bigstick23 Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Dixie came out like gang busters on fire. Keener i think scored 12 of Dixies first 14 points but after that he went down hill. This game was a battle between Lawson and Howard, with both sides having contributors McCord for Scott and Muzillo for Dixie. It was tied at half time, a 3 point game after the third and was decided in over time on a foul shot by Chris Qugiley. Howard and Lawson both put up 20 plus and both could not be stopped. The officating for this game was less than good but both teams fought through it. Scott just wanted it more at the end. Good win for the Eagles. 11-3 with ryle coming next.
NEERFAN Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Scott is playing some good ball, huge darkhorse in the 10th IMO. Good big man and some quality guard play can take you far come late February.
BGGreen Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Scott is playing some good ball, huge darkhorse in the 10th IMO. Good big man and some quality guard play can take you far come late February. Not sure they are that much of a dark horse anymore--One of the hottest teams around NKY!!
NEERFAN Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 They are one of the hotter teams in NKY but they still really haven't gained much respect from those in the 10th. They are on a roll right now, have a good, young coach and a nice bunch of players.
BFritz21 Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Dixie was on fire, they should have come out on top. Did anybody else notice how the rules for the game were "no blood, no foul"?
Sandman Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Dixie was on fire, they should have come out on top. Did anybody else notice how the rules for the game were "no blood, no foul"? Couple questions BFritz, if Dixie was on fire how did they only score 54 points in 36 minutes? Also, if they were on fire, why exactly didn't they come out on top? Thank you in advance for your insight.
BFritz21 Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Couple questions BFritz, if Dixie was on fire how did they only score 54 points in 36 minutes? Also, if they were on fire, why exactly didn't they come out on top? Thank you in advance for your insight. Because of solid defense, turnovers, and Dixie usually doesn't shoot that well, so being on fire doesn't mean lots of points. Thanks for the compliment on the insight and thank you even more for disrespecting me to such a large degree
Sandman Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Because of solid defense, turnovers, and Dixie usually doesn't shoot that well, so being on fire doesn't mean lots of points. Thanks for the compliment on the insight and thank you even more for disrespecting me to such a large degree It seemed you were at the game, so I was hoping for some insight. Did Dixie cool off? Did Scott start forcing turnovers, was there foul trouble on either side? Etc. That's why I said thanks for the insight. How was that disrespecting?
RoundBaller Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Couple questions BFritz, if Dixie was on fire how did they only score 54 points in 36 minutes? Also, if they were on fire, why exactly didn't they come out on top? Thank you in advance for your insight. Sandman, why exactly do you always need to challenge people in such an argumentive manner. I just looked at your most recent 20 or so posts and you continually offer negative and challenging remarks. It's okay that you choose this style of communication, but why exactly shouldn't Fritz suggest that you are disrespectful... it's your modus operandi :madman: Both defenses were stingy, and play got physical in the second half. There is a difference between run and gun to get 75 points versus working hard on every posession to get a shot. When those hard earned shots were falling in the first half, I think it's fair to say "they were hot". The box scores by quarter were 17-16, 17-18, 6-9, 8-5, 7-6. Unfortunately, after all of their hard work, the Colonels lost their legs toward the end and missed their last 5 foul shots that should have sealed the game. Chevy took the air out of the ball with a 1 or 2 point lead in the last few minutes again, and that seemed to tighten the nerves a bit. A few missed put backs on offensive rebounds, combined with missed free throws sealed their fate. Another nice win for the Eagles. Another hard lesson for the Colonels that will hopefully make them stronger in the end.
Knuckleball Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 I think a lot of Scott's success is the conditioning they have to go through. I think Coach Carr is one of the toughest conditioning coaches around NKY and I think that is why they are always in every game and have a chance to win. Case and Point, the Dixie players seem to have lost their legs in O.T. but Scott still seemed to have a lot of energy in them.
cch5432 Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Dixie seems to be coming around, and I sure am happy that Scott chose this year to become a team to really worry about.
GoldenBoy23 Posted January 10, 2006 Posted January 10, 2006 Scott once again pulls out another big win. For some reason they always trail, or are up by a little than win on a big play. But hey who's compalining, a win is a win. Next matchup is Ryle @ Scott so hopefully Scott will stay on fire with there 11-3 record. I am looking forward to see improving more on the offensive side out of a couple starters and depth in the bench which is doing there job. When is the last time Eagles have had a record like this?? was it was good as this with Lye, Stevenson, Morris, Medved, Thompson??
nkyhoopfan Posted January 11, 2006 Posted January 11, 2006 Scott played well, you have to give them that, however I think they are sure to have problems with solid teams due to the fact that Scott only seems to play 6 kids. This may work for them now, but fatigue could easily become the opponents sixth man.
Pizza boy Posted January 11, 2006 Posted January 11, 2006 Sandman, why exactly do you always need to challenge people in such an argumentive manner. I just looked at your most recent 20 or so posts and you continually offer negative and challenging remarks. It's okay that you choose this style of communication, but why exactly shouldn't Fritz suggest that you are disrespectful... it's your modus operandi :madman: Both defenses were stingy, and play got physical in the second half. There is a difference between run and gun to get 75 points versus working hard on every posession to get a shot. When those hard earned shots were falling in the first half, I think it's fair to say "they were hot". The box scores by quarter were 17-16, 17-18, 6-9, 8-5, 7-6. Unfortunately, after all of their hard work, the Colonels lost their legs toward the end and missed their last 5 foul shots that should have sealed the game. Chevy took the air out of the ball with a 1 or 2 point lead in the last few minutes again, and that seemed to tighten the nerves a bit. A few missed put backs on offensive rebounds, combined with missed free throws sealed their fate. Another nice win for the Eagles. Another hard lesson for the Colonels that will hopefully make them stronger in the end. I do not know if it was losing their legs or when Chevy had them start holding the ball for the last 4 minutes of the game. Why do the 9th Region coaches think they have to hold the ball with 3 to 4 minutes left in the game when they are up? All it does is give the other team a chance to win.
RoundBaller Posted January 11, 2006 Posted January 11, 2006 Why do the 9th Region coaches think they have to hold the ball with 3 to 4 minutes left in the game when they are up? All it does is give the other team a chance to win.Cov Cath has a knack for playing four corners when they have a nice lead. I think North Carolina used to do it 15 or 20 years ago :confused: The shot clock took it out of the college game. It's okay when it works, but it can cause second guessing when it doesn't. It can have a negative effect on momentum. When football teams stop throwing the ball in the 4th quarter with a small lead, most folks would say "they're playing not to lose" rather than "playing to win".
Recommended Posts