I agree with your depth of talent and I do think that the talent is spread over more club teams thus resulting in a dilution factor for LI and MD. The top talent is the top talent meaning the top 20 kids from each of the three areas for example are all going to be comparable...there is a ceiling of ability no matter where you come from. This is why Philly has top notch players in Collegiate ranks the top 20 are the top 20 but then there is a bigger fall off for us. Now I will concede that both LI and MD after the top 20 kids have much more parity thus reconciling to the point about depth of talent.
I still disagree about the National Rankings. Yes they make a token effort to include disparate geographical areas; however, teams from MIAA and NY Leagues are routinely included in the top 20 simply because of where they hail from geographically and they "fill out" the rankings with those teams.
I will give you two examples. Malvern Prep out of Philly was the #1 ranked team in the country a couple of seasons ago and Avon Grove which had a stacked team loses to them in overtime by a single goal and never even gets into the top 20?? How do you lose to the #1 Team and not even get a mention?? Then Malvern Prep goes on and beats a lot of MD and NY teams handily that REMAIN in the top 20? If an MIAA or NY team were to lose to Malvern by a single goal that year they would have shot up in the rankings.
Second example Salesanium which is a Delaware school but has a ton of Philly talent loses to the #1 School in the Country last year Hill School, by a score of 10-9. How to they not appear in the National Rankings?
Salesanium is a very good team. They finished 2016 ranked #63 in the country. They lost to Hill Academy who finished #10. They also lost to Malverne at #17 and Culver at #33. All 3 losses were to quality teams. The problem is that their wins didn't come against highly ranked opponents. Their best win was against Easton Area, and they finished the season ay #82. In order to break into the top 25 they need to play more non-league games against top ranked opponents. That goes with any real ranking system.
Your first example is a lot more irrelevant. Yes, in 2014 Avon Grove lost an early season game to Malverne in OT. And yes, Malverne finished the season #2 behind only Boys Latin. The problem is that they lost their next two games to Central Bucks East and Bishop Shanahan... not exactly dominant programs. Not even ranked in the top 500. A team needs to put together a body of work; they can't be judged on a single lucky game.
There's not a ton of movement nationally in the first few weeks of any season. Can't see how a team can jump into the top 20 by losing to anyone. Win and maybe there's an argument. But losing, even in overtime, isn't going to do it.
I think the problem is your citing laxpower and I am citing UA/IL I don't think laxpower is the standard although their data seems much more objective and scientific. To me a national ranking that changes every week should oscillate with the weekly results
Reply
Quote