NEW FEATURE: pick any two teams from any years and have our system the matchup for you 10,000 times and tell you all the results
sample:
simulation results (10000 trials) for this matchup:

winner
Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) 6774 wins [67.7%], Buford (GA) 3226 wins [32.3%]

most commonly occuring outcomes
63 times Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) 27, Buford (GA) 24 [0.63%]
62 times Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) 27, Buford (GA) 17 [0.62%]
54 times Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) 24, Buford (GA) 17 [0.54%]
52 times Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) 20, Buford (GA) 17 [0.52%]
52 times Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) 24, Buford (GA) 14 [0.52%]
50 times Buford (GA) 24, Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) 20 [0.5%]

most commonly occuring margin of victory
436 times Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) by 3 [4.36%]
392 times Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) by 7 [3.92%]
380 times Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas, NV) by 10 [3.8%]
350 times Buford (GA) by 3 [3.5%]

NEW: check the updated for the coming season.  South Oak Cliff (Dallas, TX), Grant (Sacramento, CA) and Cass Tech (Detroit, MI) are the top teams at coming alive at playoff time.   What we learned in year 1 of using playoff bumps is that they did work, but not as much as the playoff history of the team would suggest.  Using this system allowed us to pick a higher percentage of playoff games correctly than ever before, but we were definitely over-counting this factor.  You'll notice more conservative playoff bump numbers going forward.
Full of the change mentioned above

FINAL NATIONAL FOOTBALL PREVIEW WILL BE RELEASED AUGUST 7TH, BUT GET A AT IT NOW.  If you are a head varsity coach and have not yet already done so, please click here to send us info about your team

SUBSCRIPTION REQUIRED: after 24 seasons of our loyal site visitors being able to enjoy us keeping things free, we will unfortunately not be able to do so going forward.  As we turn the page on the now-failed model of funding the operation of our site by being a content provider to other sites, we'll be staying in house and will need to rely on our site frequenters and the subscription model to keep us afloat.  Re: the we've implemented, we feel that we've bent over backwards to keep things affordable for casual fans who don't spend a great deal of time on our site-- the true addicts to what we do will be asked to pay more for unlimited access.  While there's nothing more annoying than suddenly having to pay for something you're used to getting for free, our hope is that after the initial shock wears off, people will see that it actually makes a good deal of sense for the people who use the information we collect to fund the man-hours needed to do it.  While other sites may have different areas of focus than us, having articles, pictures, player statistics or other content, please note that this is the only site in the country with complete national schedules/scores/standings.  Sites such as cnnsi/sblive, on3/massey, maxpreps (going forward), scorestream, etc. rely on scores that happen to be reported to them, rather than actively collecting them as we do, and as you've likely seen, they tend to end the season with 50-80% of any given team's results and have irrelevant league standings, ratings, etc. as a result.

NAME CHANGE: calpreps is now hsratings.com...this is a better name for us, given that we're number-crunchers and we do so for high schools nationally

STATE LEAGUE-BY-LEAGUE STANDINGS PAGES  
 
find a team     
NATIONAL TEAMS (updated immediately after games)

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 128.7





2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 106.7


3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 96.4

4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 89.3

5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 84.5
6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 80.7
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 80.2
8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 79.5
9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 77
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 76.2
11) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 75.3
12) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 74.4
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points
current mythical national title contenders
states represented:

With projection ratings (right column), recent results are weighted more heavily and the "politically correct" moderately-low cutoff point at which margin of victory is no longer counted is eliminated.  Standard ratings acknowledge to-date success ("resume"); with projection ratings, the goal is to accurately predict future outcomes.  For states/sections using ratings to determine playoff teams, it is recommended that standard ratings be used for selection (determining who is in), and projection ratings be used for seeding the teams that make it in.
NATIONAL TEAMS BY PROJECTION RATINGS

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 158.6





2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 136.6


3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 126.3

4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 119.2

5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 114.4
6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 110.6
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 110.1
8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 109.4
9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 106.9
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 106.1
11) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 105.2
12) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 104.3
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points
current best teams nationally
states represented:
CALIFORNIA TEAMS (resume)

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 128.7





2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 106.7





3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 84.5

4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 80.2
5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 79.5
6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 76.2
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 73.5

8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 65.7
9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 63.6
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 63.2
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points


CALIFORNIA TEAMS (predictive)

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 158.6





2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 136.6





3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 114.4

4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 110.1
5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 109.4
6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 106.1
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 103.4

8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 95.6
9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 93.5
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 93.1
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points
FLORIDA TEAMS (resume)

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 77

2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 69.7
3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 68.7
4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 64.9
5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 64.5

6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 60.1
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 58.1
8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 56.1

9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 51.9
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 49.6
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points


FLORIDA TEAMS (predictive)

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 106.9

2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 99.6
3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 98.6
4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 94.8
5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 94.4

6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 90
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 88
8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 86

9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 81.8
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 79.5
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points
GEORGIA TEAMS (resume)

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 80.7

2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 74.4
3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 70.6
4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 68.2
5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 67.7

6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 63.4
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 61.5
8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 60.9
9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 59.1
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 57.6
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points


GEORGIA TEAMS (predictive)

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 110.6

2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 104.3
3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 100.5
4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 98.1
5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 97.6

6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 93.3
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 91.4
8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 90.8
9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 89
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 87.5
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points
TEXAS TEAMS (resume)

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 75.3

2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 71.2

3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 64.8
4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 63.8
5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 60.6
6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 58.3
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 57.6
8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 56.2
9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 53.2
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 52.3
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points


TEXAS TEAMS (predictive)

1) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 105.2

2) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 101.1

3) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 94.7
4) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 93.7
5) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 90.5
6) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 88.2
7) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 87.5
8) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 86.1
9) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 83.1
10) xxxxx (xxxxx, xx) 0-0, 82.2
ratings rounded to nearest tenth
gaps between bunches of teams indicate clear breaks of 4+ points
GENERAL LINKS









contact us

(reminder that we don't respond to emails)



RATINGS/PROJECTIONS












NATIONAL





PREVIOUS YEARS (prior seasons are always free)

2024     2023

2022     2021

2020     2019

2018     2017

2016     2015

2014     2013

2012     2011

2010     2009

2008     2007

2006     2005

2004     2003

2002     2001