Ohio's Highest HS Football Winning Percentages All-Time

Bull GreenDog

Well-known member
I don't get how Massillon and McKinley starting their programs earlier would give them an advantage in winning percentage. Total games won, yes, but not winning percentage.

Doesn't the fact that Marion Local ranks ahead of McKinley on this list despite having 300 fewer victories prove that there is no advantage for teams that started their programs earlier?
 

LELL

Well-known member
No one is ignorant enough to say the poll title system is just as good enough as the playoff system.
With that being said at the end of the day you can pick a year and find out who was the Ohio state champion for that particular year. No matter how bad you want to, you can’t change history. It’s really not that hard.
Very true, but people know there's an asterisks. Reputation doesn't mean a damn thing if you can't back it up. 50 years a fraud I say. Just like the bully who thinks he can bully everyone. Just step up and smack in the mouth, they'll back down. ROTFLMAO!
 

Bull GreenDog

Well-known member
Very true, but people know there's an asterisks. Reputation doesn't mean a damn thing if you can't back it up. 50 years a fraud I say. Just like the bully who thinks he can bully everyone. Just step up and smack in the mouth, they'll back down. ROTFLMAO!
They did beat the defending D1 state champ this year, and knocked 4 time defending state champion Hoban out of the playoffs three years ago. Not exactly backing down.
 

Massillon#82

Well-known member
Interesting question, and I am going to be serious a second.

I sort of due feel the same way about college, especially pre-BCS.

People complAined about the BCS, but it at least gave us a game between two teams whom a certain system felt were the best.

Even in the bowl era, at least the voters had the means and ability for the most Part to be able to Evaluate teams and vote on them but even at that it wasnt a good enough system to see who actually had the best team.

In HS, even today, most AP voteRs do not see one down of a Team and vote. Just thInk how it was in the 70s and before? Reputation and score of the Games. That was it. Since thEre was no playoff system no one had any idea how legit Records were. We see it all the time nowadays when an undefeated team is beaten out of the playoffs early because their Schedule is garbage so one could say the pre BCS system are fake titles.
So cute, typical troll po💩.
 

Massillon#82

Well-known member
Very true, but people know there's an asterisks. Reputation doesn't mean a damn thing if you can't back it up. 50 years a fraud I say. Just like the bully who thinks he can bully everyone. Just step up and smack in the mouth, they'll back down. ROTFLMAO!
Is there anyway you can translate this nonsense and repost it ?
 

State2013-1

Active member
Massillon Washington and Canton McKinley track games going back to the 1890's-- Wyoming started playing football in 1930-- that's a 40-year head start... Maria Stein Marion Local High School was founded in 1957, and started playing football in ~1960-- that is roughly a 70-year head start for Massillon Washington and Canton McKinley... presumably you understand the time difference between 1890 and 1930 and 1960.
Question: I understand Marion was founded in 1957 but there was a consolidated high school in Maria Stein that played football before then. The elementary school didn't consolidate until 1955 and it took 2 more years to get the high school moved to its current location. Marion counts the records from that high school as it's own not only in student records but sport records as well. So shouldn't those records be added to their total? I would be interested to see what that does to their overall winning percentage.
 

State2013-1

Active member
I feel like this Massillon fight is like Browns fans saying they have the most championships, but obviously 0 superbowl win. It sounds to me like they're both just still riding Paul Brown's coattails. I guess there could be worse people's coattails to ride like (he who shall not be named) coach Cramer in Maria Stein.
 

*67

Well-known member
I don't get how Massillon and McKinley starting their programs earlier would give them an advantage in winning percentage. Total games won, yes, but not winning percentage.

Doesn't the fact that Marion Local ranks ahead of McKinley on this list despite having 300 fewer victories prove that there is no advantage for teams that started their programs earlier?
One could argue that in the very early years, schools with a more advanced program could rack up wins against schools that were just learning how to play the game. I'd guess that some games in the 1890s-1920s were as much an open practice that happened to had fans in the stands and they kept score than they were actual games.

But you're right, that doesn't make up for then 50 other years.
 

algernonsidney

Well-known member
Football in the 1890's was NOT that popular at all-- it was considered SO dangerous that many schools seriously considered banning the sport-- to prevent the frequent deaths that were occurring (due, amongst other things, to the lack of any protective equipment-- especially for the head). Baseball's popularity dwarfed football's popularity for ~100 years after the invention of both sports. The most popular sports in America in the 1920's and 1930's were:
1) Baseball (and it wasn't even close with #2);
2) Boxing;
3) Horseracing

Football was very unlikely to have even been #4 at that time. Baseball dominated the national sporting news, with professional teams in all of the most important cities-- while professional football was just getting started-- with "top level" professional football teams in such backwaters as Canton and Portsmouth, OH and Decatur, IL.

In the 1890's, there wasn't really much "national sporting news." Sports were still very regional. The only way for people to travel long distances was by train. It was a big deal for Ohio State to play Minnesota or Wisconsin.

Baseball is still the perfect sport for radio. The sport is slow enough that you can describe everything on the radio. Television made us realize how slow the game is, which is why it's less popular now. Baseball's peak popularity was in the days of radio.

Most early football history took place in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Of course, some of the Ivy League schools are also a part of football history. It's not really an accident that the most-contested college-football rivalry is Lafayette and Lehigh (both in eastern Pennsylvania).
 

John Lee Pettimore

Well-known member
One could argue that in the very early years, schools with a more advanced program could rack up wins against schools that were just learning how to play the game. I'd guess that some games in the 1890s-1920s were as much an open practice that happened to had fans in the stands and they kept score than they were actual games.

But you're right, that doesn't make up for then 50 other years.
I'm sure some junkies would love the drugs you're obviously on.
 

Steel Valley FB

Well-known member
Warren Western Reserve was 182-54 in their 24 football seasons of existence, all of which were played in the AAA or D1 classification. That’s 77.1% and good enough for #2 on this list. Please edit, accordingly. Thanks!


 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4GX

Greenwave9

Member
Since this came up a few years ago, I've continued to track the records of Ohio high schools with the highest all-time football winning percentage; I believe that these records are current through this past weekend's games:

View attachment 36044

Wyoming is now Ohio's all-time highest winning percentage team, if tie games are included in total games played; Wyoming has been Ohio's highest winning percentage team for some time now, if tie games are excluded from the total played-- but now, Wyoming has also surpassed Massillon Washington in highest winning percentage, if tie games are included in the total games played.

Note that some sports statisticians calculate winning percentage with tie games included in the total games played (with ties considered "not a win"), while others (e.g.- the NFL, for purpose of ranking its teams by winning percentage) exclude tie games from the total (i.e.- ties are considered neither a win nor a loss- and thus excluded from denominator of the winning percentage calculation).

In recent years, Canton McKinley has seen its all-time winning percentage falling fairly noticeably, Massillon Washington and Steubenville have been (roughly) maintaining their winning percentage at their historical levels, while Wyoming and (especially) Maria Stein Marion Local have been raising their winning percentages gradually over time; while Wyoming may be first in all-time winning percentage at the moment, if MSML continues to post 16-0 state championship seasons with the frequency that MSML has done over the last ~decade, it won't be long before MSML takes over the top spot from Wyoming.
If you include this past weekend's 11/12/22 victory - Newark Catholic has a combined record of
555 Wins
188 Losses
4 Ties
Winning % of 74.30%

NC opened in 1958 so does not have as long history as some of these teams listed.

The OHSAA has a list by wins & as well as winning % that is updated for the most part thru 2019:

https://www.ohsaa.org/sports/staterecords/football#team

Good luck to all the teams trying to make it to the Final 4 this weekend!
 
Last edited:

4GX

Well-known member
You should take the time to break down Mck and Massillon starting in 1930 and see if your hypothesis holds. Instead of just "imagining".
Not my job-- you can do it, if you like-- you used the word "should" as if you have the job of assigning me tasks. Since Massillon Washington and Canton McKinley fans like to talk about all-time victory records (since that paradigm favors schools that started playing football WELL before many other schools did), I just focused on all-time TOTAL records (with my original post)-- and the FACTS speak for themselves. Someone else here, trying to boost Massillon Washington and Canton McKinley's case for somehow being "the best" all-time, decided to start talking about "imagining" (if Massillon Washington and Canton McKinley did NOT play each other every year-- a hypothetical)-- and I responded to that with a different "imagining"-- it's not facts, it's hypothetical-- the FACTS say that Wyoming has the highest all-time winning percentage in Ohio HS football...

BUT I'd bet dollars to donuts, that if you compared Wyoming's record against Massillon Washington and Canton McKinley's record since 1930, you will find that Wyoming has a superior winning percentage over those two schools-- I HIGHLY doubt that Massillon Washington's and Canton McKinley's winning percentage PRE-1930 is lower than their respective winning percentages POST-1930-- so, subtracting either school's pre-1930 record from their post-1930 record is HIGHLY unlikely to boost their respective post-1930 winning percentages-- but, if somebody from either school wants to do the math on that, have at it.
 

4GX

Well-known member
If Wyoming celebrated 100 years of football in 2018, and you stated they started their football program in 1930, what happened to the other 12-13 years? Am I missing something?
Wyoming did not "celebrate 100 years of football in 2018"-- that is a comment made by a Massillon Washington backer-- Wyoming began fielding a team in 1930....

Edit: That was the date listed in the OHSAA record books-- but, it now appears as though Wyoming played its first season of interscholastic HS football in 1919-- I stand corrected on this item-- I should have fact-checked the OHSAA.
 
Last edited:

4GX

Well-known member
This thread looks fun.

What we need to do is break it down into two levels:
1. Big Boy divisions
2. Pee Wee Divisions.
Right-- because one plays football, and the other plays something else...

No doubt there is a difference between the level of play in Division I and Division VII...

Not sure what your implication is-- I do know that the smaller schools start with many fewer warm bodies to choose from-- so it (generally) is just as hard to win there, as it is at the higher level(s)-- it's pretty much like the horse racing paradigm of handicaps-- with heavily favored horses carrying more weight, to "equalize" the race/challenge-- or the boxing/wrestling paradigm of weight classes...

So, if you're saying that the accomplishment of winning nearly 80% of your games, when facing off only against other similarly sized smaller schools is NOT worth comparing with the accomplishment of winning a high percentage with a large student body/team against other similarly sized large schools, then I guess we should stop caring about who wins a boxing match in the Lightweight, Welterweight, Middleweight weight classes (get lost, Sugar Ray Leonard, Floyd Mayweather, et al!)-- and ONLY care about the unlimited/Heavyweight class.
 

Thavoice

Well-known member
Right-- because one plays football, and the other plays something else...

No doubt there is a difference between the level of play in Division I and Division VII...

Not sure what your implication is-- I do know that the smaller schools start with many fewer warm bodies to choose from-- so it (generally) is just as hard to win there, as it is at the higher level(s)-- it's pretty much like the horse racing paradigm of handicaps-- with heavily favored horses carrying more weight, to "equalize" the race/challenge-- or the boxing/wrestling paradigm of weight classes...

So, if you're saying that the accomplishment of winning nearly 80% of your games, when facing off only against other similarly sized smaller schools is NOT worth comparing with the accomplishment of winning a high percentage with a large student body/team against other similarly sized large schools, then I guess we should stop caring about who wins a boxing match in the Lightweight, Welterweight, Middleweight weight classes (get lost, Sugar Ray Leonard, Floyd Mayweather, et al!)-- and ONLY care about the unlimited/Heavyweight class.
Big boy vs PeeWee.
 

4GX

Well-known member
Massillon Principal 1893: "We should start a football club see."

Superintendent: "Why do you say that?"

MP: "Because in about 40 years most schools will have one, and we want a head start when people are calculating wins and winning % in, oh....I don't know....125 years from now see."

Super: "That's brilliant."
Nice try-- pretty silly-- but nice try-- I made none of those allegations, so your little fantasy dialog is pretty ludicrous.
 

4GX

Well-known member
I don't get how Massillon and McKinley starting their programs earlier would give them an advantage in winning percentage. Total games won, yes, but not winning percentage.

Doesn't the fact that Marion Local ranks ahead of McKinley on this list despite having 300 fewer victories prove that there is no advantage for teams that started their programs earlier?
In the early years that Massillon Washington and Canton McKinley fielded teams-- and focused on them intently-- when few others did, it was a LOT easier to rack up high winning percentages against relatively weak competition. In the days before many NCAA Division I schools even bothered to field women's basketball teams (and the AIAW ran the nominal championship for women's basketball), schools like a little tiny all-girls Catholic school (Immaculata-- AKA "Mighty Mac") dominated women's college basketball-- later followed (in the very early days of the NCAA starting to run an NCAA women's basketball championship) by Louisiana Tech (the "Lady Techsters")-- that no longer happens now, with most of the big NCAA Division I schools now putting significant resources into women's basketball.

The point is: if you subtracted the win-loss records that Massillon Washington and Canton McKinley racked up in the years from ~1890-1930 from those schools' overall win-loss records, their overall winning percentage is only likely to go DOWN, not up... those years of fielding a team (and focusing HEAVILY on the sport) when many others did not, created a favorable environment for racking up a much higher winning percentage (THEN) than either of those schools is able to generate now.

As for your comment about Marion Local (now) ranking ahead of Canton McKinley on this list, despite having ~300 fewer victories-- yes, it DOES prove that Marion (an EXCEPTIONAL achiever, over the last ~25 years, and a high achiever almost since inception, in ~1960) has won at a higher rate, during Marion's shorter history, than Canton McKinley has over its longer history-- BUT, Marion's differential advantage over Canton McKinley would be even greater, if we were ONLY looking at games during the period when BOTH Marion and Canton McKinley fielded teams-- in other words, if we subtracted Canton McKinley's won-loss record from pre-1960 from Canton McKinley's overall record.
 

4GX

Well-known member
Question: I understand Marion was founded in 1957 but there was a consolidated high school in Maria Stein that played football before then. The elementary school didn't consolidate until 1955 and it took 2 more years to get the high school moved to its current location. Marion counts the records from that high school as it's own not only in student records but sport records as well. So shouldn't those records be added to their total? I would be interested to see what that does to their overall winning percentage.
Whenever you have consolidation (or splintering) of schools, the story gets a little messy (e.g.- Hamilton had one HS, then two, now is back to one)-- I did see that in the historical record (about there being another HS in the area, before Marion Local was created)-- but it is hard to discern how those records of that school (which was not a Maria Stein-only HS) are captured in OHSAA historical records... What is fairly clear is what MSML's record has been since it was founded in 1957 (and began playing football in ~1960)-- that record is (I believe) what I cited in the statistical data, in the table I inserted in my original post in this thread.
 
.
Top