The Future of the SOC 2?

User avatar
Valenth
SEOP
Posts: 4310
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 10:13 am
Location: Ohio

The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by Valenth »

I know this has been discussed a lot, but I do Think we agree the SOC 2 needs some teams added to the mix.

My best proposal for the SOC2..

Wheelersburg
Waverly
West
Valley
Minford

(If possible) Add: Piketon, and Oak Hill OR Northwest to make it 7 teams. This would help to keep teams from possibly having future 9 game schedules.


User avatar
GoBucks1047
JV Team
Posts: 398
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 12:44 am
Location: Scioto County

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by GoBucks1047 »

Geographically, Piketon makes good sense. Competitively, not so much, not to mention Piketon has been in the SVC for 53 years and the SVC has been the same for 29 years; 40 years if you count out Bishop Flaget, who was apart of the then 9-team SVC from 1975-86. I don't see Piketon leaving anytime soon. Plus wouldn't 7 teams just bring back the same 9-game season issue SOC II would be trying to avoid in the 1st place. I'd say stick with you latter option of moving Northwest or Oak Hill up and make an even 6 teams for SOC I and SOC II unless Portsmouth would somehow join the SOC, which probably isn't going to happen anyway now since they're in the OVC.


oldschoolqb
Waterboy
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:58 pm

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by oldschoolqb »

I don't think Piketon would come in a million years. They have a chance each year to compete for the SVC in most sports...SOC...not so much! The SOC has had many opportunities in the past to add Portsmouth, and now they're gone to the OVC. In my opinion, it's our loss.


Game day
All State
Posts: 1029
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 7:55 am

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by Game day »

I am not sure where the SOC is going to get any teams at this point. They had a chance to grab Portsmouth and Ironton a few years back and passed on them. This I think will be important over the next few years to see what new teams might join this league.


oldschoolqb
Waterboy
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:58 pm

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by oldschoolqb »

Being in the SOC is a blessing and a curse. Teams know that if they come play in our league, they're going to get "punched in the mouth." Not everybody wants to do that year in and year out. Also, I think having Wheelersburg hurts the league's chances to add lesser schools. I for one love having the Pirates in our league...I think it gives our league a real legitimacy having a team with such a sustained record for excellence. But, for a new team coming in, you know they're going to be really good in almost everything year in and year out...not everybody wants the bar set that high.


oldschoolqb
Waterboy
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:58 pm

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by oldschoolqb »

And teams that could compete would never be voted in by the smaller SOC schools.


BurgGrad6
SE
Posts: 2487
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:03 pm
Location: The Burg

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by BurgGrad6 »

Jackson would be a good fit! Also I wish ironton would have got in. Not really sure what the future looks like for the soc. I know burg had a hard time getting 10 games this season...


BurgGrad6
SE
Posts: 2487
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:03 pm
Location: The Burg

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by BurgGrad6 »

oldschoolqb wrote:And teams that could compete would never be voted in by the smaller SOC schools.
This is the biggest problem.....


oldschoolqb
Waterboy
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:58 pm

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by oldschoolqb »

I agree BurgGrad. I really wish Ironton and Portsmouth would have got in. And, you're right, Jackson would be a great fit, but...^^^^^^. In fact, we even dropped them from the schedule this year.


User avatar
doubleplay643
S
Posts: 1776
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:40 pm

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by doubleplay643 »

BurgGrad6 wrote:Jackson would be a good fit! Also I wish ironton would have got in. Not really sure what the future looks like for the soc. I know burg had a hard time getting 10 games this season...
Thanks for thinking of us BurgGrad6.


User avatar
one Oak
JV Team
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 9:26 pm
Location: Oak Hill, Ohio

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by one Oak »

Changes need to be made in the league. Oak Hill & Northwest shouldn't be playing in the SOS I in football, but moving to SOC II wouldn't be a good move for them at this time. The SOC II has been dominated by Wheelersburg with this years' championship being their 30th since 1972.

According to burg fan.com their all time record against current league members is Minford 54-6, Portsmouth West 36-20, Waverly 38-17, and Valley 35-5. They are also 46-8 against Northwest. Burg fan lists them as 7-2 against Oak Hill although this appears to be more recent games not actually all time.

I think a third division with a possible merger with the OVC for at least football could be an answer, but if the OVC continues to be as competitive as it was this year they wouldn't have much of a reason to agree to that.


pmow3
Varsity
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:25 pm

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by pmow3 »

Well Crap. All my old posts about this subject are gone now. I don't think I have enough strength to type it all out again... But I'll try.
I knew I should've copied that a long time ago!!
If Gallia is in the OVC now, I'm not sure I like this as much as I once did. But.....
Combine the SOC And OVC....
Make a 3 division Power Conference
Division 1
Ironton
Portsmouth
Wheelersburg
West
Waverly
Gallipolis
Rock Hill

Division 2
Chesapeake
Coal Grove
Fairland
Oak Hill
Minford
Valley
Northwest
South Point

Division 3
Green
Symmes Valley
East
South Gallia
Notre Dame
Eastern

Now.... You would be required to play 6 or 7 division games and crown champions in all 3 divisions. That's fine. But this gives you flexibility to schedule who you want in your other 3 or 4 games. There is a huge advantage in doing this. If you see a 3 or 4 year slump coming in your program, you can schedule down or if you see good years coming, then you can schedule UP.... This would give all the schools with playoff aspirations the best chance to reach the playoffs!!! Playoffs have become bigger in many ppl's minds than conference anyway. Did you see where East made it this year finishing 4th in the SOC 1..? They shouldn't have been the only ones. Most of this is a product of scheduling. You'll still have division champions, and that's great!!! But This will assure every team their best chance at a 10 game schedule every year!! The SOC could dictate the whole thing!!! They could wait until the deadline every year and schedule the conference games to give each team enough points to play for to reach week 11.....
It would also give every team the best chance to schedule their non conference rivals as they want. Weeks 1 2 3 and 4 would be non conference weeks in Div 1 and 3. Div 2 would have only 3 non conference games. But those would all be early season games and would be filled much easier. Maybe they would all come from within anyway.
If Valley sees a good year coming, they play their division, then get Wheelersburg, West and Portsmouth to fill it out. If they see bad years coming, they may go the other way. Each team could rate themselves and be rated before the season starts. Then you schedule.. I think it would be amazing and create lots of playoff chances across the board!! I realize with Gallia in, the travel would be rough. Maybe this isn't best for all sports? I don't know. But I do know or think that it's perfect for Football and getting the maximum amount of teams from your conference in the playoffs...


wipala
Varsity
Posts: 567
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Surprise, Arizona

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by wipala »

Portsmouth in the power conf for football,,,,,Really!


Mailman
All Conference
Posts: 779
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 9:43 pm
Location: Southern Ohio

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by Mailman »

I would switch Portsmouth and Chesapeake. Based on this years success


Jolly P(irate)
SEOP
Posts: 3186
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 8:45 am

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by Jolly P(irate) »

The winner of the conference division should move up one.


Da man
Riding the Bench
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 1:23 pm

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by Da man »

I like the ovc as is. I think you go back to enrollment for soc. Move NW or OH up. Jackson is just too big but it might be a decent fit for soc. Who has won the soc 1 since NW has been in it?


User avatar
one Oak
JV Team
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 9:26 pm
Location: Oak Hill, Ohio

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by one Oak »

Northwest, Oak Hill & Symmes Valley shared the title last year. Oak Hill won it this year.


User avatar
one Oak
JV Team
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 9:26 pm
Location: Oak Hill, Ohio

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by one Oak »

If it was based on enrollment Valley would be in the SOC I unless Northwest & Oak Hill both moved to the SOC II with them.


User avatar
pfloyd
SEOPS HOF
Posts: 13553
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 12:25 pm
Location: The Dark Side of the Moon

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by pfloyd »

Jackson is looking, wants in a league other than SEOAL (3 teams now including Jackson) … I don't see Gallia moving again leaving the OVC … Portsmouth? not sure how they would respond based on how they have been treated by the SOC in the past - they might just thumb their noses at an invite … Ironton ? they have been in a revolving door of leagues LOL … they would not have an issue with jumping to yet ANOTHER league imo …


Image


Image
Mailman
All Conference
Posts: 779
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 9:43 pm
Location: Southern Ohio

Re: The Future of the SOC 2?

Post by Mailman »

one Oak wrote:If it was based on enrollment Valley would be in the SOC I unless Northwest & Oak Hill both moved to the SOC II with them.
Valley will wish they were in SOC I the next several years


Post Reply

Return to “Football”