SoutheasternOhioPreps.com

Talked with Emma and she did not receive anything. Very disheartening.

mcooper wrote:Talked with Emma and she did not receive anything. Very disheartening.

Unacceptable that she didn't get anything.

She got second team all-district per AP.

That's great.

Where can I find the complete list? Anyone know?

I found it on the Chillicothe Gazette site.

Congrats to the girls who made the list. Not meaning any disrespect to anyone but how can there not be 3 Waterford girls on the first team? Stats don't really mean that much when 3 girls score 10 points in the first half and you have to stop pressing to avoid being viewed as unsportsmanlike. Our best players have had their best stat games in the big games, because we can continue to push for points. It won't matter to our Team girls because they are on a mission, but every year we hear about how good this girl is or that girl..and when we finally meet up they get owned just like last night. Put any of our players on any of the other teams around and they would be stat machines. It's a crock.

Ironman92 wrote:She got second team all-district per AP.

Proves the point of the start of this thread. AP does not have the politics of the "coach voting".

gobucksBlitz wrote:

Ironman92 wrote:She got second team all-district per AP.

Proves the point of the start of this thread. AP does not have the politics of the "coach voting".

AP also has more spots on each team and is not dependent on a coach or school paying their coaching dues in order to nominate and vote on players

80sballer wrote:

gobucksBlitz wrote:

Ironman92 wrote:She got second team all-district per AP.

Proves the point of the start of this thread. AP does not have the politics of the "coach voting".

AP also has more spots on each team and is not dependent on a coach or school paying their coaching dues in order to nominate and vote on players

Good points. But I hope you do see in the list, that players that were voted higher and ahead of other players on the coaches were not voted as high/or ahead on the AP and not ahead of the players in the coaches. Just a point.

gobucksBlitz wrote:

80sballer wrote:

gobucksBlitz wrote: Proves the point of the start of this thread. AP does not have the politics of the "coach voting".

AP also has more spots on each team and is not dependent on a coach or school paying their coaching dues in order to nominate and vote on players

Good points. But I hope you do see in the list, that players that were voted higher and ahead of other players on the coaches were not voted as high/or ahead on the AP and not ahead of the players in the coaches. Just a point.

I would think your points would have more to do with the fact that there are more teams involved in the AP compared to the coaches. In div 4 for AP you have Waterford, Eastern Meigs, southern, Ironton st joe etc. who are not involved in the coaches team that you are talking about.

80sballer wrote:

gobucksBlitz wrote:

80sballer wrote:

AP also has more spots on each team and is not dependent on a coach or school paying their coaching dues in order to nominate and vote on players

Good points. But I hope you do see in the list, that players that were voted higher and ahead of other players on the coaches were not voted as high/or ahead on the AP and not ahead of the players in the coaches. Just a point.

I would think your points would have more to do with the fact that there are more teams involved in the AP compared to the coaches. In div 4 for AP you have Waterford, Eastern Meigs, southern, Ironton st joe etc. who are not involved in the coaches team that you are talking about.

Coaches have 2 districts within the SE do t they (13 and 14)....AP is entire district.

Regardless, definitely way less politics with AP