Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Fort Frye doesn't even play River. Also like I said Fort has one of the stronger strength of schedules they are currently projected to make the playoffs at (6-4). Fort can only do so much with the schedule only D7 team on the schedule are PVC teams and Waterford.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Also you didn't even get the schedule right they also play D6 Stubemville Catholic and D6 Barnesville. Think it's funny you think they lost to Northridge because they're bigger. You know Fort won the first 2 meetings right? The reason Fort Frye beats Waterford has nothing to do with school size.Its because they are better coached.. Stop complaining about school size and get better. Why does school size even matter when you have 38 players and Fort has 34? It's a cop out man.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...
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Again it's the number of male students. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it not true
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Do you think that the fact that Fort Frye has a 140 boys 34 which play football had anything to do with the game? No it didn't it's just a lame excuse for some sore losers. Waterford thought this was the year they'd win and they didn't now you guys are just crying. We're talking D6 vs D7 it's not like we're talking a school with 250 plus. Fort has 34 players and you guys are crying over Schools size. Total Lames
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 20590
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:49 am
- Location: Next to a lake somewhere
- Contact:
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Everyone Nelsonville-York plays accept for Trimble and Newark Catholic (same size) is bigger.
We are the smallest school in the TVC-OHIO and we don't complain.
Get better!
Championship's are won in the off-season
BUCKEYE PRIDE!
BUCKEYE PRIDE!
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
I say he buys you that or a Farmer from Turners after a long Friday drinking binge.
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
I'm good with either one... Billy Bob direct message my self and Eastern, we want our food
-
- JV Team
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:40 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
It wasn't me who said 30+. I said Waterford 22 FF 19. I'll take a large BBQ chicken pizza from the guy who said 30+
Re: WK3 (1-1) Fort Frye @ Waterford (2-0)
My bad Billybob....BB trucking is on the hook for pizzabbtrucking.inc wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 2:50 pmThe cadet defense does not have the defense to interupt anything less than 30 or so points. SO the offense is going to have to step it up and do way better than against Northridge.
-
- JV Team
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:40 pm
Re: WK3 (1-1) Fort Frye @ Waterford (2-0)
Pizza party on you bbtruckingbbtrucking.inc wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 2:50 pmThe cadet defense does not have the defense to interupt anything less than 30 or so points. SO the offense is going to have to step it up and do way better than against Northridge.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: WK3 (1-1) Fort Frye @ Waterford (2-0)
Heck Yea!!!Billybob55 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2017 10:55 amPizza party on you bbtruckingbbtrucking.inc wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 2:50 pmThe cadet defense does not have the defense to interupt anything less than 30 or so points. SO the offense is going to have to step it up and do way better than against Northridge.
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
I feel like if you're going to use school size as an excuse then FF shouldn't be considered your rival.
When you lose to a rival you're supposed to complain about officials, coaching, 'cheating', and 'dirty players'. Lol. When it gets to school size you need to find a new rival I guess.
I hate posting this after the pizza party plans were made, but I wanted to get my two cents in there. Lol
When you lose to a rival you're supposed to complain about officials, coaching, 'cheating', and 'dirty players'. Lol. When it gets to school size you need to find a new rival I guess.
I hate posting this after the pizza party plans were made, but I wanted to get my two cents in there. Lol
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Pretty lame excuse when your team has more players if you asked me.J8fusl wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 1:23 pm I feel like if you're going to use school size as an excuse then FF shouldn't be considered your rival.
When you lose to a rival you're supposed to complain about officials, coaching, 'cheating', and 'dirty players'. Lol. When it gets to school size you need to find a new rival I guess.
I hate posting this after the pizza party plans were made, but I wanted to get my two cents in there. Lol
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Of course you would coming from the bigger school and you are correct this year it didn't matter but in the history of the rivalry it has made a huge difference as you said that bringing in warren in the pvc would be much bigger than the rest of the school. So lame I don't think so
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
You are right about that people in Waterford want to believe we can compete with ff in football but I believe the series is 35 -7 all time just like leaving the pvc was a tough decision I believe it would be in the best interest of Waterford to drop ff and pick up another d7 school
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: Fort Frye(23) @ (19)Waterford
Really best interest? That game prob brings in double what your other home games bring. Also you beat Fort in basketball last year what's the difference there? School size is lamest excuse I've ever heard in this rivalry. You haven't beat us in Football because we're better. The enrollments before this one was like 98-128 in terms of boys. Trust me both schools are still small we're talking 1 div. You want to bring up Warren who had close 325 kids and say that's like what's it's like with Fort over Waterford. Fort and Waterford are very similar you add both the schools up they still have less then Warren. I don't hear you complaining about Belpre and Federal Hocking they are both D6 also. Should Waterford go dropping them? Should Waterford go Beallsville and go join a small WV league?Jughead wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2017 4:40 pm You are right about that people in Waterford want to believe we can compete with ff in football but I believe the series is 35 -7 all time just like leaving the pvc was a tough decision I believe it would be in the best interest of Waterford to drop ff and pick up another d7 school