FBR '06 AP Coming soon..

AP FBR 2006 is coming soon.

If your squad is an AP 06 team send me your team name/future team name and I will add you to the database we have been compiling.

Thank you and we look forward to this.

Post the tiers.

Sir/ma'am we have no tiers at this time as we are only working on team names. Of course a few squads have gotten some games in.

We will be posting tiers with every AP FBR we post once that begins.

Thanks for keeping this place lively.

Wow, the PMs flew fast and furious once this was posted.

Based on what we have witnessed first hand and has now been reported rather quickly...

AP FBR 06 will begin as a non ranking list of teams. Simply a point of reference if you are looking for a team.

Until the squads that are claiming AP 06 are all truly AP 06 we will not rank them, but will list them.

Lots of change coming to our community and a point of reference should be handy until it is all legitimate.

Do you generally prefer quality or quantity of data?
Will you include or exclude OT goals (not PKs)?
How will you handle a 'magenta' team? Current FBR uses >50%
Would you have entered SuperCopa games? Specifically, out of town teams that had multiple games against in-town teams.
What do you think about de facto #1s?

Why the urgency of tiers with every week, Gopher didn't do it... Bo certainly didn't do it. Now Bo.... err a....AP 2006 FBR going to do it? Do they change that often?

Sho'nuff wrote:Do you generally prefer quality or quantity of data?
Will you include or exclude OT goals (not PKs)?
How will you handle a 'magenta' team? Current FBR uses >50%
Would you have entered SuperCopa games? Specifically, out of town teams that had multiple games against in-town teams.
What do you think about de facto #1s?

Do you generally prefer quality or quantity of data?  We are striving for quality of data, which is why We will not be ranking AP 06s until the data is pure.  Some teams reporting as AP 06 at this time simply are not trully AP, and there is nothing wrong with that or stopping them from doing that because the change has actually not taken place.  We feel anything prior to it actually being AP is being done prematurely and in some cases for a very specific agenda.

Will you include or exclude OT goals (not PKs)? We have decided that a game ended during regulation or OT with a goal(s) scored during the run of play will be recorded as such.  A game that is decided with PKs will be recorded as tie.

How will you handle a 'magenta' team? Current FBR uses >50%  A team like "magenta" will be recorded in FBR, placed into the Non-NTX tiers and will not be included in the rankings actually published.  

Would you have entered SuperCopa games? Specifically, out of town teams that had multiple games against in-town teams.  Yes, we would and will enter games like played at Super Copa, and would place those out of town teams into respective non-ntx tiers so that it is acurately reflected in FBR.

What do you think about de facto #1s.  There will be no de-facto #1s in the future AP 06 FBR.

Good stuff!

If you are creating a list and second FBR please include

DTS 06G (AP) Adames

Manager
Dodie Mabra
469-853-3031

If this team plays as an AP team it will not have any 05 birth year players.

Have no idea who is doing the FBR 06...but this is good stuff. And it goes back to the ROOTS of the original FBR.  There was no de facto anything in the original FBR. That is why FBR was started in the first place...pre FBR parents had an excel sheet that kept their daughters team as #1 after winning a few games and then not playing anybody except boys or weak older teams...lol. The whole de facto business was anti FBR which was supposed to be about fairly ranking teams based on relative game results only.

Original FBR also did NOT rank hodgepodge teams once it became common knowledge  they weren't real teams or were folding.  It created some discussion, but I remember when the 01s had a team called princess warriors that always used guest players. Towards the end they were mostly players showing up for games that played for other teams. Once that happened the original FBR stopped ranking them.

For FBR to work best, IMO the person (or persons) doing it should be familiar with the age group....even better if the people doing it are NOT anonymous. Original FBR posted the tiers, every single time, and tried to be TRANSPARENT at all times. Keep up the good work whoever you are....

Thank you 4-3-3. We strive to return FBR back to what it was at its purest form.

Does this Coup have anything to do with Jade Helm '15?

4-3-3 wrote:Have no idea who is doing the FBR 06...but this is good stuff. And it goes back to the ROOTS of the original FBR.  There was no de facto anything in the original FBR. That is why FBR was started in the first place...pre FBR parents had an excel sheet that kept their daughters team as #1 after winning a few games and then not playing anybody except boys or weak older teams...lol. The whole de facto business was anti FBR which was supposed to be about fairly ranking teams based on relative game results only.

Original FBR also did NOT rank hodgepodge teams once it became common knowledge  they weren't real teams or were folding.  It created some discussion, but I remember when the 01s had a team called princess warriors that always used guest players. Towards the end they were mostly players showing up for games that played for other teams. Once that happened the original FBR stopped ranking them.

For FBR to work best, IMO the person (or persons) doing it should be familiar with the age group....even better if the people doing it are NOT anonymous. Original FBR posted the tiers, every single time, and tried to be TRANSPARENT at all times. Keep up the good work whoever you are....

I'm gonna disagree with you a bit there Bud...

PW's were in my '01 rankings all the way through Fall and Spring of U10. They weren't removed until the middle of May, once it was confirmed that they were going to merge with TFC Guzman going into select.

I also ranked Solar Webb and Solar Murin all the way through the fall of U10, when it was up for debate as to whether either of those teams were standalone entities, and only stopped ranking them once neither one showed up in a Spring league.

Also ranked Solar Blue/DT Red North (J. Hollis' team) all the way through U10, though it was common knowledge that they were light on numbers and almost always using guest players. They ended up pulling in the extra numbers they needed to make a full roster for QT.

As for posting Tiers, I don't know if you posted them every week when you were publishing FBR at U9 for the '01's, but once I took over publishing duties at U10, I most certainly did NOT post the tiers every week. I posted them every few weeks, about the same frequency I posted them over the subsequent 4 years.

(p.s. Still got all of the old screen shots to prove everything I just said).

Fact. The original FBR...tiers were posted. I know because I made it a point to do so every single time.

Fact. PW was removed from rankings once it was apparent they were not a team. A huge # of teams used guest players, so listing out a handful is clouding the point. Only a few teams didn't truly have a team other than guests and were removed when there was consensus the team didnt actually or no longer existed.

Fact. You didnt "take over" FBR until after 01s went select. I was involved throughout for 01s. There is no way on god's green earth I would've been up for all the "de facto" #1 stuff you started after you took over.

Opinion.  The original FBR was first and foremost intended to be  about fairness and transparency (which is why tiers were always posted). I've given you many kudos over the years for carrying on FBR, but don't Pharrell me.

The only thing that caught my interested here is: what happened to the princess warriors?

4-3-3 wrote:Fact. The original FBR...tiers were posted. I know because I made it a point to do so every single time.

Fact. PW was removed from rankings once it was apparent they were not a team. A huge # of teams used guest players, so listing out a handful is clouding the point. Only a few teams didn't truly have a team other than guests and were removed when there was consensus the team didnt actually or no longer existed.

Fact. You didnt "take over" FBR until after 01s went select. I was involved throughout for 01s. There is no way on god's green earth I would've been up for all the "de facto" #1 stuff you started after you took over.

Opinion.  The original FBR was first and foremost intended to be  about fairness and transparency (which is why tiers were always posted). I've given you many kudos over the years for carrying on FBR, but don't Pharrell me.

Fact:  I never said that I took over FBR before '01's went select.  I said I took over FBR publishing duties at U10, which is absolutely true.  We were doing them together, but I was the one posting the rankings under my username on here every week starting in the fall of U10, and I was not posting the tiers every week during U10.  Plus, I acknowledged the fact that I didn't remember what you were posting when you did the FBR at U9, so don't know what you're all pissy about with that.

Fact:  You used PW's as an example of a "hodgepodge" team and implied that we removed them from the rankings before the team stopped playing games under the PW moniker.  That is absolutely untrue. I counted EVERY game that PW's played at U10, and they were listed in the FBR that I posted up until AFTER they played their final game under the PW moniker, and parents came on this board and confirmed that PW's were no more and had basically merged with TFC Guzman.  I don't remember all of arguments, so we very well may have battled over how long I kept some teams in the rankings, but have no recollection of excluding any '01 "hodgepodge" teams like you claim, so please remind me who those teams were.

Fact:  I never took issue with your statement about "De Facto" teams.  I know you hated that I did that.  

Opinion: Teams such as Solar '03 Red and LP RASE '04 did exist, and could not be ranked in FBR because they didn't play any games against other teams in their age group for long periods of time.  I never included those team within the actual FBR ranking if they didn't have enough qualifying games.  However I did choose to acknowledge the fact that prior to being excluded from the FBR, those teams were undefeated against girls at age for an extended period of time before they decided to only play up in age or play boys.  You want to hate on me for that, be my guest.

Fact:  I never Pharreled you.  Never took credit for anything I did not do.  Only pointed out where you made inaccurate statements.

This debate is appreciated from two obvious long time forum contributors.

Our hope is to return FBR to what it was. Thank you both.

FBR06AP wrote:This debate is appreciated from two obvious long time forum contributors.  

Our hope is to return FBR to what it was. Thank you both.

You might have missed my question... Why do tiers need to be published every week? Gopher didn't. Do they change significantly on a weekly basis? Educate me please.

Tiers do not need to be published weekly if the tiers are done correctly.

It would be best practice to publish them when there are swings in rankings. It helps to explain why teams are ranked where they are... correctly or incorrectly.

You can look at the tiers posted today by the FBRG person as an example.

Look at the column under "cWL"... this shows you that teams record within the tier. Notice teams with no games within the tier or poor records within the tier.

Strength of schedule is a factor in FBR, so who you play matters in this regard. It can and does inflate teams in standings

We won't use any specific teams as examples, but if you look at those things a picture of what it should look like becomes more clear.

For all sending PMs, we thank you for contributing and we aim to please.

boilerjoe_96 wrote:

FBR06AP wrote:This debate is appreciated from two obvious long time forum contributors.  

Our hope is to return FBR to what it was. Thank you both.

You might have missed my question... Why do tiers need to be published every week?  Gopher didn't.  Do they change significantly on a weekly basis?  Educate me please.

I did not post tiers on a weekly basis for 2 primary reasons:

1) Doing all of the cut and paste to create the posting of the Tiers is a pain in the a$$, and it makes for a very l-o-n-g post in the thread that's a pain to have to scroll through.
2) People tend to focus too much on why is my favorite team in such-and-such tier, and tend to forget that what really matters in FBR is which Tier a team's OPPONENTS are in.

Instead, what I posted every week, was the summary of the Tier-vs-Tier records, to demonstrate that the Tiers were staying properly balanced according to the general 80-20 placement rule that 4-3-3 and I settled on over time.  I felt that provided at least some level of transparency to the process, while avoiding reason 1 listed above.

Plus, you are correct in the fact that generally the Tiers don't change much from one week to the next.  Usually, it's no more than 1 or 2 teams that move up or down in any given week.  Less frequently, maybe once per season or so, a larger shuffling of the tiers is needed.  Even when that happened, I typically didn't post the tiers, just noted in my rankings post that a larger than normal shuffling occurred, and again, always posted the tier-vs-tier records as a confirmation that the adjustments were reasonable.

Cuz is precisely correct on what is important on the tiers. The opponents tier assignment.

It sounds like gophers was more a CUZete90 disciple. Who started the rule of excluding OT goals? Glad to see that changing!

None of the academy leagues have come out and announced NTX is going AP in spring of 2016. NTSSA has not mandated this yet ? Are the leagues prepared to meet the deadline to accommodate the small sided fields by spring ?

FBR06AP wrote:AP FBR 2006 is coming soon.  

If your squad is an AP 06 team send me your team name/future team name and I will add you to the database we have been compiling.

Thank you and we look forward to this.

It is our understanding that this is because none of this takes place until fall 2016. Not january.

The size of field and number of players will have no impact on FBR elpistolero.

Thank you for the question.

Thanks for correcting me on the field size and the number of players.  
I have to disagree when there is no such thing as AP06 league next spring.  How can we have fantasy AP06FBR. I am missing something here.  

FBR06AP wrote:It is our understanding that this is because none of this takes place until fall 2016. Not january.  

The size of field and number of players will have no impact on FBR elpistolero.  

Thank you for the question.