NewEra wrote:Why didn't Piquet play!?Bo_Diaz wrote:Piguet is also a player that saw plenty of minutes for the Falcons that isn't playing this year.
Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
You can play both soccer and football during the fall, sounds like just a choice he made. A good student-athlete all around.
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
^ Yes, I agree. However, I don't know if he was given the choice of playing both, and was forced to make a choice. If he was not, then just imagine that 2000 team without Parks.
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
You must be really new to the are if you say "Valley is a good team but I'm going with Minford"patro3410 wrote:I'm new to this area and Minford, and if Vladimir is a past , present or future coach then I should have chosen a different area to send my kids. Cause with his attitude and degrading of kids that's not someone I would want around the peewee program. I know this is a football forum but wow. Or maybe he is one of those people who thought he could play football and now he knows how to coach Valley is a good team but I'm going with Minford .
Having watched my Pirates play both teams, I can assure you that Valley is better than good. The Falcons will need Valley to make game changing mistakes to stay around in this one. These teams seem to be headed in opposite directions but I'd like to see the Falcons pull the upset. My guess is the Indians get up early and grind away a win as they get ready for the playoffs. Good luck both teams!
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
Valley has proven all year long that it is the best team in the area, and one of the best in their Division. Minford has its great moments but then also has its blunders. The fire power of Valley will not change week 10 and Minford unfortunately finds itself with their 3rd loss of the year and missing out of the playoffs.
Valley - 42
Minford - 14 (1 score with Varsity, 1 with JV late)
Valley - 42
Minford - 14 (1 score with Varsity, 1 with JV late)
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
@ Vladimir, I don't believe you have degraded any kids and have made some interesting points. But being a past coach or present could be the support of the Wing T of the Falcons long time offense. The problem (opinion only) is based around everybody we play in the conference knows and seen it year after year.patro3410 wrote:I'm new to this area and Minford, and if Vladimir is a past , present or future coach then I should have chosen a different area to send my kids. Cause with his attitude and degrading of kids that's not someone I would want around the peewee program. I know this is a football forum but wow. Or maybe he is one of those people who thought he could play football and now he knows how to coach Valley is a good team but I'm going with Minford .
- YOU'RE TIGER BAIT
- SEOPS Hippo
- Posts: 25617
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 10:23 pm
- Location: WAVERLY, OHIO
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
if valley does not have a letdown game after the huge win over burg, and don't overlook Minford, they roll into week 11 unblemished again.man these guys got it rolling
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
@Bounce, Thank you for being able to comprehend what I've had to say. You're correct, I've never degraded or singled out any kid nor coach. As far as coaching, I'm a past coach within the Wing-T system. As from what we had in the late 90's and before this coaching staff, we are way ahead. My biggest concern is with the scheduling and continuing to challenge ourselves, but I'll wait until after this week to really get into all that. For now: GO RED!!
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
Well lets hope the Falcons get everything together and play to what the expectations of this years team should be.
-
- Waterboy
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:36 pm
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
Yes, I am a new member of this forum and area. Everybody has opinion which is fine and to answer your question My kids are peewee football players.
As a new person to the area looking at new era would be running the spread offense a little more and read option. Going out of the spread does not mean you have to launch the ball every time , mix it up a little bit, ground and pound does not always work. As big and tough as Minford O-line is do something a little different. When you have the opposing teams defense lining up in the box 90% of the time the offensive coordinator should be smart enough to go to the spread. I mean 2 run plays in a row and your backs get tackled for negative yardage and then you pass on 3rd down, umm what coach doesn't know that play is coming and if a good coach has watched enough film they know what route the receiver is running and its a picked off pass.. just hoping for a little change in the "new era".
And Valley may have a good team, but I was at the Burg and Valley game and if Burg wouldn't have shot their selves in the foot a couple of times they would have won. To my understanding Valley has not lost a game in awhile which means they are going to come in over confident making to many mistakes.
As a new person to the area looking at new era would be running the spread offense a little more and read option. Going out of the spread does not mean you have to launch the ball every time , mix it up a little bit, ground and pound does not always work. As big and tough as Minford O-line is do something a little different. When you have the opposing teams defense lining up in the box 90% of the time the offensive coordinator should be smart enough to go to the spread. I mean 2 run plays in a row and your backs get tackled for negative yardage and then you pass on 3rd down, umm what coach doesn't know that play is coming and if a good coach has watched enough film they know what route the receiver is running and its a picked off pass.. just hoping for a little change in the "new era".
And Valley may have a good team, but I was at the Burg and Valley game and if Burg wouldn't have shot their selves in the foot a couple of times they would have won. To my understanding Valley has not lost a game in awhile which means they are going to come in over confident making to many mistakes.
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
^Well, Dontcha think you need the personnel in the first place to run the spread and Spread/Gun Zone option? This is small school football so you have to run your offense according to the kids you have. I'm not "Degrading," any of our kids, but we don't have the speed to do that. With the personnel and O-line we have the Wing-T, Straight T, Wishbone, I formations best suits this bunch. Again, not "Degrading" just telling it like it is.
If you're thinking well the area knows we run the Wing-T, and they put 9 in the box. Tell that to Clinton-Massie who won the D4 state championship last year and ran the WingT and only passed the ball 6 times the whole game, against 9 in the box. Tell that to Kettering Alter who runs the double tight wishbone against 9 in the box, and has won multiple state titles doing just that. Both have not changed their offense in decades. These teams have a system in place, they stick with it, and run it to perfection. Both Clinton Massie and Kettering Alter are the very top ranked teams in Region 14 (Same region as Minford,) and guess what? They run the ball over 95% of the time.
If you're thinking well the area knows we run the Wing-T, and they put 9 in the box. Tell that to Clinton-Massie who won the D4 state championship last year and ran the WingT and only passed the ball 6 times the whole game, against 9 in the box. Tell that to Kettering Alter who runs the double tight wishbone against 9 in the box, and has won multiple state titles doing just that. Both have not changed their offense in decades. These teams have a system in place, they stick with it, and run it to perfection. Both Clinton Massie and Kettering Alter are the very top ranked teams in Region 14 (Same region as Minford,) and guess what? They run the ball over 95% of the time.
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
Exactly, our line has been beat all year in SOC play. But when your facing 10 in the box it is difficult to block them all which then blows up our play before it gets started.patro3410 wrote:Yes, I am a new member of this forum and area. Everybody has opinion which is fine and to answer your question My kids are peewee football players.
As a new person to the area looking at new era would be running the spread offense a little more and read option. Going out of the spread does not mean you have to launch the ball every time , mix it up a little bit, ground and pound does not always work. As big and tough as Minford O-line is do something a little different. When you have the opposing teams defense lining up in the box 90% of the time the offensive coordinator should be smart enough to go to the spread. I mean 2 run plays in a row and your backs get tackled for negative yardage and then you pass on 3rd down, umm what coach doesn't know that play is coming and if a good coach has watched enough film they know what route the receiver is running and its a picked off pass.. just hoping for a little change in the "new era".
And Valley may have a good team, but I was at the Burg and Valley game and if Burg wouldn't have shot their selves in the foot a couple of times they would have won. To my understanding Valley has not lost a game in awhile which means they are going to come in over confident making to many mistakes.
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
Why doesn't Minford have the personnel ? Where are we failing to progress? Vladimir are you even considering comparing the O line to Clinton Massie or Kettering.Vladimir wrote:^Well, Dontcha think you need the personnel in the first place to run the spread and Spread/Gun Zone option? This is small school football so you have to run your offense according to the kids you have. I'm not "Degrading," any of our kids, but we don't have the speed to do that. With the personnel and O-line we have the Wing-T, Straight T, Wishbone, I formations best suits this bunch. Again, not "Degrading" just telling it like it is.
If you're thinking well the area knows we run the Wing-T, and they put 9 in the box. Tell that to Clinton-Massie who won the D4 state championship last year and ran the WingT and only passed the ball 6 times the whole game, against 9 in the box. Tell that to Kettering Alter who runs the double tight wishbone against 9 in the box, and has won multiple state titles doing just that. Both have not changed their offense in decades. These teams have a system in place, they stick with it, and run it to perfection. Both Clinton Massie and Kettering Alter are the very top ranked teams in Region 14 (Same region as Minford,) and guess what? They run the ball over 95% of the time.
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
If a frog had wings it wouldn't bump its arse either.patro3410 wrote:
And Valley may have a good team, but I was at the Burg and Valley game and if Burg wouldn't have shot their selves in the foot a couple of times they would have won. To my understanding Valley has not lost a game in awhile which means they are going to come in over confident making to many mistakes.
Good teams don't make mistakes that get them beat.
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
Guys if you going to run the spread then you have to go 100% all in, and run it to perfection. I do agree just jumping into the spread on 3rd down or in certain points in the game it allows the defense to know exactly what you are up to. It does give a chance to create a turnover, but most likely a 3 and out.
@Bounce: Well neither one of them have a D-1 kid on their O-line and we have possibly 2. If you've really watched those teams their O-line is not bigger than ours nor more athletic. Once you get to the state championships the talent evens out, so it's not like they have something all that different .... Point is, they have a system in place, they stick with it 100%, and they run it to perfection.
@Bounce: Well neither one of them have a D-1 kid on their O-line and we have possibly 2. If you've really watched those teams their O-line is not bigger than ours nor more athletic. Once you get to the state championships the talent evens out, so it's not like they have something all that different .... Point is, they have a system in place, they stick with it 100%, and they run it to perfection.
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
I know several parents at minford is tired of the wing t one is a good friend of mine has a son on the 8th grade team and he is transferring his kid from minford to valley this summer because he does not want his son in that offense
-
- S
- Posts: 1994
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:32 am
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
You were doing so well, right up until the point of trying to reference the actual Valley-Minford game. Obviously you aren't "new to this forum", given that you have been a registered member for almost 9 years (you joined in January of 2005....did you forget it's there for all to see?) I doubt many Valley OR Minford teams have EVER come into a game against the other over confident, because it's a huge rivalry game. But, in your defense, you're "new to the area", right? ;)patro3410 wrote:Yes, I am a new member of this forum and area. Everybody has opinion which is fine and to answer your question My kids are peewee football players.
As a new person to the area looking at new era would be running the spread offense a little more and read option. Going out of the spread does not mean you have to launch the ball every time , mix it up a little bit, ground and pound does not always work. As big and tough as Minford O-line is do something a little different. When you have the opposing teams defense lining up in the box 90% of the time the offensive coordinator should be smart enough to go to the spread. I mean 2 run plays in a row and your backs get tackled for negative yardage and then you pass on 3rd down, umm what coach doesn't know that play is coming and if a good coach has watched enough film they know what route the receiver is running and its a picked off pass.. just hoping for a little change in the "new era".
And Valley may have a good team, but I was at the Burg and Valley game and if Burg wouldn't have shot their selves in the foot a couple of times they would have won. To my understanding Valley has not lost a game in awhile which means they are going to come in over confident making to many mistakes.
-
- S
- Posts: 1994
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:32 am
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
By the way patro,
I absolutely agree with your points regarding offensive philosophy! I think you're on the money with the type of things that would work. Hopefully coach Daniels and company will get it straightened out. Those guys have a lot of knowledge and I'm sure they'll get things squared away in the future.
I absolutely agree with your points regarding offensive philosophy! I think you're on the money with the type of things that would work. Hopefully coach Daniels and company will get it straightened out. Those guys have a lot of knowledge and I'm sure they'll get things squared away in the future.
Re: Valley (9-0) @ Minford (7-2)
Well those parents also probably don't know anything about football. The wing-t turned this program around and when ran the correct way it's a very dangerous offense. Sometimes it just takes some patience and tiring out the defense to get what you want soo people seem to forget that. And on the spread comments we just don't have the speed nor he quarterback to this right now. And you saw what type of offense won head to head a power game referring to valley n burg. Which player are you referring to?izladoom wrote:I know several parents at minford is tired of the wing t one is a good friend of mine has a son on the 8th grade team and he is transferring his kid from minford to valley this summer because he does not want his son in that offense