Pella vs Xavier

[GatorBait1988]

Who ever said their coaching staff didn't do their job over the course of the season or seasons before? I stated, in this game Xavier's coaching staff failed the kids. Period. They were getting exploited by 6'5 receivers and did NOTHING to combat the weakness. I don't care if they "always play man coverage", it didn't work, so as a coach you need to adjust. I said kudos to Xavier for winning 12 games and being a perennial powerhouse in 3A, but to use the defense that they win a lot of games therefore that means they have a solid coaching staff is absurd. In high school sports, teams win the majority of their games off of talent discrepancy. You have the best talent, you can win a bunch of games in high school sports. Good/Great coaches adapt their teams to who they are playing and beat teams they shouldn't. Xavier lost on the last play, if Pella would have spread them out all night and stopped running on 1st and 2nd down I don't think the game would have been as close as it was. Pella had a distinct advantage in athleticism in their skill players vs Xavier's secondary. Pella thought it was a weakness and went after it, 300+ yards between 2 WRs later and they have a point. At no point did Xavier adjust to a zone or even help with a safety over the top. I don't believe that constitutes "good coaching". Again, I am discussing one particular game in one particular season. Kudos to the 12 wins previous to this game and the many years previous to this year.

 

[mander1211]

Who ever said their coaching staff didn't do their job over the course of the season or seasons before? I stated, in this game Xavier's coaching staff failed the kids. Period. They were getting exploited by 6'5 receivers and did NOTHING to combat the weakness. I don't care if they "always play man coverage", it didn't work, so as a coach you need to adjust. I said kudos to Xavier for winning 12 games and being a perennial powerhouse in 3A, but to use the defense that they win a lot of games therefore that means they have a solid coaching staff is absurd. In high school sports, teams win the majority of their games off of talent discrepancy. You have the best talent, you can win a bunch of games in high school sports. Good/Great coaches adapt their teams to who they are playing and beat teams they shouldn't. Xavier lost on the last play, if Pella would have spread them out all night and stopped running on 1st and 2nd down I don't think the game would have been as close as it was. Pella had a distinct advantage in athleticism in their skill players vs Xavier's secondary. Pella thought it was a weakness and went after it, 300+ yards between 2 WRs later and they have a point. At no point did Xavier adjust to a zone or even help with a safety over the top. I don't believe that constitutes "good coaching". Again, I am discussing one particular game in one particular season. Kudos to the 12 wins previous to this game and the many years previous to this year.

And I'm also discussing one game in particular: last night's.

To your point, Pella had way more talent and probably should have won the game by more. Xavier had no business being in the game. And yet, Xavier was in the game. Probably because the coaching staff put them in that position.

 

[bigfridaynite]

I have to agree CRX did a great job hanging around an almost won it.Pella is a match up nightmare for any HS team

 

[GatorBait1988]

If we all want to keep believing that Xavier's coaching kept them in the game, we can. But that doesn't add up when Wilson was unstoppable in the 1st half and they left him for dead in the second half and the absence of any help for their CBs matched up against those huge WRs. We just have to agree to disagree.

 

[bigfridaynite]

I can't say I totally disagree that's for sure but it was like Pella could do what they wanted to do when they had to, Pella was so calm to the final gun.CRX did so many things right won the turnovers ,score on opening drive of game and 2nd half ect

 

[woodsiding]

If we all want to keep believing that Xavier's coaching kept them in the game, we can. But that doesn't add up when Wilson was unstoppable in the 1st half and they left him for dead in the second half and the absence of any help for their CBs matched up against those huge WRs. We just have to agree to disagree.

This isn't magical land of Xbox where there is an adjustment that makes a great offense bad. Pella is a great offense, that will score, and will have advantages against most any team it plays. Xavier shut down their running game and capitalized on mistakes in their passing game.

It was a great football game!

 

[Old Pitcher]

In my opinion, the primary reason that Xavier was able to "shut down" Pella's running game, was due to their tailback (and fastest player) being injured. R-P-O Wildcat type offenses can not run effectively when they are trying to hide the fact that one of the options is not a "real" option. The defense then only has to focus on stopping the one real option. Therefore, no running game. The fact that Pella could still throw so effectively when everyone knew that they couldn't run was surprising.

Can anyone that was there last night say for sure if the long pass reception and great footwork by the Pella receiver down to the 4 that was ruled out of bounds by a ref that was 45 yards away on Pella's 2nd to last possession was as in bounds as it appeared on TV?

 

[GatorBait1988]

This isn't magical land of Xbox where there is an adjustment that makes a great offense bad.

Who said you could make a "good offense bad". The problem with this board is people just state things they want to hear. I never said Xavier could make "magically" make Pella's offense bad. What you can and should try to do, is make it hard for a good offense to move the ball and score. Force them to make decisions outside of the norm. Playing man coverage on 6'5 athletic receivers wasn't the correct game plan, in fact, it was the exact game plan that Pella wanted them to play. The game shouldn't have been close, the game was close (in my opinion) because Pella's coaching staff didn't abandon the run game early enough. They actually got a little life in their run game when Finney broke that big run off, that run had way more to do with the six missed tackles than it ever did with the actual play call. Great coaches make adjustments week to week AND mid-game!!

Let's look at Alabama for example, 4-5 years ago they were a pro-style offense(McElwain was there but Saban called the majority of plays, really put a leash on McElwain) that recruited big bruising RBs that would pick up chunks of yardage. They were very successful, won a ton of games, and even some National Titles. Why did they adopt Lane Kiffin's spread? Who did they lose to prior to Kiffin? Spread teams, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Ole Miss, Ohio State. Saban knew the game was changing and that he couldn't rely on his defense to stop these spread offenses every possession, when he knew he couldn't stop them every possession he knew that his ground and pound offense took up too much time on the clock to come back. Not to mention if someone fumbled, threw a pick, penalty happened, that put their ground and pound offense deeper in trouble by relying on a QB that wasn't used to throwing the ball down field, thus getting them into more trouble. Saban saw the writing on the wall, I need to develop an offense that can put points on the board quickly if my defense gives up points. That's called an "adjustment". The fact that he looked himself in the mirror and knew his system was flawed. Guess what, he hired an Offensive Guru and his teams are continuing to win. That's what GREAT coaches do.

There is only two explanations that the Xavier coaching staff could have from last night;
1). They were stubborn. They didn't want to change their "system".
2). They honestly believed that their CBs could cover Pella's WRs in man coverage.

Either way, they didn't put their team in the best position to win and that all has to do with the Coach.

 

[Dutch_Nation]

Who said you could make a "good offense bad". The problem with this board is people just state things they want to hear. I never said Xavier could make "magically" make Pella's offense bad. What you can and should try to do, is make it hard for a good offense to move the ball and score. Force them to make decisions outside of the norm. Playing man coverage on 6'5 athletic receivers wasn't the correct game plan, in fact, it was the exact game plan that Pella wanted them to play. The game shouldn't have been close, the game was close (in my opinion) because Pella's coaching staff didn't abandon the run game early enough. They actually got a little life in their run game when Finney broke that big run off, that run had way more to do with the six missed tackles than it ever did with the actual play call. Great coaches make adjustments week to week AND mid-game!!

There is only two explanations that the Xavier coaching staff could have from last night;
1). They were stubborn. They didn't want to change their "system".
2). They honestly believed that their CBs could cover Pella's WRs in man coverage.

Either way, they didn't put their team in the best position to win and that all has to do with the Coach.

Before I address what you posted here I just want to say this was a tremendous game between two very deserving teams. Both teams were extremely well coached and executed their game plans rather effectively. This is a game that both teams should be proud of, and it will be one that is remembered for years to come.

Gator, you keep saying Pella should have abandoned the run game on first and second down and just thrown the ball. This tells me that you either a) don't know football, or b) weren't paying much attention to the game...

Pella only ran the ball 15 or so times. 2 of those "attempts" were sacks, and several others were QB scrambles. a couple of the runs came in the redzone, one leading to a touchdown. and then obviously the 73yd TD score from the QB. Your claim of consistently running on 1st and 2nd down just doesn't add up..

On the season Pella has run the ball 330 times. An average of nearly 30 per game. So here we have a coaching staff that already recognized they wouldn't be able to consistently run the ball against a sound Xavier front 7. They cut the average in half this game and really opened up the game by throwing the ball.

So are you claiming they should have thrown even more? Anyone who has ever played/coached football knows that you cannot and will not consistently win games if you are one dimensional. Had Pella completely abandoned the run, the passing game wouldn't have worked the way it did.

You also seem to think the Xavier coaches lost this game. I would argue that the Xavier coaches did an exceptional job of preparing for Pella and was in a great spot to win the game. Xavier knew that Pella would get yards through the air, that's a given. They also knew they could stop the run, which they did, except for the one big play. Had Xavier switched to a zone scheme on defense, Pella would have found much greater success running the ball. Xavier had 3 interceptions, something no other team has done against Pella this year.

The only flaw I saw in Xavier's play calling was on the final drive. They needed to run plays that would eat up more clock instead of quick hitters right up the gut. Had they done that, who knows if Pella even gets that final shot at the endzone.

 

[GatorBait1988]

I'm a little confused on the verbiage "one dimensional". Teams don't want to be one dimensional because they believe the team will adjust and stop the one dimension. My point was, Xavier was giving the same defensive look no matter the down, yards to go, or anything else. They had zero adjustment, so the success through the air would have been the same if you threw once or fifty times.

I will have to look at the box score, but 15 attempts that netted you nothing against the same defensive scheme all night is still too many. I think someone mentioned that if Finney didn't bust that 70+ yard run than Pella would have had less than 10 yards rushing all night. I agree one dimensional teams don't work against teams that adjust, but if the team refuses to adjust (like Xavier) then you keep exploiting the weakness.

 

[Dutch_Nation]

I don't understand where you think Pella didn't keep exploiting the weakness of the Xavier defense. They threw the ball over 70% of the time... The QB threw for the most yards he has all season. They picked up all but 3 of their 1st downs by passing. They exploited the weakness as much as they could. You also have to remember that most of Pella's WRs play both ways. You can't send them out on routes every single play and still expect them to be effective late in the game and on the other side of the ball.

So if 15 rushing attempts is too many, how many would you have called? I would argue that Pella only legitimately called 10 run plays. 1 of which was an end-around to the WR. Pella did a great job of keeping Xavier honest and still made them respect the threat of a run play. Pella was able to bust open that big run because they had called the same play a couple times earlier in the game and figured out a way to block Xavier up front. It opened up, the QB made some moves, and the rest is history.

 

[mander1211]

Who said you could make a "good offense bad". The problem with this board is people just state things they want to hear. I never said Xavier could make "magically" make Pella's offense bad. What you can and should try to do, is make it hard for a good offense to move the ball and score. Force them to make decisions outside of the norm. Playing man coverage on 6'5 athletic receivers wasn't the correct game plan, in fact, it was the exact game plan that Pella wanted them to play. The game shouldn't have been close, the game was close (in my opinion) because Pella's coaching staff didn't abandon the run game early enough. They actually got a little life in their run game when Finney broke that big run off, that run had way more to do with the six missed tackles than it ever did with the actual play call. Great coaches make adjustments week to week AND mid-game!!

Let's look at Alabama for example, 4-5 years ago they were a pro-style offense(McElwain was there but Saban called the majority of plays, really put a leash on McElwain) that recruited big bruising RBs that would pick up chunks of yardage. They were very successful, won a ton of games, and even some National Titles. Why did they adopt Lane Kiffin's spread? Who did they lose to prior to Kiffin? Spread teams, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Ole Miss, Ohio State. Saban knew the game was changing and that he couldn't rely on his defense to stop these spread offenses every possession, when he knew he couldn't stop them every possession he knew that his ground and pound offense took up too much time on the clock to come back. Not to mention if someone fumbled, threw a pick, penalty happened, that put their ground and pound offense deeper in trouble by relying on a QB that wasn't used to throwing the ball down field, thus getting them into more trouble. Saban saw the writing on the wall, I need to develop an offense that can put points on the board quickly if my defense gives up points. That's called an "adjustment". The fact that he looked himself in the mirror and knew his system was flawed. Guess what, he hired an Offensive Guru and his teams are continuing to win. That's what GREAT coaches do.

There is only two explanations that the Xavier coaching staff could have from last night;
1). They were stubborn. They didn't want to change their "system".
2). They honestly believed that their CBs could cover Pella's WRs in man coverage.

Either way, they didn't put their team in the best position to win and that all has to do with the Coach.

Before I address what you posted here I just want to say this was a tremendous game between two very deserving teams. Both teams were extremely well coached and executed their game plans rather effectively. This is a game that both teams should be proud of, and it will be one that is remembered for years to come.

Gator, you keep saying Pella should have abandoned the run game on first and second down and just thrown the ball. This tells me that you either a) don't know football, or b) weren't paying much attention to the game...

Pella only ran the ball 15 or so times. 2 of those "attempts" were sacks, and several others were QB scrambles. a couple of the runs came in the redzone, one leading to a touchdown. and then obviously the 73yd TD score from the QB. Your claim of consistently running on 1st and 2nd down just doesn't add up..

On the season Pella has run the ball 330 times. An average of nearly 30 per game. So here we have a coaching staff that already recognized they wouldn't be able to consistently run the ball against a sound Xavier front 7. They cut the average in half this game and really opened up the game by throwing the ball.

So are you claiming they should have thrown even more? Anyone who has ever played/coached football knows that you cannot and will not consistently win games if you are one dimensional. Had Pella completely abandoned the run, the passing game wouldn't have worked the way it did.

You also seem to think the Xavier coaches lost this game. I would argue that the Xavier coaches did an exceptional job of preparing for Pella and was in a great spot to win the game. Xavier knew that Pella would get yards through the air, that's a given. They also knew they could stop the run, which they did, except for the one big play. Had Xavier switched to a zone scheme on defense, Pella would have found much greater success running the ball. Xavier had 3 interceptions, something no other team has done against Pella this year.

The only flaw I saw in Xavier's play calling was on the final drive. They needed to run plays that would eat up more clock instead of quick hitters right up the gut. Had they done that, who knows if Pella even gets that final shot at the endzone.

Dutch...well said on all points. For someone to call Xavier's coaching last night a "travesty" is absolutely ridiculous.

Congrats on the win last night. Quite a run Pella is having right now.

 

[Dutch_Nation]

In my opinion, the primary reason that Xavier was able to "shut down" Pella's running game, was due to their tailback (and fastest player) being injured. R-P-O Wildcat type offenses can not run effectively when they are trying to hide the fact that one of the options is not a "real" option. The defense then only has to focus on stopping the one real option. Therefore, no running game. The fact that Pella could still throw so effectively when everyone knew that they couldn't run was surprising.

Can anyone that was there last night say for sure if the long pass reception and great footwork by the Pella receiver down to the 4 that was ruled out of bounds by a ref that was 45 yards away on Pella's 2nd to last possession was as in bounds as it appeared on TV?

I don't necessarily agree with your first point here. You have got to credit Xavier on their tenacity up front. They were relentless in their pressure on the line. All year Pella has relied on the QB to carry the load on the ground, something Xavier knew and keyed on from the first snap. Kudus to them for not letting Pella run well.

As for the injured tailback. I don't think he is their fastest player, but I could be wrong. He only has 350ish yards on the season so it's not like he has been a workhorse. I think the replacements did just as well as he would have against Xavier. and in no way am I trying to diminish his ability as a back by making that statement, rather I think it comes down to line play, and this year's Pella team isn't as good at run blocking as they have been in the past. Xavier brought the pressure all night long and Pella had it's hands full in trying to give the QB time to throw.

 

[Dutch_Nation]

Congrats on the win last night. Quite a run Pella is having right now.

Agreed, something special for sure. I'm just glad my work schedule has allowed me to make it to the majority of the games this year. It has been fun to see them grow as a team after losing so much talent from last year's squad. I've been following the Dutch for 25+ years and it is great to see all of the hard work paying off. There can't be enough said about the coaching staff Pella has. I was so thrilled to see them finally get over the hump and win a championship.

 

[mander1211]

Agreed, something special for sure. I'm just glad my work schedule has allowed me to make it to the majority of the games this year. It has been fun to see them grow as a team after losing so much talent from last year's squad. I've been following the Dutch for 25+ years and it is great to see all of the hard work paying off. There can't be enough said about the coaching staff Pella has. I was so thrilled to see them finally get over the hump and win a championship.

I recall a Regis/Pella game in about 1992 that was one of the best high school playoff games I've ever been to. The game was at Pella and it was maybe the coldest football game I've ever been to. Regis pulled it out late - it was a hell of a game. Nice to see the "rivalry" renewed in recent years.

 

[Dutch_Nation]

I recall a Regis/Pella game in about 1992 that was one of the best high school playoff games I've ever been to. The game was at Pella and it was maybe the coldest football game I've ever been to. Regis pulled it out late - it was a hell of a game. Nice to see the "rivalry" renewed in recent years.

Indeed, what a battle that was! The Pella/Xavier rivalry has really taken off in the last few years. Quite a few post season meetings in many different sports.

 

[GatorBait1988]

After careful consideration, I now agree that Xavier playing man coverage was the best option. Thanks for making me see the light guys!

 

[GatorBait1988]

I was 100% sarcastic.

 

[cidhawkeye]

I enjoy gator calling Pella poorly coached. Always good to see 40 wins in a row getting you called out by the gator, good thing Xavier was coached so poorly to bail Jay out.

 

[El_Doce]

Great Game! Everyone left it all on the field. Great Effort by both teams. I don't know why the IHSAA can just flip the brackets in the semis and have an east/west semi. Then some of these debates go away.

The great thing about this game is all the small things that fell into place to make the finish exciting. Both teams should be proud of their programs.

 

[Dutch_Nation]

I was 100% sarcastic.

Well in that case I recant my statement and hope you come to realize how moronic your previous posts sound. The great thing about all of this is that the Dutch train just keeps on moving, proving time and time again that the coaching staff knows how to get the kids ready to play.

I would still love to hear what you would have called differently if you were the coach (which you very clearly will never be)

 

[GatorBait1988]

I'm definitely cheering for Pella. My original statement was that Xavier's Coaching staff in fact hurt their team with the continuous call of man to man coverage on Holterhaus and Van Wyk. I don't see the value in man up coverage on 6'5 WRs with 5'9 CBs. I don't think that was a smart coaching move, in fact, in my opinion it was quite dumb. Now onto Pella, I believe the game wouldn't have been as close as it was if they would have abandoned the run game early and just aired it out. I say this for the sole reason that Xavier was making zero adjustments to stop the WRs. Pella is an awesome running team, but when Xavier was repeatedly stopping their run game, they should have abandoned it and purely went through the air. Holterhaus and Van Wyk were the best players on the field by a mile, mesh that with the fact that Xavier was strictly playing man up coverage and I believe Pella could have thrown for whatever they wanted. I hope the "Dutch Train" keeps rolling, they are definitely fun to watch. I apologize for being sarcastic, that was out of line.

 

[bigfridaynite]

I was a little surprise CRX didn't run some screens on the 3rd and more than 6 the QB couldn't throw down field to well and the RB was great in open field

 

[KidSilverhair]

Gator, I'm anxious to see you step forward and take over a football program as head coach. We will be able to see the brilliance of your offensive and defensive mind as your team wins every game. Chances are Schulte might step down after Quinn graduates in a couple of years, I'm sure Xavier would love to have you.

Now that's how you do sarcasm.

Xavier plays man. It's what they do. It's gotten them a 4A state championship, three 4A championship game appearances, and two trips to the 3A semis in three years. Can they get burned doing that? Sure. Can their cornerbacks magically grow 10 inches to counter tall receivers? Well, no, not even private schools have figured that out. Yet. Let me ask you, if playing zone with a safety over the top would have helped, it would have mainly helped with stopping long plays after the catch, right? How many of those did Pella have? One.

Finney threw three interceptions in this game. He had a total of five in 11 games prior to that. Yes, two of those were overthrows (of his towering receivers, mind you), but don't you think the Xavier pressure had a little to do with that? The third interception was a little behind the receiver, but you can't take away the effort of Gerke to pull that away from Holterhaus. That was a 50-50 ball, and Gerke did take it away. Give the kid some freakin' credit, man.

And Xavier was so outcoached and outmatched athletically that they had the lead and the ball with less than a minute left? Really, mander? You think Pella had way more talent than Xavier? I can't agree with you. In 2014 that was obvious, this year I think they were very evenly matched talent-wise.

What made the difference? Finney's TD run, a great play by him helped by (uncharacteristic) poor tackling by Xavier. Penalties on Xavier hurt on a couple of drives, at least once forcing a field goal when a TD could have been on the table (Pella had a couple of big penalties that killed drives, too, it's true). Xavier's choice to run three times up the middle when a first down could have ended the game. Finney's coolness under pressure and Van Wyk being able to make the big plays when it mattered at the end.

It wasn't because Xavier played man coverage. Sorry, it just wasn't. Believe what you want - and I will look forward to seeing the future football dynasty guided by Coach Gator.

 

[GatorBait1988]

I've come the realization that giving up almost 400 yards through the air isn't the fault of the secondary or defensive scheme. It's what Xavier does and that can't be changed. I'm sorry that I believed that a coach could make an adjustment mid-game after seeing what the other team is having success doing. I didn't know me pointing out flaws in one game totally discredited Xavier's success, I think I even mentioned that their history was impressive as well as their 12 previous wins this year. Again, I believe that this one particular game, the Xavier staff didn't help the team with their lack of adjustments. There are numerous coverages you could have ran to combat their passing attack, safeties playing cloud coverage over the top and mirror coverages underneath. I think anything would have been better than Holterhaus and Van Wyk running wherever they wanted all night on those little CBs. The interceptions were uncharacteristic, one was on a tip, one was on a very hard route for a high school QB to complete (20+ yard flag) and he underthrew the ball. I can't recall the other pick. I will end it here, we just don't agree. Everyone can see that Xavier was at a disadvantage with having less athletes and I don't believe Xavier's coaching staff helped with the continuous call of man up coverage. Others believe differently. I respect that.

 

[KidSilverhair]

Having different opinions and yelling about them is actually a great thing about sports. Surely we can all agree on that!

Why are we suddenly coming to the notion that Pella has way more talent than Xavier? The numbers, both for the game and for the season. don't show that. Watching the game with my own eyes didn't show that. The fact that Pella needed to pull off two consecutive great plays to even win the game doesn't show that. These two teams were really, really closely matched. Pella was taller - Xavier looked a little faster to me - Xavier's line did a great job run blocking - Pella's did well in pass protection - Pella's pass defense was stifling - Xavier shut down the run. I just can't see "Well obviously Pella had way more talent." This isn't 2014.

 

[KidSilverhair]

Also as far as adjusting - I would think Xavier's coaches figured they were giving their team the best chance to win the game. Your earlier argument about Saban & Alabama isn't quite apt, because you're not going to change defensive coaches and install a whole new system at halftime. If the Xavier D hadn't played zone/cloud/mixed coverages all season, would they be able to do it effectively all of a sudden in the middle of the 12th game of the year? Criticize the coaches for not working on changes during practice last week, I suppose, but what they were doing had been working pretty well.

 

[GatorBait1988]

Also as far as adjusting - I would think Xavier's coaches figured they were giving their team the best chance to win the game. Your earlier argument about Saban & Alabama isn't quite apt, because you're not going to change defensive coaches and install a whole new system at halftime. If the Xavier D hadn't played zone/cloud/mixed coverages all season, would they be able to do it effectively all of a sudden in the middle of the 12th game of the year? Criticize the coaches for not working on changes during practice last week, I suppose, but what they were doing had been working pretty well.

Of course you can't change your entire system in the middle of the game. My point is that great coaching staffs already have in place ways to stop teams that may cause a disadvantage to their team, especially if you are as good as Xavier is and believe you will make a good run in the playoffs. IMO, Xavier's staff should have known they were going to make a good run in the playoffs and should have been making adjustments in the middle of the season to prepare for the teams that caused them the most trouble. It doesn't take a genius or some unreal coach to see that Pella is a matchup nightmare on the perimeter (for a lot of high school football teams) for Xavier. Of course you can't replicate the size and speed from Holterhaus and Van Wyk but you can definitely get game reps of running different coverages mid-season when you are absolutely killing teams (mind you, in this case the best time to run these game reps is when you have a comfortable lead and the the down and distance presents itself, such as 3rd and 10, you know, it will be a pass play, you are up by 30+, let your safeties and CB work on something that will help them down the road). Making adjustments mid game isn't abandoning your "system", it is adapting to the particular game and giving your kids the best chance to win. Again, (I don't know how many times I've said this), this isn't to discredit anything Xavier has accomplished THIS YEAR (prior to this game) and the many years before it!! But, people need to be real and stop using past success as a free pass for coaches. Great, you had a 12 win season and pounded everyone before this, but I would put a hefty wager down that Xavier was the more athletic team in ALL of their games this year, no disrespect to the coaching staff (again) but a huge advantage in sports (especially high school sports) is having the best athletes.

Again, I believe coaches should be making adjustments ALL THE TIME. Year to year, week to week, half to half and play to play. I can't understand how people can ever use the adage, "It's their system and they've won a lot, so they know what they are doing", they sure didn't look like they knew what they were doing (in this particular game) allowing Holerhaus and Van Wyk to do whatever they wanted.

All in all, make adjustments. It's very hard. This should be done at the beginning of every year after coaches evaluate their teams. What is our biggest weakness? What teams out there (they we may face, Xavier should consider everyone because they are such a great team who makes deep runs in the playoffs quite often) can expose our weakness? What can we do to try and combat our weakness? It's hard for coaches to believe they have a weakness, especially from successful programs. But, every team has a weakness (to an extent), some may be very visible and others not so much. The hard part is believing you have a weakness when you beat everyone on your schedule with such ease. That's where the coaching and film work come in.

No, I'm not pretending to be some great coach, or anything like that. I do love the game, understand it pretty well, and like to discuss. I do apologize if anyone took offense to this or if anyone believed I was downing a particular staff.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Of course you can't change your entire system in the middle of the game. My point is that great coaching staffs already have in place ways to stop teams that may cause a disadvantage to their team, especially if you are as good as Xavier is and believe you will make a good run in the playoffs. IMO, Xavier's staff should have known they were going to make a good run in the playoffs and should have been making adjustments in the middle of the season to prepare for the teams that caused them the most trouble. It doesn't take a genius or some unreal coach to see that Pella is a matchup nightmare on the perimeter (for a lot of high school football teams) for Xavier. Of course you can't replicate the size and speed from Holterhaus and Van Wyk but you can definitely get game reps of running different coverages mid-season when you are absolutely killing teams (mind you, in this case the best time to run these game reps is when you have a comfortable lead and the the down and distance presents itself, such as 3rd and 10, you know, it will be a pass play, you are up by 30+, let your safeties and CB work on something that will help them down the road). Making adjustments mid game isn't abandoning your "system", it is adapting to the particular game and giving your kids the best chance to win. Again, (I don't know how many times I've said this), this isn't to discredit anything Xavier has accomplished THIS YEAR (prior to this game) and the many years before it!! But, people need to be real and stop using past success as a free pass for coaches. Great, you had a 12 win season and pounded everyone before this, but I would put a hefty wager down that Xavier was the more athletic team in ALL of their games this year, no disrespect to the coaching staff (again) but a huge advantage in sports (especially high school sports) is having the best athletes.

Again, I believe coaches should be making adjustments ALL THE TIME. Year to year, week to week, half to half and play to play. I can't understand how people can ever use the adage, "It's their system and they've won a lot, so they know what they are doing", they sure didn't look like they knew what they were doing (in this particular game) allowing Holerhaus and Van Wyk to do whatever they wanted.

All in all, make adjustments. It's very hard. This should be done at the beginning of every year after coaches evaluate their teams. What is our biggest weakness? What teams out there (they we may face, Xavier should consider everyone because they are such a great team who makes deep runs in the playoffs quite often) can expose our weakness? What can we do to try and combat our weakness? It's hard for coaches to believe they have a weakness, especially from successful programs. But, every team has a weakness (to an extent), some may be very visible and others not so much. The hard part is believing you have a weakness when you beat everyone on your schedule with such ease. That's where the coaching and film work come in.

No, I'm not pretending to be some great coach, or anything like that. I do love the game, understand it pretty well, and like to discuss. I do apologize if anyone took offense to this or if anyone believed I was downing a particular staff.

Teams can change systems mid game. It's called coaching.

 

[GatorBait1988]

I agree. But I do understand teams like Webster City who run a huge amount of time how it can be difficult to become an air it out team when their opponent is just constantly lining up 8-9 in the box. That goes back to a coach shouldn't be so reliant on one form of offense (pass or run). So you see the point that teams should change during games based on their opponent. Thanks.

 

[cidhawkeye]

I agree. But I do understand teams like Webster City who run a huge amount of time how it can be difficult to become an air it out team when their opponent is just constantly lining up 8-9 in the box. That goes back to a coach shouldn't be so reliant on one form of offense (pass or run). So you see the point that teams should change during games based on their opponent. Thanks.

Completely agree. Watching teams get stuffed in their base offense and have no alternative is interesting. I was referring more on the defensive side of the ball. I watched a team put in a new defensive package at the half. Offensive team had put in an entirely different offense in the off season and the defense had to change. Great staffs do that.

 

[GatorBait1988]

For sure. You better believe great coaches put in special sets in defense if they are playing a star QB, RB, etc. I just don't understand how there was no adjustments after what Holterhaus and Van Wyk were doing. But apparently when you bring that up, it gets turned into "Xavier's staff knows what their doing, look at their past success." I'm just lost how that is relevant to the current game. If you refuse to make adjustments, you are doing a disservice to your team, no matter how much success you've had. Plain and simple.

 

[KidSilverhair]

I totally agree with the concept that coaches need to adjust what they're doing if they're getting beat in a phase of the game. I'd go so far as to say I think it would serve Xavier well to work on some different coverage packages during the course of the season, so they could make changes against an opponent like Pella.

I just don't buy into the claims in this case that "Pella was doing whatever they wanted through the air" and "If McKinstrey would have just given up on the run and threw it more Pella would have won easily." Don't buy it.

Let's look at the "they would have won easily if they threw it more" take first. Pella threw 29 times for 335 yards, but also threw 3 interceptions. Throwing it more might have gotten more yards, but Xavier might have also picked Finney off another time, who knows. The Dutch only had 15 rushing attempts, and at least 3, maybe 4 of those were actually sacks or scrambles. So they only called maybe 12 rushing plays in the whole game, which included a Finney run on 3rd and 1, plus Finney's TD run from the 2. Do you know how many times anyone but Finney ran the ball in the second half? Once. It's almost mathematically impossible for them to have run the ball less.

Now let's take the "Xavier needed to adjust to Pella's passing game" point of view. Again, I actually agree with you. Chances are a different style of pass defense might have given Xavier the win. Maybe. I grant you the point, and say you're correct. But in the course of the game, with a defensive backfield that hadn't played anything other than man coverage all season, the Saints were ahead and made their third interception of the game with about a minute left. Seems like the man coverage, while being shredded for a lot of yards, was still doing enough at that point for Xavier to win the game. If Coach Schulte had called an option, maybe, on second down and Rodriguez burst through for 11 yards, Xavier's probably practicing for the championship game right now, even with them playing man coverage all the way against Pella.

So it was a razor-thin margin on which this game tilted. Xavier doesn't pick up a first down after that last interception; Finney just barely gets that next-to-last pass away with two Xavier defenders hitting him; Van Wyk actually comes back in from out of bounds to make the catch at the 20; then Van Wyk backs over the Xavier cornerback and knocks him down in the end zone on the winning TD. All of those plays were just a hairs-breadth away from going Xavier's way instead of Pella's - and Xavier got to the 45-seconds left point with the ball in their possession and the lead, by playing their regular man coverage. You can probably see why the Xavier coaching staff didn't want to change their defense for the last 45 seconds. For those of us watching from afar, we might think changing it up would be smart. When you're on the sideline in the heat of the battle, chances are you're going to stick with what brought you to a 2-point lead with less than a minute left against the best team in the state.

Sometimes players just make plays.

And again, I'm not saying your opinion on Xavier's pass defense is wrong. I actually agree that getting players prepared with experience playing different coverages would be a smart thing to do during the course of the season. But I don't think man coverage is the reason they lost, not exactly.

 

[woodsiding]

On a different note. On the second to last play of the game, on TV it looked like the receiver who caught the ball was out of bounds earlier in the route. Did anyone else see that?

 

[KidSilverhair]

For sure. You better believe great coaches put in special sets in defense if they are playing a star QB, RB, etc. I just don't understand how there was no adjustments after what Holterhaus and Van Wyk were doing. But apparently when you bring that up, it gets turned into "Xavier's staff knows what their doing, look at their past success." I'm just lost how that is relevant to the current game. If you refuse to make adjustments, you are doing a disservice to your team, no matter how much success you've had. Plain and simple.

Let me just mention this point one more time. Holterhaus had 7 catches but only one score, on the big-play 64-yarder, and the last time Pella went to him Xavier intercepted the ball. Before the winning drive, Van Wyk had just three catches and hadn't scored. Xavier was doing an okay job on defending the pass - not perfect, not enough, but okay. And they had the lead up until Van Wyk's last two catches.

I can see the point of view of a coaching staff that thinks their team is doing enough to win at that point. Sure, I would have liked to have seen a safety sneak over the top and knock one of those last two passes out of the way, but that's not the way it went. You know, sometimes you just tip your hat to the other team. Finney was big-time on that next-to-last throw ... Xavier could have had sixteen guys back in coverage and he would have found a way to complete that pass.

I apologize for beating this into the ground, because as I said, I kinda think it would serve Xavier better sometimes to mix things up in coverage. But you can't say the Xavier coaches didn't put their kids into position to win the game, because they did. And Pella made the better plays at the end.

 

[GatorBait1988]

I know one pick was because it hit a Pella wideout in the hands and deflected off and a Xavier defender caught it(nothing to do with coverage and definitely wasn't Finney's fault for hitting the wideout in his hands), another pick was a very difficult route for a high school QB to make (shouldn't have been called). I can't recall the other pick, not saying it didn't happen obviously, I just can't recall it. I believe if Pella would have run intelligent routes (underneath posts and ins) they would have exposed Xavier even more. I do understand what you are saying with coaches going with packages that give them success, but they also have to take the consequences and full blame when it doesn't work out. Hopefully they see where their mistake was and prepare properly for next year. Good luck to them.

 

[KidSilverhair]

On a different note. On the second to last play of the game, on TV it looked like the receiver who caught the ball was out of bounds earlier in the route. Did anyone else see that?

He definitely was, but I couldn't tell if he got forced out, or if that even makes a difference in high school football. I think he probably got re-established in bounds before the catch anyway.

(I also think on the long pass on the previous drive, the one to Ware that was called out of bounds, he might have dragged a foot inbounds for a legal catch. Things go both ways.)

 

[KidSilverhair]

I know one pick was because it hit a Pella wideout in the hands and deflected off and a Xavier defender caught it(nothing to do with coverage and definitely wasn't Finney's fault for hitting the wideout in his hands), another pick was a very difficult route for a high school QB to make (shouldn't have been called). I can't recall the other pick, not saying it didn't happen obviously, I just can't recall it. I believe if Pella would have run intelligent routes (underneath posts and ins) they would have exposed Xavier even more. I do understand what you are saying with coaches going with packages that give them success, but they also have to take the consequences and full blame when it doesn't work out. Hopefully they see where their mistake was and prepare properly for next year. Good luck to them.

Two picks were overthrows.The first one on Pella's opening drive went off the receiver's hands. I wouldn't call it "in the hands" because it was pretty high and the receiver was leaping for it. Finney's second pick, in the fourth quarter, was another high overthrow that the Xavier defender got at the goal line. The third one, after Xavier had taken the lead 30-28, that must be the difficult route you're describing. It was a tad behind Holterhaus, but he had his hands on it at the same time the defender Gerke grabbed it, and Gerke wrestled it away.

It's also hard to say interceptions have "nothing to do with coverage" ... high school quarterbacks aren't perfect, and part of the game is being in position when things don't go exactly right. See, this is something that gets me riled up. Both of these teams were playing incredible football. Not perfect, mind you, but hard-nosed, athletic, intelligent football, with players on both sides making plays and leaving it all on the field. I recognize the fact that Pella made great plays at the end when it mattered, and I give them credit. Why try to minimize the plays Xavier made?

 

[GatorBait1988]

This is where we have the disagreement. I believe there is a way to combat those "great plays" with play calling, it sounds like you are just stating, "Pella made plays at the end, kudos to them", as if Xavier was helpless and could do nothing about that. I believe they could and could have throughout the game. But, their inability to adjust and adapt cost them the game.

What I find comical is the amount of people who think it is proposterous of me to call out a defensive scheme that gave up almost 400 yards through the air (definitely wasn't working), yet are stating that Xavier should have ran different offensive plays on their last drive. Using prior logic couldn't we state, "Wilson was unstoppable against Pella, he had rushed for 250+ yards prior to the last drive, not to mention what he had done for the entire year, the coach was going with something that they had success with all night and all year"? They actually had success with running the football on Pella, especially Wilson. They had success the whole year rushing the football, especially with Wilson. I feel that Wilson picking them up 10 yards over 3 downs was way more likely than Xavier's CBs being able to cover Van Wyk and Holterhaus in man up coverage.

At no point was this a slight at the kids leaving all their heart on the field. Let's stop with the emotional arguments.