third in program history having won it in 1977 and 1980 before state playoffs were implemented.
You can get your pitch forks, write your letters, send your emails,call the local board of Ed. They are not going to do anything. The schools are going to take huge hits this year in money from the state and Tax cap. They are ALL scrambling to figure out how they will make it through the year. There may be some districts that cut sports from the budget. The last thing on their minds is football schedules.. Sorry but that is the reality of the situation. Welcome to the new normal…
Just Sayin, you could be right, but that mentality isn’t going to get anyone anywhere. If nothing else, phone calls, e-mails, letters will piss them off. Better than doing nothing as Wing T said. Just sayin!
Just sayin, why should 5 people cost the State approximately 1 Million?
Just Saying
I know that there is a lot of scrambling going on regarding the budget and how to make the “new normal” work. I have been involved in school district issues for over a decade and this is the worst scenario on school finances I have seen.
I don’t see this as a budget/extra expense issue. That may come later, but this is changing the playoff berths from 8-4. There is nothing about cutting the number of games. I have spoken with a couple people who are aware of the scenarios and they both said the powers that be are trying to make sense of a more equitable league set up and playoffs.
There are indications that the committee will be looking at other cost cutting measures, but this is not one of them.
I would also say that now is the time for people to advocate for what they want because of the budget and financial issues. If you don’t others are and will make their desires known.
So sit back if you want, I will continue to make my opinion known. Just my opinion…
Wing T,
Great post. There is no reason to sit back and watch as the powers that be continue to do whatever they want. After all, as tax layers in our individual districts we pay for a voice, so why not exercise it. Sure, it may fall on deaf ears, but we have to let them know we care about our kids and communities or this will only be the beginning.
There was a great article in the Poughkeepsie journal the other day about the percentage of school budgets that is for athletics in most cases less than 0.5 percent of overall budget is for sports. Peanuts considering the opportuniiea they create for or youth to learn, grow, and compete.
NRHS alum,
With all due respect the “state championships” in ‘77 and ‘80 were only according to the state sportswriters and for some inexplicable reason the state sportwriters wouldn’t rank NYC teams back then – CHSFL, PSAL and Independents. A ‘state championship’ from writers who are only ranking half the population and excluding two of the best leagues isnt really a ‘state’ anything – more like a NYPHSAA championship. Both New Ro and WP had other undefeated seasons in the 70’s that weren’t voted #1 by the sportswriters that could’ve deserved #1 and been better than New Ro’s teams in ‘77 and ‘80.
In ‘03, a 1 loss New Ro team won the NYPHSAA, along with a 1 loss St Anthony’s winning the CHSFL, Poly Prep had 1 loss as an independent playing an incredible schedule and Freeport was undefeated on LI.
DC,
I agree with what your saying but this is going to be a slash and cut year. I have seen three districts proposed budget cuts. All of the iinclude sports and the arts. I agree with Dematteo. Forget the state tourny this year. 7 game schedule, 8 team playoff ending with section champs. If you do not make the playoffs your free to schedule who ever you want, no matter what class as your last game.
This is a link to the proposed state aid cuts to the district schools. Add a 2 percent property tax freeze. Not going to be a pretty year.
http://www.lohud.com/article/99999999/DATABASE04/110202009/-1?appSession=382279744158914&RecordID=&PageID=2&PrevPageID=1&cpipage=1&CPISortType=&CPIorderBy=