Rankings are final: (corrected on 12/5/07)
(with last week's CP rankings; Born Index for 12/03/07 and calpreps for 12/03/07)
I question whether some of the non-public teams should even be a part of these rankings, but I will follow the CP's lead and if their enrollment is less than the largest Group 2 in the state, I will include them. CP rankings are from last week.
CP and I almost agree:
1. Holy Spirit (12-0): CP #1; Born Index #1; calpreps #1
2. Glassboro (12-0): CP #3; Born Index #2; calpreps #2
3. Holy Cross (9-2): CP #5; Born Index #3; calpreps #3
4. Camden Catholic (8-2): CP #6; Born Index #4; calpreps #4
5. Paulsboro (11-1 or 9-3/forfeits): CP #2; Born Index #5; calpreps #5
6. Gloucester Catholic (8-3): CP #7; Born Index #10; calpreps #7
7. West Deptford (10-2); CP #4; Born Index #6; calpreps #6
8. Florence (8-2): CP unranked; Born Index #12; calpreps #17
9. St. Joe's (7-3): CP #8; Born Index #7; calpreps #10
10. St. Augustine (8-2): CP #9; Born Index #8; calpreps #9
11. Bridgeton (7-4): CP #10; Born Index #9; calpreps #11
12. Woodbury (8-3); Born Index #11; calpreps #8
13. Delran (6-4): Born Index #16; calpreps #14
14. Burlington Twp. (6-5); Born Index #13; calpreps #12
15. Penns Grove (7-3); Born Index #18; calpreps #15
16. Palmyra (7-3); Born Index #27; calpreps #26
17. Schalick (7-4): Born Index #24; calpreps #13
18. Gloucester (6-4); Born Index #22; calpreps #19
19. Lindenwold (6-4); Born Index #14; calpreps #18
20. Pennsville (5-5): Born Index #25; calpreps #27
21. Audubon (6-4); Born Index #29; calpreps #22
22. New Egypt (6-4); Born Index #33; calpreps #30
The next 3 are a virtual tie and could be ranked in any order
23. Haddon Heights (4-6); Born Index #20; calpreps #16
24. Haddon Twp. (5-5); Born Index #28; calpreps #23
25. Haddonfield (5-5); Born Index #15; calpreps #21
26. Cinnaminson (4-6): Born Index #30; calpreps #20
27. Buena (4-6); Born Index #23; calpreps #29
28. Bishop Eustace (4-6); Born Index #19; calpreps #24
29. Deptford (2-8); Born Index #17; calpreps #28
30. Sterling (4-6); Born Index #21; calpreps #25
31. Woodstown (4-6); Born Index #35; calpreps #34
32. Maple Shade (5-5); Born Index #38; calpreps #37
33. Collingswood (2-8); Born Index #26; calpreps #32
34. Middle Twp. (3-7); Born Index #31; calpreps #31
35. Pleasantville (1-9); Born Index #32; calpreps #36
36. Overbrook (2-8); Born Index #37; calpreps #35
37. Willingboro (0-10); Born Index #34; calpreps #33
38. Bordentown (3-7); Born Index #42; calpreps #40
39. Gateway (1-9); Born Index #36; calpreps #38
40. Salem (2-8); Born Index #39; calpreps #39
41. Burlington City (2-8); Born Index #40; calpreps #41
42. Riverside (1-9); Born Index #41;calpreps #42
43. Clayton (2-8); Born Index #44; calpreps #43
44. Pitman (1-9); Born Index #43; calpreps #44
45. Wildwood (0-8); Born Index #45; calpreps #45
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
First, I respect your thoughts and rankings. Second, I also understand how you rank them in a virtual tie. But with Heights losing soundly to Haddonfield, and Haddon Twp losing soundly to Heights a few weeks back, wouldn't it make sense to rank them in order of recent competition. Once again I appreciate and understand your rankings. Just going based on recent performance.
It is a tough call. Should teams be ranked by how they ended the season or by the whole season? What about Audubon? They have more wins than the others, but mixed success against them head-to-head. The middle of the Colonial Conference was such a mixed bag this year with each team having peaks and valleys.
Same problem with ranking the middle of both Tri-County Divisions. Schalick beats Gloucester who beats Penns Grove who beats Schalick. They can only play each other on the dates that the schedule provided. Would they have done differently if the schedule were different? That is why the newspapers stop ranking after doing a short list of the top ten. As you move down the ladder there is much more room for debate.
Post a Comment