State College 1 -> 1
LASA 2 -> 2
Bellarmine 3 -> 3
Hunter 6-> 4
Maggie Walker 4 -> 5
Stevenson 5 -> 6
Auburn 12 -> 7
Dorman 7 -> 8
Seven Lakes 8 -> 9
St. Ignatius 18 -> 10
Centennial NR -> 11
Thomas Jefferson A 9 -> 12
DCC 15 -> 13
Dunbar 14 -> 14
duPont Manual 13 -> 15
Novi NR -> 16
Ladue NR -> 17
Copley NR -> 18
Walton 19 -> 19
Alpharetta 10 -> 20
Georgetown Day NR -> 21
Thomas Jefferson B NR -> 22
Chattahoochee NR -> 23
Northmont 17 -> 24
St. Anselm's 16 -> 25
Richard Montgomery 22 -> 26
Olmsted Falls 23 -> 29
Cistercian 24 -> 30
Mission San Jose 11 -> 32
Oak Park and River Forest 25 -> 36
Loyola 21 -> 40
Walter Johnson 20 -> 62
Fred wrote:Went through stuff from last year. Here's the changes from preseason to postseason rankings, for the top 25 of each.State College 1 -> 1
LASA 2 -> 2
Bellarmine 3 -> 3
Hunter 6-> 4
Maggie Walker 4 -> 5
Stevenson 5 -> 6
Auburn 12 -> 7
Dorman 7 -> 8
Seven Lakes 8 -> 9
St. Ignatius 18 -> 10
Centennial NR -> 11
Thomas Jefferson A 9 -> 12
DCC 15 -> 13
Dunbar 14 -> 14
duPont Manual 13 -> 15
Novi NR -> 16
Ladue NR -> 17
Copley NR -> 18
Walton 19 -> 19
Alpharetta 10 -> 20
Georgetown Day NR -> 21
Thomas Jefferson B NR -> 22
Chattahoochee NR -> 23
Northmont 17 -> 24
St. Anselm's 16 -> 25
Richard Montgomery 22 -> 26
Olmsted Falls 23 -> 29
Cistercian 24 -> 30
Mission San Jose 11 -> 32
Oak Park and River Forest 25 -> 36
Loyola 21 -> 40
Walter Johnson 20 -> 62
Mewto55555 wrote:WHY IS EVERYONE RANKED ALL WRONG (2011)
Mewto55555 wrote:WHY IS EVERYONE RANKED ALL WRONG
MattNC wrote:There should be separate rankings for teams that never actually had 4 player teams..like mine! >_>
MattNC wrote:There should be separate rankings for teams that never actually had 4 player teams..like mine! >_> (or attended any events/placed well in any events that would warrant acknowledgement)
Dominator wrote:Fred, I think you should take into account how IMSA was missing our third best player for the IMSA HEAT OF THE NIGHT tournament, and our second best player's pet kitten had recently run away, and so our performance was understandably less-than-optimal. When you figure that in, it seems we should be ranked at least 2 and possibly 6 places higher.
MattNC wrote:There should be separate rankings for teams that never actually had 4 player teams..like mine! >_> (or attended any events/placed well in any events that would warrant acknowledgement)
sssssssskkkk wrote:MattNC wrote:There should be separate rankings for teams that never actually had 4 player teams..like mine! >_> (or attended any events/placed well in any events that would warrant acknowledgement)
The top teams play down 1-2 players all the time, and they still are able to cope with it. Missing players is a part of the game.
Riot In Cell Block Nine wrote:Thanks for doing this again, Fred.
I'll say that DCC will probably continue to be good. They lose all their "starters" from last year, but they tend to reload. Seven Lakes is probably going to be really good as well. They return all of the players from the team that finished 14th at NSC.
King of Carrot Flowers wrote:Riot In Cell Block Nine wrote:Thanks for doing this again, Fred.
I'll say that DCC will probably continue to be good. They lose all their "starters" from last year, but they tend to reload. Seven Lakes is probably going to be really good as well. They return all of the players from the team that finished 14th at NSC.
Two of Seven Lakes' guys who are returning did some good stuff at NASAT, or so I've heard.
I'm excited to see how my own team will do this year, seeing as we snuck in the bottom of the rankings last year. We're definitely not Top 25-worthy, but it would be cool to see who we all can match up to after returning an all-underclassman team that went 5-5 at HSNCT.
Me, in 2010 wrote: I think there should be special rankings for teams with non-human players.
Yeah, but your talking the top players of the nation being formed on a 3 man team, well rounded players, so it doesn't matter too much as opposed to middle of the road Chapel Hill (no offense Matt).
No Electricity Required wrote:So on the serious (but by no means too serious) side of this thread, I'm curious as to the reasoning behind DCC not making the top 25.
Hayley Legg wrote:Fred wrote:Went through stuff from last year. Here's the changes from preseason to postseason rankings, for the top 25 of each.State College 1 -> 1
LASA 2 -> 2
Bellarmine 3 -> 3
Hunter 6-> 4
Maggie Walker 4 -> 5
Stevenson 5 -> 6
Auburn 12 -> 7
Dorman 7 -> 8
Seven Lakes 8 -> 9
St. Ignatius 18 -> 10
Centennial NR -> 11
Thomas Jefferson A 9 -> 12
DCC 15 -> 13
Dunbar 14 -> 14
duPont Manual 13 -> 15
Novi NR -> 16
Ladue NR -> 17
Copley NR -> 18
Walton 19 -> 19
Alpharetta 10 -> 20
Georgetown Day NR -> 21
Thomas Jefferson B NR -> 22
Chattahoochee NR -> 23
Northmont 17 -> 24
St. Anselm's 16 -> 25
Richard Montgomery 22 -> 26
Olmsted Falls 23 -> 29
Cistercian 24 -> 30
Mission San Jose 11 -> 32
Oak Park and River Forest 25 -> 36
Loyola 21 -> 40
Walter Johnson 20 -> 62
Some of these are pretty interesting. It's intriguing to see how St. Anselm's and RM got worse as the year went on.
Fred wrote:Heyyyyyyyyyyy
Return to High school area archives
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests