UKatdog

The old man in his prime. Perhaps this is why he can't remember anything these days.

IMO, if they played on the team they should be celebrated as part of that team. To ask them to play up, (presumably it is their option) and then not give them credit for doing so is very weak "administration". Now, this all assumes the players called up actually contributed to the team. Moving up and primarily sitting the bench, all just for the personal experience, probably doesn't count.

1A: Beechwood 2A: Mayfield 3A: Corbin 4A: Frank-Simp 5A: Cov Cath 6A: Male

Purely based upon those stats, it looks like Roberts (Senior) has been the better QB thus far. But, that's not what you asked. No slam on Cam (Sophomore), but I think Pikeville has the better QB on Friday. Yet, BHS has the better team, coming out with the win.

The Tiger's future is bright, no doubt. Their Freshman class has a ton of talent. The coaches do seem to work hard to get some freshman in as early as they can. But, don't fool yourself, not every kid got into this game.

"Logan Castleman does everything, but sell popcorn at halftime." You sure??? I thought I saw him behind the counter while the band was playing. Oh well, could have been his old man. They look a lot alike:-)

"Logan Castleman does everything, but sell popcorn at halftime." Are you sure?? I thought I saw him behind the counter while the band was playing. Oh well, could have been his old man. They look a lot alike

Parker Mason at Beechwood is a game changer. Runs fearless and usually with several defenders chasing him. Brett Holladay, his QB, is throwing very well this year. Strong arm on that kid and he moves well on his own.

How did this one turn out? HHS ended Beechwood Frosh's 1 1/2 season winning streak but it was no "crushing" as suggested earlier. Two costly turnover by the Tigers, when they had the Birds on their heals, in the final quarter were the difference.

None of those PF's had anything to do with player size or maturity. One was a yard out of bounds. The next was prob five yards out of bounds on the concrete. The last one I saw was a crack-back type of hit during a punt return and completely unnecessary.

This, at times, was tough to watch. The Tigers are a well oiled machine and BC had trouble keeping 11 men on the field. The Rebel QB extended a few drives with pure toughness but was offered little protection. Beechwood's O line was opening holes three levels deep. QB Holliday was accurate and had time to make good decisions. The D was stingy. Xavier Campbell made runners pay. Both lines are large and in charge. And, how about that Tiger kicker saving the shutout by tracking down a speedy Rebel returner just before he got into the endzone?

I agree. I seriously doubt that the extra 2 years of play, from 4 to 6 yrs old made any difference, AT ALL, in his current skill level. It seems obvious this young man is a special athlete with a good head on his shoulders. Kids like that pick things up quickly. Regardless, more power to him now. Hope his life continues to reward his hard work and good decision making.

However, I think that whoever that multiple coin is, wins this year. Very interesting statement. Do you think the hype goes to Beechie's head this year? Are they caught looking ahead to 2A? Or, are you simply playing the odds that a three-pete is extremely rare? Or, perhaps they are just O-VER-RAT-ED??

Interesting that most, if not all, of the top 10 teams have chosen not to take on a 1A opponent in their first week of play. Don't know abt the two TN schools.

Well stated. You've almost convinced me with this.

You're manipulating my words to fit your logic. I never implied they should practice a skill that they wouldn't be expected to execute in a game. How does anyone get good at something they've never done before? My point being that there seems to be great resistance to ANY change for the fear of being called "soft". And a prime example is the transitions in rules that have occurred as equipment technology advanced. Do you feel we shouldn't have gone to hard shell helmets because it made people soft? Maybe you do. But that's not my opinion. I prefer to think that as we understand more about the game, we can adjust. Perhaps I'm in the minority in thinking that just because something changes that doesn't mean its been ruined. I love football most of all sports. Played a little in the way back. But I'm not naive enough to think that it can't be made better for the long run.

Well, you're making it kinda easy... Sorry, Bud, but you don't know that and the basis for your argument lacks logic. There are plenty of example of pro athletes that didn't play their primary sport until later, even some who transitioned while in college. I still believe training and practice work. But please, educate me on how not having kickoff in freshman football will stunt one's pro prospects.

Practice?

...because Hester and Hall's carreers were established in their HIGH SCHOOL FRESHMAN years??? So much so, that it's unreasonable to think they could have ever been successful without returning KO's, in their FRESHMAN year of HS?? Seriously, what a sophomoric response... Ha, you like the way I did that

There sure seems to be a lot of passion for the "sky is falling" opinion. If some on this thread had their way, we'd still be in leather helmets. Remember when people thought those wearing a facemask were "soft"? Yeah, that safety adjustment really ruined the game as we knew it. I do miss all the blood. I agree that the proposal to put the ball on the 35 at 4th & 15 is ridiculous. But, c'mon, resistance to any change at all is pretty short sighted. Perhaps a result of too many kick off coverage runs?

Great input. Thanks to all.

Thanks for the solid input WD & rjs. This is good stuff. What about kickoff strategies? How deep does an average, standard kickoff go? I presume the ability to kick left-side, center, and right-side is normally a given. I've got a rising Freshman soccer convert who wants to be the big toe on the team and we want to train appropriately.

So, I'm relatively new to the HS football scene and am curious about kicking stats. What would be considered an average accuracy percentage for PAT attempts? What is considered "very good"? And, at what distance do coaches start considering going for 3 rather than converting a 4th down? (This last one obviously depends on the leg of your kicker, mainly. But, what else goes into that decision?) Thoughts? Is success as a HS kicker more abt executing kickoff strategies than the point making?

Right. And how would the coaches "nip it"? You can't expect them to cut a talented kid based on speculation alone. BTW, it may not be a done deal yet.

It was a tough one to watch. Honestly The Birds didn't swing the bat much and it paid off. Tigers were trying to make things happen at the plate and Rom did a nice job keeping them off balance. It's difficult to blame it all on pitching when you can muster only three hits. Was one of the tightest strike zones I've seen. Tigers couldn't hit it. Seems like some plate umpires give more credit to higher velocity pitches where a slower breaking ball in the same location is called a ball.