Highlands 32 Covington Catholic 21

[FirstTimeLongTime]

4 minutes ago, Colonels_Wear_Blue said:

I don't entirely disagree about saying that both teams having starters out. You're correct about that. I will say, I think having multiple players injured on the o-line is bound to make a significant difference in the game, and I think that showed with Cov Cath's inability to get Leen much yardage on Friday, as well as how many times Pitzer was hit. That said, I also think Highlands' defense had something to do with that.

Another thing I would say is that for the Highlands folks saying "if we hadn't turned over it could have gotten out of hand," (I don't believe I read you saying that FTLT) I personally think that's an erroneous statement. Turnovers happen through your offensive mistakes or defensive forced turnovers. It's part of game play. To me, saying something like "if we hadn't turned over as much as we did, the score could have been different" is as dopey as saying, "if we had scored on every drive we would have had more points."

Totally agree. I will say that I am surprised that HHS had 5 turnovers (minus 3 for the game) and still won. It helps when you score on offense, defense and special teams. Saying it would have gotten out of hand is nonsense. Hopefully no big injuries came out of the game. 

[Colonels_Wear_Blue]

I went backed and checked the film on the safety because I've heard several folks from the Cov Cath side of things saying they didn't think it was a safety. It's obvious from the film that Pitzer had eyes on receiver #11 Ben McEvoy for about 8 frames worth of film, and it's clear that Pitzer's intent was to throw the ball to McEvoy, so I don't think he was simply throwing the ball away, but quoting the NFL rule on intentional grounding, "It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that is thrown in the direction of and lands in the vicinity of an originally eligible receiver."

McEvoy was at about the 5 yard line when Pitzer was releasing the ball from his hand, and the ball bounced only a couple of yards from Pitzer after he threw and was subsequently tackled...it hit probably 8 or 9 yards away from McEvoy, so it's a tough argument to say there was no grounding.

One thing I can say, regardless of the situation, is that from watching the game live and from watching the officials in the film, the white cap, the line judge, and the back judge all had their eyes on the quarterback the entire play, so from an officiating point of view, none of them were looking at receivers to be in a position to make an accurate call as to whether or not there was a receiver in the vicinity. I'd say they ended up with the right call, but realistically, it wasn't made by their own accurate observation of the game.

[Colonels_Wear_Blue]

I went back and re-watched the game.

By my count, Cov Cath ran 39 offensive plays in the first half. 11 were QB draw run, 2 were screens, 3 were punts, 1 was FG kick. Pitzer was sacked 3 times in the first half. I counted 36 offensive plays in the second half. 4 were QB run, 9 were screens, 1 was a pint. Pitzer was sacked 3 times in the second half, not including the safety play.

75 offensive plays: 20% were QB run, 15% were screen passes, 8% were sacks.

[Tigerpride94]

4 hours ago, Colonels_Wear_Blue said:

I went back and re-watched the game.

By my count, Cov Cath ran 39 offensive plays in the first half. 11 were QB draw run, 2 were screens, 3 were punts, 1 was FG kick. Pitzer was sacked 3 times in the first half. I counted 36 offensive plays in the second half. 4 were QB run, 9 were screens, 1 was a pint. Pitzer was sacked 3 times in the second half, not including the safety play.

75 offensive plays: 20% were QB run, 15% were screen passes, 8% were sacks.

Seems that would be somewhat easy to defend if not throwing any passes down the field to keep the defense honest.

[BirdDaddy]

5 hours ago, Colonels_Wear_Blue said:

I went backed and checked the film on the safety because I've heard several folks from the Cov Cath side of things saying they didn't think it was a safety. It's obvious from the film that Pitzer had eyes on receiver #11 Ben McEvoy for about 8 frames worth of film, and it's clear that Pitzer's intent was to throw the ball to McEvoy, so I don't think he was simply throwing the ball away, but quoting the NFL rule on intentional grounding, "It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that is thrown in the direction of and lands in the vicinity of an originally eligible receiver."

McEvoy was at about the 5 yard line when Pitzer was releasing the ball from his hand, and the ball bounced only a couple of yards from Pitzer after he threw and was subsequently tackled...it hit probably 8 or 9 yards away from McEvoy, so it's a tough argument to say there was no grounding.

One thing I can say, regardless of the situation, is that from watching the game live and from watching the officials in the film, the white cap, the line judge, and the back judge all had their eyes on the quarterback the entire play, so from an officiating point of view, none of them were looking at receivers to be in a position to make an accurate call as to whether or not there was a receiver in the vicinity. I'd say they ended up with the right call, but realistically, it wasn't made by their own accurate observation of the game.

Maybe you have a case for grounding but Pitzer is wrapped up and driven for several yards by Highlands prior to your Frames.. The play should of been blown dead well before the attempted pass. Noway he was breaking away from that tackle for loss. Sack and Safety either way. This play is blown dead and marked for forward progress with Negative yards if say this happened out in the field of play. I like the call in the End Zone. Safety and Noon takes over. Bluebirds win.

[BirdDaddy]

Just watched the Play again in question. Folks he is tackled and wrapped up at the Goal line and spun around and is driven backwards to the back of the Endzone. Close to eights yards before he chucks it. Its a sack. I will play that game. The Highlands people that I have talked to seem to think that #54 for Highlands should of been credited for a Sack but the Ref ultimately let the Colonel QB fall on his own Sword with grounding and the Ref blew the call. See how that works? Spin it how you want. Lets make sure you tell the whole story because there is always two sides IMO. Highlands dialed up the pressure all Night on the Colonel QB and this play was ultimately the one that was the dagger. 

[BirdDaddy]

Grounding?

Sack?

 

 

Incomplete Pass?

[El Diablo]

22 minutes ago, BirdDaddy said:

Just watched the Play again in question. Folks he is tackled and wrapped up at the Goal line and spun around and is driven backwards to the back of the Endzone. Close to eights yards before he chucks it. Its a sack. I will play that game. The Highlands people that I have talked to seem to think that #54 for Highlands should of been credited for a Sack but the Ref ultimately let the Colonel QB fall on his own Sword with grounding and the Ref blew the call. See how that works? Spin it how you want. Lets make sure you tell the whole story because there is always two sides IMO. Highlands dialed up the pressure all Night on the Colonel QB and this play was ultimately the one that was the dagger. 

Yeah, I would say he threw it about the time it should have been blown dead. I think he did see that WR but the pass itself didn’t qualify outside of grounding. I think that’s what Colonels wear blue was saying. 

[Bluebird]

Should have been a sack and a safety!  Hindsight is always 20 20.  The end result was the same.  

[BirdDaddy]

13 minutes ago, El Diablo said:

Yeah, I would say he threw it about the time it should have been blown dead. I think he did see that WR but the pass itself didn’t qualify outside of grounding. I think that’s what Colonels wear blue was saying. 

Gotcha. I can see where it could be viewed a different way by different color glasses. Lets play the what ifs game. What if he completes the pass to #11? #20 from Highlands tackles him for a Safety. Same results. Highlands is and was the better team Friday. My glasses fit just fine.

[TheDeuce]

6 hours ago, Colonels_Wear_Blue said:

I went backed and checked the film on the safety because I've heard several folks from the Cov Cath side of things saying they didn't think it was a safety. It's obvious from the film that Pitzer had eyes on receiver #11 Ben McEvoy for about 8 frames worth of film, and it's clear that Pitzer's intent was to throw the ball to McEvoy, so I don't think he was simply throwing the ball away, but quoting the NFL rule on intentional grounding, "It is a foul for intentional grounding if a passer, facing an imminent loss of yardage because of pressure from the defense, throws a forward pass without a realistic chance of completion. A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that is thrown in the direction of and lands in the vicinity of an originally eligible receiver."

McEvoy was at about the 5 yard line when Pitzer was releasing the ball from his hand, and the ball bounced only a couple of yards from Pitzer after he threw and was subsequently tackled...it hit probably 8 or 9 yards away from McEvoy, so it's a tough argument to say there was no grounding.

One thing I can say, regardless of the situation, is that from watching the game live and from watching the officials in the film, the white cap, the line judge, and the back judge all had their eyes on the quarterback the entire play, so from an officiating point of view, none of them were looking at receivers to be in a position to make an accurate call as to whether or not there was a receiver in the vicinity. I'd say they ended up with the right call, but realistically, it wasn't made by their own accurate observation of the game.

If he is not outside the tackle box and the ball doesn’t make the line of scrimmage, a receiver being in the area is irrelevant.

”Rule 7-5-2 EXCEPTION 2 now permits a player to purposefully throw an incomplete forward pass without warranting an intentional grounding penalty provided the passer is outside of “the pocket” (lateral boundary of the free-blocking zone) and the pass reaches the neutral zone or the extension of the neutral zone beyond the sideline.”

https://www.nfhs.org/articles/revised-intentional-grounding-chop-block-rules-headline-2022-high-school-football-rules-changes/

[El Diablo]

20 minutes ago, BirdDaddy said:

Gotcha. I can see where it could be viewed a different way by different color glasses. Lets play the what ifs game. What if he completes the pass to #11? #20 from Highlands tackles him for a Safety. Same results. Highlands is and was the better team Friday. My glasses fit just fine.

Yeah I agree. If you turn the ball away to your opponent like that, that many times and win you are the better team for sure. At least for that day. 

[TheConch]

9 hours ago, The Oracle said:

So let me ask you this. You seem to have taken exception to Wirth's lazy offensive scheme where he relied heavily on running just a couple of different plays. Do you not think it's a problem that EE clearly relies heavily on only running a couple of different plays? Or is it okay when one does it but not okay when the other does?

EE has his favorites, every coach does, yes. But I’d also say they work? Look at his record. Not to mention, we don’t have an OL this year to block more than a second anyways, Pitzer his on his back what seams like every other play. 

DW ran the same play, and it did not work. 

Not to mention, things EE does that Wirth never did: Go under center on the goal line. EE’s offense consists of QB draws, WR screens - Not the terrible bubble , RB slow screens, vertical routes and crossing routes, double moves, combos, jet and replace and switch routes. 

When quite literally DW would throw the bubble, run the ball, throw the bubble, punt.  And had to be the only “no huddle/hurry up” team to receive 5 delay of game penalties a game for taking to long to get the call in and read the wrist band.

If you think the offense under EE and DW are in anyway similar, I’m not sure what you have been watching no or under DW. 
 

(And I thought DW was a good coach, but needed to fire his OC and I think he would still be at CovCath, and possibly a state champ.) 

[Royal Blue]

If the QB gets the pass off clean it’s an easy pick 6. #20 is waiting for it. 

[BirdDaddy]

51 minutes ago, Royal Blue said:

If the QB gets the pass off clean it’s an easy pick 6. #20 is waiting for it. 

That too. Or its incomplete and the Colonels are punting with their back’s up against the Goal Post defending Highlands bringing the House and Charlie Noon still returns it 40 yards instead of 70 yards for a TD.