WK 3 (0-2) Coal Grove @ (2-0) Valley

[tl895]

playoffs??? did you say playoffs??? playoffs? circa jim mora.... now dave lucas can use this same bit

[fuzzhead]

Haha you forgot to finish it, though! Allow me: "....We're just trying to win a game!"

[buckeyeshots]

**BUCKEYESHOTS.COM** buckeyeshots.com will be in taking pictures this Friday at this game. Picture requests should be posted on this thread, in a personal message, or emailed to [email protected]. THANKS!

[PLEASANTFLYER]

as much as i hate to say it I think the grove will be 0-3 after this week.

[SportsMom]

Everyone should have alittle more faithe in the boys from CG!!
they'll get it together!!!!!

[tigermack]

Sportsmom,

I hope they do get it together tomorrow. This team has lots of talent but they must play consistently...and their play calling is very questionable. I will be rooting for the Hornets. They really need this win.

[MinnyAckMack10]

something scares me about coal grove.. they are usually a good and legit team.. they aren't playing like it right now... although i think i see them bouncing back this week(as i have though over it for the past couple of days), i'm not reversing my prediction of valley 21-14.. man of my word..

[fuzzhead]

Coal Grove leads the all-time series, 4-2, including and 24-12 win in 2000 in which they snapped Valley's 41-game regular seson winning streak.

[RogueWarrior1965]

Everyone should have alittle more faithe in the boys from CG!!
they'll get it together!!!!!

From what I hear the lack of faith is not in the boys. Sounds like someone else needs to get it together.

[coop]

Coal Grove leads the all-time series, 4-2, including and 24-12 win in 2000 in which they snapped Valley's 41-game regular seson winning streak.

I was on that team that lost 12-24 in 2000; we ended the year 5-5. We lost our star running back in the scrimmage prior to that. We started that season 1-3; fought back to finish 5-5.

[MinnyAckMack10]

During the SOCI days, eh? 10-0 was 50/50 of getting you into the playoffs..

[Jesco White]

During the SOCI days, eh? 10-0 was 50/50 of getting you into the playoffs..

Actually, 10-0 only failed to get us into the playoffs ONE TIME!!! And, that one time was full of controversy.

It's funny how folks want to try and insult a program, but can't even use facts to do it. Why? What's the freaking point in it? And, during those SOC I days, we were pretty successful against a couple of SOC II schools as well. Do I need to point out FACTS to you on who those schools were? Or, can we just leave well enough alone and say that we played the schedule that we had, just like the teams on the field in the present times do? I say we just leave it alone and move on.

[MinnyAckMack10]

It wasn't an insult. at 10-0 any team should be able to make the playoffs.. well of course unless they don't have the points. 10-0 is a sure lock into the playoffs..right?

[Jesco White]

It wasn't an insult. at 10-0 any team should be able to make the playoffs.. well of course unless they don't have the points. 10-0 is a sure lock into the playoffs..right?

Unfortunately, no it's not. There have been several instances since we were left out in '92 where teams have finished 10-0 and not qualified. I'm pretty sure there has been at least one team that didn't qualify at 10-0 even after the expanded playoff format to 8 teams per region. I'll take a look and see to be certain.

[MinnyAckMack10]

Alright sounds good.. Would you rather have a more-tested and deserving 7-3 8-2 team or a 10-0 team? it sounds like a weak schedule.. that's all i was alluding to.. No disrespect against the indians..

[Jesco White]

It wasn't an insult. at 10-0 any team should be able to make the playoffs.. well of course unless they don't have the points. 10-0 is a sure lock into the playoffs..right?

In 2001 Newcomerstown finished 10-0 and finished 12th in Division 4, Region 15.

Also, since there were only four teams taken per Region in '92 when Valley finished 10-0 and finished 5th on the outside looking in, I checked to see how many teams since 2000 also finished 10-0 and finished 5th or lower in their Region since they would also have been left out by the standards in affect when it happened to Valley. I found 13 teams who finished anywhere from 5th to 8th with a 10-0 record. And, those teams came from nearly every different division.

[Jesco White]

Alright sounds good.. Would you rather have a more-tested and deserving 7-3 8-2 team or a 10-0 team? it sounds like a weak schedule.. that's all i was alluding to.. No disrespect against the indians..

I believe I would rather have the more tested team, but it's also hard to paint it as black and white, because if you use Valley as a reference again with the 2005 team you and Coop talked about then it goes against the grain of having a tough schedule. That team faced two playoff teams in the regular season, Wheelersburg and Symmes Valley. Burg put up a flurry of points late and spanked us, while we hammered D-6 Symmes Valley. We played that SOC I schedule with Waverly, Burg, Minford, Northwest and Chesapeake in the non-league and finished 4th in the Region. We went on to beat 9-1 Grandview Heights, 10-1 Bishop Ready (#1 in the Region) and had a heck of a comeback fall short against the 6th seed Centerburg.

Now, obviously, that team was more the exception than the rule when comparing strength of schedule in the regular season vs. playoff success. I think overall, I'd just be happy with a team that can not only qualify, but compete in the postseason. I also think that the expansion of the number of playoff teams per Region has made it better for those teams who do challenge themselves in the regular season and made that formula much more necessary for teams to compete. Overall, I like that.

[seasick80]

Jesco, never seen you post like that!!! Such enthusiasim, such PASSION! Your right in my league!! LOL. Valley wins!

[Jesco White]

Jesco, never seen you post like that!!! Such enthusiasim, such PASSION! Your right in my league!! LOL. Valley wins!

What can I say? I'm a brand new man without the responsibility of being an Admin. on the site.

[seasick80]

I love it. You made me the poster I am (people will absolutely cringe at this) when I disagreed with people saying Burg could go 0-3 when we played ironton, Gallia and West in 2005. I was vehement that we would not. Every one got on my case but you made one little post, and asked me "WHY dont you think they will go 0-3?" Well, we went 1-2 losing to Ironton When we should have won, and Gallia (when we had Gallia in thier stadium until the 2nd half). West was easy. I like the new you and I agree Valley was trashed all those years they were doing so well. And I like the way Valley has stepped up into SOC2. But i really like the way BURG has played Valley the last 6 years!!!