Jump to content

Pikeville 33 Paintsville 12

The Windex Man

By The Windex Man
in KY Football (High School)

 Share

Recommended Posts

oneijoe

oneijoe

Posted
Posted
Potential... yes.... DEFINATELY

 

But I have said it before and will continue to say that Pikeville is the most sporadic team in East KY..whether it be emotionally or tactical

 

I have to agree...

 

It was a tight 20 - 12 game going into the 4th qtr... :eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EKU_05

EKU_05

Posted
Posted
I have to agree...

 

It was a tight 20 - 12 game going into the 4th qtr... :eek:

The sad part is that I feel Pikeville could potentially be 40 points better than Paintsville..... and IMO is at least 2 TD better than Somerset and Harlan.. but in the world of the Panther's that doesn't translate exactly.

 

I watched the replay of the Hazard game last week and it was amazing to see how Pikeville could go from absolutely breath stealing to making you want to hold your breath.

 

I also saw a couple tendacies that Pikeville players did that a good scouting coach will pick up on quickly... it's also a turkey shoot as to how emotinal some of the Panthers can get on each given play.

 

Make no mistake this can be a VERRRRRRRRRRY good team, and Daniel harmon is consistently good... but man they are an enigma

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Booge

Booge

Posted
Posted

The outcome of this game was never in doubt, although I honestly believe Pikeville's coach tries to make certain games close. How else can you explain punting from Paintsville's 30 in the third quarter, lol...Also, Pikeville went away from their offense that shredded the Paintsville D in the third quarter, then got back in it and put the game away. Also, Ted Honaker was kept out of this game to let a nagging injury heal. Something else Pikeville did was win the toss to start the game, defer, and give up yet anothert KO return for a TD...

 

Anyways, some stats ---

Daniel Pugh - negative 24 yards rushing, 49 yards passing.:eek:

2 TD's - one on a QB sneak and one on an 85-yd KO return for a TD...

Paintsville as a team had 34 rushing yards and 49 passing yards for 83 total yards against Pikeville's D.

 

Daniel Harmon had 20 carries for 177 yards a 2 TD's.

Pikeville had around 250 yards of offense.

 

I was impressed with the running of Sublett (or was it Cantrell???) for Paintsville.

Paintsville looked like a better team than Hazard, and should have a good shot in their rematch...

 

I honestly believe Pikeville coaching staff left plenty in the tank for a possible rematch in the second round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oneijoe

oneijoe

Posted
Posted
The outcome of this game was never in doubt,

 

You're certainly entitled to think that if you want. But the truth is...any game with no more difference than ONE score going into the final quarter IS most certainly "in doubt".

 

___________________________________

 

 

Brief note here that deserves mention...

 

Daniel Pugh broke the all-time TD scoring record for Paintsville last night. He scored 106 (?...think that's the number given) touchdowns through his high school career (so far) !!

 

The record was formerly held by Mike "the Missile" Minix, and was set some 40 yrs. ago.

 

:ylsuper:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Booge

Booge

Posted
Posted
You're certainly entitled to think that if you want. But the truth is...any game with no more difference than ONE score going into the final quarter IS most certainly "in doubt".

 

___________________________________

 

 

 

Funny how people see things differently. Pikeville's D dominated Paintsville offense. Paintsville had negative yards in the second half and wouldn't have scored again if they would have played until 3AM. Pikeville ran a different offense in the third quarter (shotgun) than they ran in the first half where they scored on every posession except one where they turned it over. They went back under center in the fourth and put it away with two more easy drives. And got to rest a big part of their offense for the entire game (Ted Honaker) who had a sore shoulder. Let me ask you, why do you think Pikeville punted from the Paintsville 30 in the third if they thought the game was in doubt?

 

We can agree to disagree. To this Panther fan Pikeville won a lot easier than the score indicated, and the outcome was never in doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oneijoe

oneijoe

Posted
Posted
Funny how people see things differently. Pikeville's D dominated Paintsville offense. Paintsville had negative yards in the second half and wouldn't have scored again if they would have played until 3AM. Pikeville ran a different offense in the third quarter (shotgun) than they ran in the first half where they scored on every posession except one where they turned it over. They went back under center in the fourth and put it away with two more easy drives. And got to rest a big part of their offense for the entire game (Ted Honaker) who had a sore shoulder. Let me ask you, why do you think Pikeville punted from the Paintsville 30 in the third if they thought the game was in doubt?

 

We can agree to disagree. To this Panther fan Pikeville won a lot easier than the score indicated, and the outcome was never in doubt.

 

A ONE score differential at the end of 3 quarters between ANY two teams, no matter how many yards one team is or is not making, disqualifies it from being described as "the outcome was never in doubt", IMO.

 

I see it as a matter of definition. A "never in doubt" game is one you're packing up and leaving at the end of the third and being comfortable that the leading team would win.

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoachJ

CoachJ

Posted
Posted
Pikeville ran a different offense in the third quarter (shotgun) than they ran in the first half where they scored on every posession except one where they turned it over. They went back under center in the fourth and put it away with two more easy drives.

 

I usually don't get involved in the quibbles on here about our "unproductive :lol: and too-predictable;) " offense, but one slight correction...

 

The two "big plays" in the 4th quarter that actually stretched the lead and one VERY good drive we had in the 3rd in the driving rain were BOTH from our shotgun set.

 

Above all, an offense in football today needs to be FLEXIBLE and able to adapt to differing conditions, strengths of opponents, or injuries to key players. Thus, we have a way to go Full-House Power both under center (better for bad field conditions and in the red zone) and a way to go Full-House Power in the gun (allows for more passing flexibility and misdirection); in addition, we can also run a complete SPREAD offense if needed (vs. stronger run defenses, end of halves, etc.).

 

So, with WET and/or MUDDY field conditions, one consideration as to whether you're in gun or under center has less to do with what can get the most YARDS than it does how you can most easily get the BALL in play (we'd MUCH rather have been under center the way it was working with the wet field, but once the rain became a DRIVING rain at the start of the 3rd quarter, we had three straight errant under-the-center snaps).

 

Here's why: a snap to a qb under the center actually slides the ball THROUGH the mud some...a shotgun snap is more of a "lift-off-the-ground" action so the ball is less sloppy. Combine a WET BALL (driving rain) with MORE MUD and just getting the ball IN PLAY becomes the most important consideration. (We had a pretty good, time-consuming, yardage producing drive late in the 3rd quarter out of shotgun, and as I mentioned, the 2-play "drive" in the 4th quarter was completely out of shotgun).

 

When the rain subsided in the 4th, we went back UNDER CENTER and Harmon reeled off his last long run.

 

The offense we run may "look" simplistic or predictable, but trust me, EVERYTHING we do play-calling wise, whether we're under center or not, what personnel we have in, and what we do with motion is by DESIGN and VERY thought out ahead of time...often, with consideration given to the same things military generals consider in battle (there is a VERY good read for football coaches called "The Art of War" that has nice parallels between football and war strategy in terms of terrain, enemy positioning, etc.).

 

And as far as punting from their 30...with the field conditions what they were considering the TYPE of offense they were able to run (ball control running basically), the way our defense had been playing to that point, and the fact that it was 4th and TEN to go, to back them up and make them have to get even TWO more first downs than if we'd turned it over on downs right there made a LOT more sense. (Now, had we been able to predict that we'd miss the snap and actually LOSE more yards, no, we wouldn't have done it...but if we could predict things like that, EVERYTHING would be better for us!;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldfootballcoach

oldfootballcoach

Posted
Posted

I don't post much, just read all of the time. But I think I need to say it was a very smart move to go to the shotgun, and away from under center, cause of the muddy field. I was not surprised to see Coach Jackson do that early in the 3rd. Very good coach, with a very good staff, it may not be long to see them in the ville in Dec.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MTNSportsGuy

MTNSportsGuy

Posted
Posted
You're certainly entitled to think that if you want. But the truth is...any game with no more difference than ONE score going into the final quarter IS most certainly "in doubt".

 

___________________________________

 

 

Brief note here that deserves mention...

 

Daniel Pugh broke the all-time TD scoring record for Paintsville last night. He scored 106 (?...think that's the number given) touchdowns through his high school career (so far) !!

 

The record was formerly held by Mike "the Missile" Minix, and was set some 40 yrs. ago.

 

:ylsuper:

Mike Minnix didn't play 40 years ago....it was more like the 80's

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.

  I accept