Pretty sure that’s how my statement started then you boys had to bring the past in it. Congrats FF has been good. Do you want me to get you a cookie?efarns wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 3:15 pmYou're the one who brought up Nelsonville and Trimble. You obviously don't know what you're talking about on that front.NotFunnyAtAll wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 3:09 pmHere we go again with the past record. It’s playoff season baby and the wildcats are coming to ruin dreams. We don’t need to get started about recruiting players either or OSHAA will get into itefarns wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 2:47 pm
Okay? Maybe. So you'd be 1-17 against Fort Frye in recent history.
No, it was not one of Trimble's better teams. The point is, while Trimble is a good program, but there is nothing about The Tomcats to suggest Fort Frye would be scared to play them. Fort Frye beat Waterford by 30. Waterford beat Trimble, Why in the world would The Cadets be scared of Trimble? Fort Frye has recently traveled to play Lima Central Catholic, Steubenville Central, Wheeling Central, Linsley, and were signed to go play St. Henry before St. Henry backed out. You think they are scared of Trimble and Nelsonville York? Seriously?
I have every confidence Waterford will be better than they were in week 4.
D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
-
- Riding the Bench
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2021 11:54 am
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
How is it irrelevant you have more football players? Sorry losing excuse. Both schools are D6. Fort Frye plays in a league with 3 D3 schools. You never hear Fort complaining about school size when they lose.NotFunnyAtAll wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 3:10 pmEasternDspy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 2:53 pmlol
Waterford has had more football players the last 3 years.
Irrelevant to the fact of number of boys in the school.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
I bring up former matchups of every team we play. It’s called a talking point.NotFunnyAtAll wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 3:24 pmPretty sure that’s how my statement started then you boys had to bring the past in it. Congrats FF has been good. Do you want me to get you a cookie?efarns wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 3:15 pmYou're the one who brought up Nelsonville and Trimble. You obviously don't know what you're talking about on that front.NotFunnyAtAll wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 3:09 pm
Here we go again with the past record. It’s playoff season baby and the wildcats are coming to ruin dreams. We don’t need to get started about recruiting players either or OSHAA will get into it
I have every confidence Waterford will be better than they were in week 4.
-
- Freshman Team
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:46 am
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
Pretty sure any other coaching staff would have made some adjustments and forced them to at least run a different play. Fort’s staff will definitely be able to adjust.thirtyonetrap wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2024 9:25 am If Waterford can hang close in the first half, then bust out that one formation and one play, they can win this. Well, it worked against Eastern anyway.
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
It depends on what kind of cookies they are and who made them. I do like cookies.NotFunnyAtAll wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 3:24 pmPretty sure that’s how my statement started then you boys had to bring the past in it. Congrats FF has been good. Do you want me to get you a cookie?efarns wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 3:15 pmYou're the one who brought up Nelsonville and Trimble. You obviously don't know what you're talking about on that front.NotFunnyAtAll wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2024 3:09 pm
Here we go again with the past record. It’s playoff season baby and the wildcats are coming to ruin dreams. We don’t need to get started about recruiting players either or OSHAA will get into it
I have every confidence Waterford will be better than they were in week 4.
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
This thread is going to be must see/read material come Friday night, regardless of outcome. Goodness!
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
If it comes down to coaching Waterford is in trouble. Yeah I know, they out coach the TVC teams every year including Nelsonville this year. But FF is a whole different animal. They actually have a good coach and staff. That said, the Waterford players have a lot of motivation for this and no one is giving them a chance. They love proving people wrong.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
Whatever the kids need for motivation. I think it’s been the opposite. Drew Pastuer is the most accurate high school football guy and he has it a 2 point game. The comments of some on here has the Cadets fired up. Comments from the thread been going around the teams group chat. Is it Friday yet?Watertown wrote: ↑Tue Nov 05, 2024 8:58 am If it comes down to coaching Waterford is in trouble. Yeah I know, they out coach the TVC teams every year including Nelsonville this year. But FF is a whole different animal. They actually have a good coach and staff. That said, the Waterford players have a lot of motivation for this and no one is giving them a chance. They love proving people wrong.
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
I'd expect there to be a lot of former FF and Waterford legends in attendance at this one... ultimate bragging rights on the line. As a neutral observer, couldn't ask for much more in a matchup. Washington County, get ready!
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
Waterford being the #5 seed in D VI is already a great accomplishment. They are playing with house money from here on out.Watertown wrote: ↑Tue Nov 05, 2024 8:58 am If it comes down to coaching Waterford is in trouble. Yeah I know, they out coach the TVC teams every year including Nelsonville this year. But FF is a whole different animal. They actually have a good coach and staff. That said, the Waterford players have a lot of motivation for this and no one is giving them a chance. They love proving people wrong.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
Game won’t be decided on the internet. I do think one of these teams has a huge edge in coaching.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
Cadets found perfect balance in the wing-t Friday.
Miller 151
Tyce 130
Bradford 66
Plus 4 Tds
When they are firing like that it’s hard to stop.
Miller 151
Tyce 130
Bradford 66
Plus 4 Tds
When they are firing like that it’s hard to stop.
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
At some point, I’d think Waterford’s familiarity with what FF runs would have some impact on the game. FF’s offense is hard to stop if you’re unprepared or undisciplined. Waterford is more familiar with FF than anyone on their schedule, and I don’t believe they’re either of the things mentioned above. If Waterford can somehow manage to force FF out of their base, bread and butter plays (ie, dive, jet, counter), this game becomes a lot more interesting. But they haven’t really been able to do it since Huck has been calling the plays, so I’m not sure if that will change Friday.
It’s one of very few weaknesses FF seems to have from an outside perspective - their Wing T is very rules and numbers-based, and if you can take away those staple plays, it levels the playing field tremendously. It’s the matter of doing it that’s the hard part because FF is typically excellent in their execution.
It’s one of very few weaknesses FF seems to have from an outside perspective - their Wing T is very rules and numbers-based, and if you can take away those staple plays, it levels the playing field tremendously. It’s the matter of doing it that’s the hard part because FF is typically excellent in their execution.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
Ran for over 300 the first matchup. They did have 14 penalties in first half got to clean that up.beg003 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:53 pm At some point, I’d think Waterford’s familiarity with what FF runs would have some impact on the game. FF’s offense is hard to stop if you’re unprepared or undisciplined. Waterford is more familiar with FF than anyone on their schedule, and I don’t believe they’re either of the things mentioned above. If Waterford can somehow manage to force FF out of their base, bread and butter plays (ie, dive, jet, counter), this game becomes a lot more interesting. But they haven’t really been able to do it since Huck has been calling the plays, so I’m not sure if that will change Friday.
It’s one of very few weaknesses FF seems to have from an outside perspective - their Wing T is very rules and numbers-based, and if you can take away those staple plays, it levels the playing field tremendously. It’s the matter of doing it that’s the hard part because FF is typically excellent in their execution.
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
Last time they did limit Clayton but Tyce went off.
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
At this point I think its more the ladies than the gentleman getting excited about it all...might expect some future players emerge in about nine months on the winning side of the river...LMAO
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
Easy there now Chaw!
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
I guess he's telling us why he needs Waterford to win this one. Could be a dark, cold winter otherwise
-
- SEOPS Mr. Ohio
- Posts: 18863
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:46 pm
Re: D6 23: 5. Waterford (9-2) @ 4. Fort Frye (8-3)
Updated Stats
Fort Frye stats
Grady Hesson 45/81 690 55 % 6 Td 7 int
Rushing
Clayton Miller 136 1560 11.5 18 Td
Tyce Beardsley 103 1121 10.9 10 Td
Kainan Bradford 61 327 5.5 4 Td
Grady Hesson 75 227 3 8 Td
Wyatt Erb 11 - 120 10.9 2 Td
Gavin Rauch 12- 100 8.3 Td
Rec
Luke Phillis 19 338 4 Td
Clayton Miller 9 157 Td
Tytan Waller 3 70 Td
Tyce Beardsley 8 86
Defense
Tackles
Braxton Ross 128 4 Sacks
Kainan Bradford 92
Blake Wheeler 67
Maddox Huck 71
Tyce Beardsley 39
Grady Hesson 40
Treven Nicholson 37 1 Sack
Ints
Clayton Miller 2
Maddox Huck 3
Kainan Bradford 1
Grady Hesson 1
Tyce Beardsley 1
Fort Frye stats
Grady Hesson 45/81 690 55 % 6 Td 7 int
Rushing
Clayton Miller 136 1560 11.5 18 Td
Tyce Beardsley 103 1121 10.9 10 Td
Kainan Bradford 61 327 5.5 4 Td
Grady Hesson 75 227 3 8 Td
Wyatt Erb 11 - 120 10.9 2 Td
Gavin Rauch 12- 100 8.3 Td
Rec
Luke Phillis 19 338 4 Td
Clayton Miller 9 157 Td
Tytan Waller 3 70 Td
Tyce Beardsley 8 86
Defense
Tackles
Braxton Ross 128 4 Sacks
Kainan Bradford 92
Blake Wheeler 67
Maddox Huck 71
Tyce Beardsley 39
Grady Hesson 40
Treven Nicholson 37 1 Sack
Ints
Clayton Miller 2
Maddox Huck 3
Kainan Bradford 1
Grady Hesson 1
Tyce Beardsley 1