2012 Wayne County Athletic League Football

• O-Trap

  

  Just as well, I can think of plenty of non-league teams who have run a very similar offense with not so stellar scoring results.
• Jmar25

  O-Trap;1223277 wrote:Dalton? Didn't they smoke Dalton that year?
  
  I ask because my memory is obviously not crystal clear, given my mistaken notion that Chippewa was one-and-done in the playoffs in 1999.

  Yes. 44-0. They played into the 4th quarter though. There was a worry that Dalton could turn it around at any moment. When it was clear that they couldn't. They were pulled.
• Jmar25

  Bobcat;1223387 wrote:I guess maybe Jmar is right. The spread doesnt make it possible to score quicker then running the ball between the tackles. Norwayne "had" the athletes that could score at any moment but now that's over. I apolgize.
  
  By the way Norwayne outscored Kenton last year (for the year) even though Kenton had that special "system".

  Thank you for contradicting yourself. Kenton's true spread "system" should have allowed them to score more by your observations. I would even go as far as saying by your logic.... Rittman should consistently produce high scoring games in the next few years.
  
  All this "system" (Kenton... True Spread) did in reality was producing a high yardage QB. 1486WD made a better example with his Manning talk. You put him in any offense and they are going to score. Wallace had that type of ability and some real good kids to surround him. You put those boys in a standard pro offense...option...double tight... and they would have scored points.
  
  Harbour has done what none of the WCAL legends have done.... bring home the title but it in no way was because of his offense. He had the players. The true test of his coaching ability will be told in the next 5-10 years and how he makes adjustments to this miracle "system" to fit the players he will have.
• thePITman

  

  Good players make great coaches.
• Bobcat

  I agree 100 % that it takes great players. You're missing my point. You put great players in any offense and it will work. My point is that if you throw and run the ball with great success you are typically going to outscore a team that focuses mainly on the run... IMO. Norwaynes "system" uses the pass to free up the run. I agree they had great receivers last year. I think the ability to pass freed up the run a lot. Teams often double-teamed the receivers and had their corners 12 to 15 yards off of the ball. That leaves wide open running lanes. Their backs were very good and exploited it. Once they pulled in to stop the run they aired it out. What I should have said was that Norwaynes system coupled with outstanding athletes enabled them to put up huge offensive numbers. I believe that the system they are in and the returning athletes they have will allow them once again to score a lot of points.
• thePITman

  

  Bobcat;1224250 wrote:What I should have said was that Norwaynes system coupled with outstanding athletes enabled them to put up huge offensive numbers. I believe that the system they are in and the returning athletes they have will allow them once again to score a lot of points.

  This sounds better, IMO. I still think total points will be way down, though (at least 100 points less).
• O-Trap

  

  thePITman;1224189 wrote:Good players make great coaches.

  
  I read that incorrectly at first. I read it to say good players tend to be great coaches. It seemed out of place, give the discussion.
  
  I will say this. Good players will make a great coach for a year or few. A great coach will make great players perennially. I don't think there exists a "system" that produces independently. It's the management of the system (coach) and the execution of the system (players) that makes any system effective.
  

  Bobcat;1224250 wrote:I agree 100 % that it takes great players. You're missing my point. You put great players in any offense and it will work. My point is that if you throw and run the ball with great success you are typically going to outscore a team that focuses mainly on the run... IMO.

  If you mean a defense that focuses mainly on the run, you're correct. However, regardless of how quickly an offense can score, that offense sits on the sideline for as long as the other team has the ball, so from an offense-vs-offense discussion, I don't think it's relevant who is more balanced on offense without taking defenses into account.
  

  Bobcat;1224250 wrote:Norwaynes "system" uses the pass to free up the run. I agree they had great receivers last year. I think the ability to pass freed up the run a lot. Teams often double-teamed the receivers and had their corners 12 to 15 yards off of the ball. That leaves wide open running lanes. Their backs were very good and exploited it. Once they pulled in to stop the run they aired it out. What I should have said was that Norwaynes system coupled with outstanding athletes enabled them to put up huge offensive numbers. I believe that the system they are in and the returning athletes they have will allow them once again to score a lot of points.

  That may be the case, but the talent the team has is what enables the system to even be used. There were years where even Smithville ran a shotgun offense. It was because that offense suited their personnel's particular skill set.
  
  Athletes should never fit into a system. The system should fit into the athletes. If you've got little skill in a long-field passing game, but you've got a couple tank runners in the backfield, your passing game should be used just enough to keep the defense honest (Waggle pass!) while you get your yards pounding the ground. The system ... any system ... is only as useful as the players.
• Jmar25

  O-Trap;1224336 wrote:I read that incorrectly at first. I read it to say good players tend to be great coaches. It seemed out of place, give the discussion.
  
  I will say this. Good players will make a great coach for a year or few. A great coach will make great players perennially. I don't think there exists a "system" that produces independently. It's the management of the system (coach) and the execution of the system (players) that makes any system effective.
  
  
  
  If you mean a defense that focuses mainly on the run, you're correct. However, regardless of how quickly an offense can score, that offense sits on the sideline for as long as the other team has the ball, so from an offense-vs-offense discussion, I don't think it's relevant who is more balanced on offense without taking defenses into account.
  
  
  
  That may be the case, but the talent the team has is what enables the system to even be used. There were years where even Smithville ran a shotgun offense. It was because that offense suited their personnel's particular skill set.
  
  Athletes should never fit into a system. The system should fit into the athletes. If you've got little skill in a long-field passing game, but you've got a couple tank runners in the backfield, your passing game should be used just enough to keep the defense honest (Waggle pass!) while you get your yards pounding the ground. The system ... any system ... is only as useful as the players.

  agree with almost everything. We are talking HS athletes. The level of talent is so spread out at this level that this "system" talk is non-sense. I believe the only time you can use that word is in the Pro level and specific college teams.
  
  The only area I slightly disagree with is your last bit. Players at any level will have to fit into the base offense. A coach is not just going to up and change his offense from year to year and get away from something he is accustomed to teaching and knows all the ins and outs of. The college guys obviously get to recruit and grab guys that fit more for their goals. At High School of course you don't get that luxary but the athlete still has to fit into the coach's overall game plan. A good coach will however make slight adjustments to his offense. (Smithville in a shotgun set). Schrock was obviously able to do this by throwing in those wrinkles but I'm sure deep down they were still wing T. Another example is Waynedale. Seder has always used the I/Pro offense. Some years he passed more and had more spread like sets. Hendrix's junior year it was an unbalanced I with double tights. I'm sure Ram did this and so on.... If Harbour sticks to his "system" and tries to keep running the same stuff he's going to suffer over the long run.
• O-Trap

  

  Jmar25;1224461 wrote:The only area I slightly disagree with is your last bit. Players at any level will have to fit into the base offense. A coach is not just going to up and change his offense from year to year and get away from something he is accustomed to teaching and knows all the ins and outs of. The college guys obviously get to recruit and grab guys that fit more for their goals. At High School of course you don't get that luxary but the athlete still has to fit into the coach's overall game plan. A good coach will however make slight adjustments to his offense. (Smithville in a shotgun set). Schrock was obviously able to do this by throwing in those wrinkles but I'm sure deep down they were still wing T. Another example is Waynedale. Seder has always used the I/Pro offense. Some years he passed more and had more spread like sets. Hendrix's junior year it was an unbalanced I with double tights. I'm sure Ram did this and so on.... If Harbour sticks to his "system" and tries to keep running the same stuff he's going to suffer over the long run.

  See, I think it's on the coach to evaluate his players and choose a system that fits the players' talents. I think you get the most out of your team that way.
  
  Smithville in the shotgun was, I kid you not, not a Wing-T team that year. Occasionally, they'd throw in an old wing formation, but players' natural talents didn't fit a Wing-T well, so it made no sense to try to instill new talents to replace ones that are already there just for them to fit a system.
  
  I believe that a truly great coach can coach other offensive systems well, given some time to learn them, which I think is their responsibility as a coach. If you know you've got "Benny and the Jets" (old Kenton reference) but little in the running back department, but you're used to running a Pro/Con formation, you swap out the offensive scheme the next year.
  
  It just doesn't make sense to me to make a square cube fit into a star-shaped hole. That isn't to say I don't think you should get the kids to buy into the program, and believe me, nobody loves to see a mean-a** running game more than me, regardless of personnel, but if you've got receivers and a QB who can do great things with the football, but your RBs are young or inexperienced or even undersized, I just think you have to shift your paradigm and run what's going to play to your players' strengths.
• elitesmithie05

  Heres an interesting question, what would you rather be, Smithville, longer success, two final 4 appearances, 6-7 titles, or Norwayne, few good years with 1 championship. I think the easy answer is the championship however there is alot to be said for being great 10 out of 11/12 years.
  

  Red Rum;1220855 wrote:Since there's not much going on....
  
  
  Here's an FYI from the "for what it's worth" files......
  
  WCAL WIN/LOSS RECORDS 2000-2012 (playoffs included)
  1. Smithville
  98-41 .705 8 playoff app. (2002 D5 State runnerup)
  
  2. Dalton
  82-50 .621 7 playoff app.
  
  3. Norwayne
  71-57 .554 3 playoff app. (2011 D4 State Champs)
  
  4. Waynedale
  67-59 .531 4 playoff app.
  
  5. Northwestern
  65-60 .520 3 playoff app.
  
  6. Hillsdale
  61-64 .488 2 playoff app.
  
  7. Rittman
  38-83 .314 1 playoff app.
  
  8. Chippewa
  31-89 .258 0 playoff app.
  
  
  
  ....and from "sadness & despair" folder
  
  Chippewa is presently mired in a 23 game losing streak. Their last victory came against backyard rival Rittman on Oct 9 2009. (22-6 score)
  
  
  note: all stats and facts are subject to my occasional inability to get information correct

• O-Trap

  

  elitesmithie05;1224566 wrote:Heres an interesting question, what would you rather be, Smithville, longer success, two final 4 appearances, 6-7 titles, or Norwayne, few good years with 1 championship. I think the easy answer is the championship however there is alot to be said for being great 10 out of 11/12 years.

  I agree. I'll take a championship any day, but that doesn't discredit a span of 10 years ('97-'06) in which your regular season record is 90-10 and your postseason record is 12-8.
• Red Rum

  

  elitesmithie05;1224566 wrote:Heres an interesting question, what would you rather be, Smithville, longer success, two final 4 appearances, 6-7 titles, or Norwayne, few good years with 1 championship. I think the easy answer is the championship however there is alot to be said for being great 10 out of 11/12 years.

  I'd have to go with Norwaynes championship......just to be the last team standing once is too much to pass up
  
  but Smithvilles 102-18 over a 10 year span is incredibly impressive.....and a close second IMO.
• thePITman

  

  I just finished writing an article on last year's Norwayne state championship season in preparation for the upcoming football season.
  
  http://www.pitmanstats.com/2012/07/13/norwayne-football-2011-a-look-back/
• bobcat14

  thePITman;1225105 wrote:I just finished writing an article on last year's Norwayne state championship season in preparation for the upcoming football season.
  
  http://www.pitmanstats.com/2012/07/13/norwayne-football-2011-a-look-back/

  PITman I liked your artical, but need to make one correction. You said that Norwayne is losing 4 of the 5 Linemen....That is not correct, they will actually have 4 of the 5 linemen back.. Wolfe will be gone and the Wilson boy will be gone but Croftcheck, Barb and Weinman all return and as far as the the 4th lineman Scruggs, he was a starter in the State game and started and subbed in during the regular season at all line positions so it looks like Norwayne will only need to fill one position. Not sure who that will be. As far as the D-Line goes...3 of the 4 will be back, (Barb, Zimmerly, and Scruggs)..and I would guess that Weinman would fill the other position. Other then that I enjoyed your artical, (except the 7-3 record and not making the playoffs!!!!!! LOL).
• Dr. KnOiTaLL

  

  thePITman;1225105 wrote:I just finished writing an article on last year's Norwayne state championship season in preparation for the upcoming football season.
  
  http://www.pitmanstats.com/2012/07/13/norwayne-football-2011-a-look-back/

  Good article! Gets me stoked for another fall of hard hits and skull-crushing blows!
• thePITman

  

  bobcat14;1225144 wrote:PITman I liked your artical, but need to make one correction. You said that Norwayne is losing 4 of the 5 Linemen....That is not correct, they will actually have 4 of the 5 linemen back.. Wolfe will be gone and the Wilson boy will be gone but Croftcheck, Barb and Weinman all return and as far as the the 4th lineman Scruggs, he was a starter in the State game and started and subbed in during the regular season at all line positions so it looks like Norwayne will only need to fill one position.

  Thanks for the correction. I was going by the DR Preview which had Wolfe (Sr), Jon Wilson (Sr), Croftcheck (Jr), Barb (Sr), and Scruggs (Sr) as the starting offensive linemen. I figured there were a few changes, but didn't realize how many.
• THE4RINGZ

  

  thePITman;1225105 wrote:I just finished writing an article on last year's Norwayne state championship season in preparation for the upcoming football season.
  
  http://www.pitmanstats.com/2012/07/13/norwayne-football-2011-a-look-back/

  
  If you have yet to check out Pitman's new site, get there soon. It is awesome, just what you would expect from him. Great stuff!
• RedRider1

  

  Agree Ringz...he's doing it for free too because he's a fan of area sports. The local paid writers tried to get a website launched & it hasn't been that good IMO. Lots of potential but not that great of execution.
  
  Saw this on Facebook last night...apparently this is an actual fundraising card in Smithville country.
  
  Go SMITH-THIES!
  
• Dr. KnOiTaLL

  

  RedRider1;1225983 wrote:Agree Ringz...he's doing it for free too because he's a fan of area sports. The local paid writers tried to get a website launched & it hasn't been that good IMO. Lots of potential but not that great of execution.
  
  Saw this on Facebook last night...apparently this is an actual fundraising card in Smithville country.
  
  Go SMITH-THIES!
  

  That's just asking for trouble...
• O-Trap

  

  PTIman, if you need help with the website, just let me know. I'd be happy to help, and I build websites and webpages for a living.
• Bobcat

  We're less than 6 weeks from kickoff. Let's talk about some football. I hear a lot of good things about Northwestern this year. I know they have strong skill players. How many linemen are returning? Who are the key players on that Huskie team? What about the Bears?
• THE4RINGZ

  

  RedRider1;1225983 wrote:Agree Ringz...he's doing it for free too because he's a fan of area sports. The local paid writers tried to get a website launched & it hasn't been that good IMO. Lots of potential but not that great of execution.
  
  Saw this on Facebook last night...apparently this is an actual fundraising card in Smithville country.
  
  Go SMITH-THIES!
  

  
  Were they not given the opportunity to proof read the cards before they were produced?
• thePITman

  

  RedRider1;1225983 wrote:Agree Ringz...he's doing it for free too because he's a fan of area sports. The local paid writers tried to get a website launched & it hasn't been that good IMO. Lots of potential but not that great of execution.
  
  Saw this on Facebook last night...apparently this is an actual fundraising card in Smithville country.
  
  Go SMITH-THIES!
  

  The card should be worth $12. :thumbup:
• O-Trap

  

  THE4RINGZ;1226473 wrote:Were they not given the opportunity to proof read the cards before they were produced?

  This reminds me of something the DR did years ago. In an article about Chippewa, they spelled "Chippewa" with four 'p's: "Chippppewa"
• elitesmithie05

  Whats actually more funny is that we have All-Sport as a sponsor