Week 7 Super 16

[CoachNel4]

1 BGM
2 Garrigan
3 Logan-Magnolia
4 Denver
5 Belmond-Klemme
6 Audubon
7 West Sioux
8 Pleasantville
9 Winfield-Mt. Union
10 Colfax-Mingo
11 Pekin
12 West Hancock
13 Mt. Ayr
14 St. Alberts
15 Gladbrook-Reinbeck
16 Westwood

 

[Cardinal2012]

I'd like to see BGM play somebody good but you can't fault them for playing who's on their schedule.

Belmond down a little.
West Hancock up a little.
Mount Ayr up a little.
Westwood down, maybe out.
Earlham out.
Akron-Westfield in there.
Gladbrook way up. I think you might've forgot them.


I would say for the most part these are really good rankings. A lot more will be sorted out in the coming weeks.

 

[CoachNel4]

I'd like to see BGM play somebody good but you can't fault them for playing who's on their schedule.

Belmond down a little.
West Hancock up a little.
Mount Ayr up a little.
Westwood down, maybe out.
Earlham out.
Akron-Westfield in there.
Gladbrook way up. I think you might've forgot them.


I would say for the most part these are really good rankings. A lot more will be sorted out in the coming weeks.

I haven't forgotten about Gladbrook-Reinbeck as I know they had a slow start but are coming on at the right time. Akron-Westfield and G-R are close to being in and could be after this Friday's games.

 

[Cardinal2012]

Gladbrook has 2 losses to top 5 teams, one by a touchdown and the other by 2 TD's when Stokes wasn't 100%. They played Dike MUCH better than Denver did. I can understand them being in the 5-10 range, but not even top 16? Especially looking at Westwood losing to MVAO and Earhlam being beat by 40 twice to top 10 teams.

Still think they're good rankings but I felt better thinking you forgot them.

 

[CoachNel4]

I completely overlooked the Westwood game and didn't see they lost. That is my mistake. I have updated my rankings.

 

[mtdew_fever]

I'd agree on GR as they should be higher than 15. They have had a tough schedule. Even had a non-district win vs a 2A school.

Also, what's the fascination with rating Belmond-Klemme so high? Sure they are 5-1 and their only loss was a blowout to a very talented Garrigan team, but they have no other quality win? The teams they beat have a combined W-L record of 4-26.

Is BK a decent team? Yes, but they shouldn't be in the top ten.....much less anywhere near #5.

 

[HappyJac]

BK is a good team. The night they lost to Garrigan, Meints was not 100% and with him taking some of the load off Sander, they will be dangerous. Admittedly their schedule has not been that tough (aka BGM) but they've done what they needed to do except for the Garrigan game.

GR in my book is a top 5 team. Unfortunately I'm guessing D3/D4 match ups will eliminate 2 teams that could/should reach the dome if they were paired up in other districts.

 

[mtdew_fever]

The BK vs West Hancock game should be a good one and tell a lot about each team. Each have 5-1 records, but West Hancock played a more difficult non-district schedule....yet isn't getting the same credit BK is.

BK is a good team. The night they lost to Garrigan, Meints was not 100% and with him taking some of the load off Sander, they will be dangerous. Admittedly their schedule has not been that tough (aka BGM) but they've done what they needed to do except for the Garrigan game.

GR in my book is a top 5 team. Unfortunately I'm guessing D3/D4 match ups will eliminate 2 teams that could/should reach the dome if they were paired up in other districts.

 

[HappyJac]

Outside of GHV, West Hancock has not played anyone of significance, as BC has their SS at 139 and BKs is 135. So neither has played a great schedule. If WH plays like they did against Newman they will get beat. Have a stud like Sander and they will get the same attention BK is.

 

[denverhawkfan]

Gladbrook has 2 losses to top 5 teams, one by a touchdown and the other by 2 TD's when Stokes wasn't 100%. They played Dike MUCH better than Denver did. I can understand them being in the 5-10 range, but not even top 16? Especially looking at Westwood losing to MVAO and Earhlam being beat by 40 twice to top 10 teams.

Still think they're good rankings but I felt better thinking you forgot them.

GR didn't have 100% healthy Stokes against Dike is better than playing Dike without your starting QB AND RB which is what Denver did

 

[mtdew_fever]

GR is good, but there is no debate that Denver is better.....assuming they don't have an lingering injuries holding them back.


QUOTE="denverhawkfan, post: 107624, member: 5012"]GR didn't have 100% healthy Stokes against Dike is better than playing Dike without your starting QB AND RB which is what Denver did [/QUOTE]