Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Where are all the Waterford fans? Predicting wins and 30 points? Bbtrucking must be sucking his thumb right now.
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Oh we're still here....we just don't have to assure ourselves that we are good by beating a school that is three times smaller than ourselves....btw ...how many div. 6 and div. 5 teams do you play ...and win?...FF plays mostly div.7 teams.... celebrate with pride blue....All in all it was a great game and one turnover or one play could've changed it all...there was no domination...just good hard football... always is...
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18913
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
What? Fort Frye is D6 and Waterford is D7. Fort Frye is playing Warren this week and they are D3. 3 times smaller it's like 40 kids both of these schools are considered small. Funny when Waterford was winning you never heard the " Poor us Fort Frye is so much bigger then us. Get real Fort only has like 35 players.Chaw wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2017 11:15 am Oh we're still here....we just don't have to assure ourselves that we are good by beating a school that is three times smaller than ourselves....btw ...how many div. 6 and div. 5 teams do you play ...and win?...FF plays mostly div.7 teams.... celebrate with pride blue....All in all it was a great game and one turnover or one play could've changed it all...there was no domination...just good hard football... always is...
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
This is true. The series has been a total mismatch. We should drop Waterford and play Morgan or someone who has a chance to win sometimes.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18913
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
I hope the game is always played! I think everyone in the community was there Friday! I love this game. I do get super tired of Waterford using school size as a crutch. Come on the news paper claims Waterford has 38 players to Fort Fryes 34. School size has nothing to do with the game.
- LICKING COUNTY FAN
- SEOPS Hippo
- Posts: 47422
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:05 am
- Location: Buckeye Lake, Ohio
- Contact:
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Sounds like a game every fan had to enjoy.
Congrats on another huge win in this rival game.
Congrats on another huge win in this rival game.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18913
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Fort Frye Schedule BreakdownChaw wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2017 11:15 am Oh we're still here....we just don't have to assure ourselves that we are good by beating a school that is three times smaller than ourselves....btw ...how many div. 6 and div. 5 teams do you play ...and win?...FF plays mostly div.7 teams.... celebrate with pride blue....All in all it was a great game and one turnover or one play could've changed it all...there was no domination...just good hard football... always is...
4 D7
4 D6
1 D5
1 D3
That is a perfectly acceptable schedule for a D6 school. Must be good enough considering the point system is heavily based on strength of schedule and they've finished 1st and 2md last 2 years.
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
No. Chaw is right. Look at the all time record on this series. Fort Frye should find someone in an upper division for week 3. Isn't Williamstown about the same size? If Marietta is going to trounce them by 40, maybe they'd want to play Fort Frye in week 3.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18913
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
They do have a matchup with a very good Steubenville Catholic week 10.
-
- JV Team
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:40 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
I think both schools have the toughest non conference schedules possible for them. Waterford only gets 2 non conference games so it's tough to argue the strength of their schedule because they have to play 5 games a year against teams who can't compete with them
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18913
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Fort Frye plays
D6 Belpre
D6 Barnesville
D7 Waterford
D5 Northridge
D6 Steubenville Central Cath
D3 Warren
I think it is a huge upgrade from Wirt and Newcomerstown the last 2 seasons.
D6 Belpre
D6 Barnesville
D7 Waterford
D5 Northridge
D6 Steubenville Central Cath
D3 Warren
I think it is a huge upgrade from Wirt and Newcomerstown the last 2 seasons.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18913
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
PVC has shrunk so much I can't believe the Monroe Central is D7 now. 3 of the 4 D7 teams Fort play are PVC opponents.
-
- JV Team
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:40 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Tvc hocking needs to shrink. Only issue is the teams that would get booted are the better teams
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18913
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
New leagueBillybob55 wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:03 pm Tvc hocking needs to shrink. Only issue is the teams that would get booted are the better teams
Fort Frye
Belpre
Trimble
Nelsonville York
Waterford
Wahama
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18913
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
EasternDspy wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:07 pmNew leagueBillybob55 wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:03 pm Tvc hocking needs to shrink. Only issue is the teams that would get booted are the better teams
Fort Frye
Belpre
Trimble
Nelsonville York
Waterford
Wahama
Southern
Eastern
Are welcomed if they think they can keep up.
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
No it doesn't. It is the perfect small school league; virtually guaranteed 3 playoff teams per year and have been within a ball bounce of getting four teams in. Trimble, Waterford, & Wahama have had their best ever playoff runs in the last half decade and at least six of the nine teams have made the playoffs.Billybob55 wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:03 pm Tvc hocking needs to shrink. Only issue is the teams that would get booted are the better teams
The ability to compete with each other has raised the standard at schools who struggled for decades. It is exactly the right situation for all of those schools.
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
The divisions are based on number of male students enrolled not how many players they have.
DIV. VII DIV. VI
0-99 100-150
Belpre. 102 ( barely div. VI)
Waterford. 73. (Below average of div VII)
Shenandoah. 103 ( barely VI)
River. 108 (another barely)
Warren. (Div.III .....but c'mon.. it's Warren)
Fort Frye. 143 (7 from div. V)
Northridge. Div. VI. Fort lost
Shenandoah will probably trounce the fort by 2 tds
The rest are Div. VII
Belpre and Shenandoah both were div. VII last year. So a practically div. V team beats mostly div. VII teams every year. PLAY SOMEBODY...
DIV. VII DIV. VI
0-99 100-150
Belpre. 102 ( barely div. VI)
Waterford. 73. (Below average of div VII)
Shenandoah. 103 ( barely VI)
River. 108 (another barely)
Warren. (Div.III .....but c'mon.. it's Warren)
Fort Frye. 143 (7 from div. V)
Northridge. Div. VI. Fort lost
Shenandoah will probably trounce the fort by 2 tds
The rest are Div. VII
Belpre and Shenandoah both were div. VII last year. So a practically div. V team beats mostly div. VII teams every year. PLAY SOMEBODY...
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18913
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Chaw wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2017 7:36 pm The divisions are based on number of male students enrolled not how many players they have.
DIV. VII DIV. VI
0-99 100-150
Belpre. 102 ( barely div. VI)
Waterford. 73. (Below average of div VII)
Shenandoah. 103 ( barely VI)
River. 108 (another barely)
Warren. (Div.III .....but c'mon.. it's Warren)
Fort Frye. 143 (7 from div. V)
Northridge. Div. VI. Fort lost
Shenandoah will probably trounce the fort by 2 tds
The rest are Div. VII
Belpre and Shenandoah both were div. VII last year. So a practically div. V team beats mostly div. VII teams every year. PLAY SOMEBODY...
Waterford has more players that's a terrible excuse.