SEMIFINALS
- Thread starter BlameIt
- Start date
And WL isn't a 1 trick pony? They've only completed 26 passes on the year and SE has a superb run defense.
SE held Michael Santi to 35 yards at 2.7 ypc when his season totals were 1660 at 14.4 ypc.
I think you're in line to get some more predictions wrong.
This post was edited on 11/7 10:08 PM by CP84
No thought on SE's run defense?
Btw, let's hear a number. What will West Lyon hold St. Eds to in rushing? You've come that far, might as well.....
This is gonna be a fun week of discussion.
Also it's inconsistent with his own rankings. On his last rankings he had SE at #3 and WL at #6 behind Saint Ansgar who he's overrated all season.Originally posted by DarkThunder#61:
No thought on SE's run defense?
Btw, let's hear a number. What will West Lyon hold St. Eds to in rushing? You've come that far, might as well.....
This is gonna be a fun week of discussion.
It appears in all classes, eastern half vs eastern and western vs western. Not sure anything sinister here. BTW, what makes SW better than either WL or SE? All are undefeated and don't have a lot of common opponents. Sit back and enjoy the games.
SW is without a doubt the 2nd best team in 1A, it's to bad they are more than likely going to get beat by about 20. Rooting for them though.
If I had to put money down I would pick West Lyon but St. Eds is certainly capable of winning. WL will be without a doubt the biggest strongest team SE has faced this year plus they are very sound and have good speed too. I don't care what the heck happened vs Madrid as WL is way more physical than Madrid. Also West Lyon losing an early game means nothing, last time they won 1a they lost two i think. They are rolling now. Turn overs could turn the tide either way but I like WL if they both play clean.
South Winn is a very good team and there's a reason they're #2. They can run AND pass very well, similar to Regina, though not quite as efficiently. They've also shown that they can be stingy on defense, so that's clearly the matchup to watch (Regina's offense vs South Winn's defense) if South Winn can force a few stops and then play keep-away while putting points on the board, that's gonna be their best bet, and really any team's best bet against Regina. Make them play catch-up with limited possessions and limited time to work with.................................easier said than done considering how much of a quick-strike team they are. You could get them down 14-0 and all they'd need is two plays to tie it and sadly they could do it in that many (few) plays too.....
I also do think that SE is gonna need either Bocken or even if it's Flattery at some point for a few plays to step in and complete some passes because the defenses are only gonna get tougher from here. There's no denying that West Lyon has a good defense, and even if SE gets by them without passing, then there's Regina (most likely), and they're all too aware of how that game when down last year.
I feel confident enough now in saying that SE is better in just about every area this year as a team, but there's always some point in the playoffs where it comes down to needing to make a play, or even a few, through the air. So we'll see if Bocken can get healed up enough or if they find a way to work in Flattery to throw some passes.
Regina beats SW 49-21
WL beat FDSE 28-17
Regina is best in state. SW is second best. They didn't show anything the first time around against DNH. This time they put the foot on the peddle offensively and defensively.
WL is the third best team in 1A. IKM or FDSE is 4th. DNH or SCC are 6th.
WL beat FDSE 28-17
Regina is best in state. SW is second best. They didn't show anything the first time around against DNH. This time they put the foot on the peddle offensively and defensively.
WL is the third best team in 1A. IKM or FDSE is 4th. DNH or SCC are 6th.
congrats on that. I assume you want a prize, right?
I respect Coach Tighe and all he's done.
But, for my money, WL is a much better team and program.
FDSE has played a tougher district schedule.
WL played a tougher non-district schedule.
PREDICTION:
WL 28-20
as for the "I am going to be wrong" quote, CP84: no worries. I've been wrong before
I see above where DarkThunder is saying that FDSE is going to have to pass at some point to be successful in the Dome. That is what I cannot understand. Why....why...did FDSE not work on their passing game during the season when they were up 21+ points in games? Or, at any point against weaker competition?
It's not going to work well to get to the hardest games of the year and then decide you're going to pass more. Should have been rounding out your game in the lead up to the playoffs. Too late now...
It's not going to work well to get to the hardest games of the year and then decide you're going to pass more. Should have been rounding out your game in the lead up to the playoffs. Too late now...
It's because their head coach and play caller was born in 1930. This isn't supposed to be a joke. That is the answer to your question.
No. If SE would have worked on their passing game when they were up by 21 or more, they would have got blasted for running up the score. As it was, they were already got blasted several times for running up the score, even when freshmen where playing.
I think SE can win without throwing the ball multiple times in a game at the dome. I think the question for SE is when the players decide it's time to pick up their game. They are very talented and ran the ball even when 10 players where within a couple of yards of the line of scrimmage. The SSC game was only close until SE decided to dominate the game middle/late part of the 3rd quarter. SSC never had a chance after that. What I am afraid of is that the players won't put it into high gear until its too late at the dome. Often before big games you would have a hard time trying to find a pulse in these kids. They are very calm and collected before games, that's not to say they aren't ready to play. They go out and do their jobs in a workman style, nothing flashy or any thing.
I am looking forward to WL game. It's going to be a great battle. They have a great team. We have a great team. We basically do a lot of the same things. Whoever loses this game will have nothing to hang their heads about. And as I said before, I really feel like the winner of this game has a great chance to beat which ever team wins the other simi-final. One of the most important parts to winning is believing you can win. Both SE & WL have put their time in this year and worked hard. I will be cheering for the team that wins this game.
One of my favorite sayings about Coach Tithe came from a player several years ago who came out of the game and said to him, "Coach it's like they know our plays before we even run them." Coach T said, "Son we're not here to out smart them. We're here to out play them." Go Gaels.
I think SE can win without throwing the ball multiple times in a game at the dome. I think the question for SE is when the players decide it's time to pick up their game. They are very talented and ran the ball even when 10 players where within a couple of yards of the line of scrimmage. The SSC game was only close until SE decided to dominate the game middle/late part of the 3rd quarter. SSC never had a chance after that. What I am afraid of is that the players won't put it into high gear until its too late at the dome. Often before big games you would have a hard time trying to find a pulse in these kids. They are very calm and collected before games, that's not to say they aren't ready to play. They go out and do their jobs in a workman style, nothing flashy or any thing.
I am looking forward to WL game. It's going to be a great battle. They have a great team. We have a great team. We basically do a lot of the same things. Whoever loses this game will have nothing to hang their heads about. And as I said before, I really feel like the winner of this game has a great chance to beat which ever team wins the other simi-final. One of the most important parts to winning is believing you can win. Both SE & WL have put their time in this year and worked hard. I will be cheering for the team that wins this game.
One of my favorite sayings about Coach Tithe came from a player several years ago who came out of the game and said to him, "Coach it's like they know our plays before we even run them." Coach T said, "Son we're not here to out smart them. We're here to out play them." Go Gaels.
I prefer this quote from Regina coach Marv Cook:
"This game has evolved," Regina coach Marv Cook said. "It's no longer 3 yards and a cloud of dust. We want to get the ball in the hands of athletes and let them do things. Ultimately, we try to do that. It makes for a fun and exciting game."
"This game has evolved," Regina coach Marv Cook said. "It's no longer 3 yards and a cloud of dust. We want to get the ball in the hands of athletes and let them do things. Ultimately, we try to do that. It makes for a fun and exciting game."
Claiming that SE just "decided" when to "dominate" SCC is pretty ridiculous. Also, I would imagine most people would agree that the best strategy would be to both outsmart and out play the opponent. Anybody who claims they are not trying to do one or the other is probably incapable of doing so. Not having an established passing attack will hurt SE tremendously in the dome. That is not to say they can't overcome this obstacle, but it would be easier to win if they didn't have to. I believe this deficiency is a relic of Tighe never getting to the dome before last year. It is admittedly circular logic; a lot like the chicken or the egg dilemma. Does he not install a passing attack because he has never gotten far enough to need one, or has he never gotten that far because he never installed a passing attack? Scholars will debate this conundrum for centuries to come.
Originally posted by Pinehawk:
I see above where DarkThunder is saying that FDSE is going to have to pass at some point to be successful in the Dome. That is what I cannot understand. Why....why...did FDSE not work on their passing game (Maybe they did......maybe not.....) during the season when they were up 21+ points in games? (So you're saying Regina threw the ball up 21+?.....But it was okay because they wanted to "work on it"? I see how it works now......) Or, at any point against weaker competition? (Funny you should mention that: In SE's 3 games prior to the Qtrs, they were 10/12 for 307 yds and 3 TDs, 0 INTs. Did they really need to pass any more than that?)
And what would happen if Regina didn't have "athletes"?
You'd make the best with what you had, would you not?..................................
There really is a difference between not having a passing attack (i.e. plays), and not using it.
There's also a strategy involved in just when you decide to pass.
SCC had a spread offense and implemented the no-huddle later in the season. They wanted to play faster on offense. So how do you slow that down? By putting together an 8-minute touchdown drive of your own, like SE did on their first score. You're probably not gonna burn 8 minutes off the clock and keep the other team's offense off the field by passing the ball.
You develop 'athletes' in the off seasonOriginally posted by DarkThunder#61:
And what would happen if Regina didn't have "athletes"?
You'd make the best with what you had, would you not?..................................
St. Ed's had one of the best receivers I saw last year...they turned him into a second string running back.
Criticize the coach for coaching decisions all you want. However, get your FACTS straight. He is the STARTING fullback, not second string. Coach Tighe has won more games than you probably have watched, so I will trust he knows what he is doing. I, for one, have learned a lot about coaching from him. Some agree, some disagree with him. I know I am a better coach because of him.
sexc1, trusting Tighe's coaching because of how many games he won is pretty flawed logic. Roger Bannister has won more races than I have ever watched, but I would bet big money that I could whoop his ass in the mile today.
You may love the guy and think he's a great coach, and you could probably have a great argument for thinking so. But don't cite something he did 10-50 years ago as evidence.
You may love the guy and think he's a great coach, and you could probably have a great argument for thinking so. But don't cite something he did 10-50 years ago as evidence.
Citing the last seven years would be much more accurate. However, I still do not think it is difficult to argue it is less of a cause than most think. In fact, I did it on this forum earlier this season. I'd rather not repeat it because the last thing the fine patrons of this site need is more talk about St. Edmond, nonetheless talk that has already been had under separate threads.
For their offense yes moving Peed to a ball carrier was good. He still gets used in the passing game and he gets the ball in his hands far more than last year when he was exclusively a wr. There are a lot of good playoff teams that almost exclusively run the ball, their opponent this week being one of them, yet, the criticism of the run offense on this forum is almost exclusively aimed at SE.
I KNOW he knows fball better than I do. I never said every decision he has ever made was a good one. I just think his track record for 1 year, 10 years, or 50+ years is pretty good. I will take the many more +'s than the -'s. You have the coaches you like, I have the coaches I like. That is what makes sports fun. We can debate this till we're blue in the face. He is coaching in the dome for the second straight year, I have never done that.
Ok, but if we are simply holding people to that standard (are they a better coach than I am? than sexc1 is?) then we aren't really holding them to any standard at all. If this were the standard, I would never be able to criticize Russell Westbrook. Sure, he is infinitely better at basketball than I am, but he is getting paid to do it (and he sucks sometimes). Again, I'm not trying to say that Tighe is a piss poor coach (I think he's actually quite good), but every time somebody questions his, often times questionable, coaching strategy they shouldn't be met with resistance like "look how many games he's won" and/or "he's a better coach than you are!"
No, I'd rather they challenge my criticism with something a little stronger than what is currently being used to do so.
Well let's look at it this way, Pine.........is there anything we can say to prove to you that it was?
There's your answer.
And what would happen if Regina wasn't able to take the kids they had and get them to develop into athletes?......................................................................Originally posted by Pinehawk:
You develop 'athletes' in the off seasonOriginally posted by DarkThunder#61:
And what would happen if Regina didn't have "athletes"?
You'd make the best with what you had, would you not?..................................
Good, so now that we've established that, we can move to the next step.
When people disagree with you, you may not like what they say. However, dismissing what they say is not the same as them being incorrect (or correct either).
You can dismiss their comments and ask for something better all you want. Doesn't necessarily make them wrong. Deal with it.
Read my second sentence, I never said he was above criticism. I believe ALL coaches have made bad or questionable decisions. Don't you? I can only speak for myself. I think he does a great job. Not a perfect job, but a great job. I am not saying he is the best to ever coach, just that I feel he is a great coach. His number of wins, and to me the number of wins/year, over the period of time in which he has coached, are pretty good statistics to back me up. Are there coaches out there with more impressive resume's? Sure. I never said he was the best, just that he is good. Pick a coach that you feel is good. What is your criteria? I tend to go with wins and consistency over time. Certainly winning isn't the only thing. In today's world, a successful coach tends to have good relationships with their athletes who respect them. I would throw that in there too. Obviously you won't get that 100% across the board, but a high percentage that do. What works for you? I give you credit Captain, your posts don't attack athletes and coaches on a personal level, and for that I respect your opinions and thoughts.
DT, I'm not sure how I can help you here. I will keep this short. While my request for a better argument certainly is not dispositive of its accuracy, it is still very very capable of being wrong. I find it quite easy to prove this by my previous Roger Bannister hypo. It is a weak argument to claim that somebody is good at something today because they were good at it in the past. It is tough to "deal with it" when you make no sense.
Similar threads
