I see our strength of schedule is up to 3rd toughest in all DIV according to fantastic50. Hope it pays off.

On the other side of that coin is a team like Van Wert who's schedule is ranked as the 2nd toughest in DIV and they are going to have to scratch and claw to try to to get to week 11.

It will payoff.

Here's a scenario...say we beat Ashland and Clear Fork...but lose to Madison, Wooster & West Holmes (this is hypothetical of course).

Would we still host a week 11 game with a 6-4 record?

I don't want to find out, but that would be pretty interesting.

that would be kinda funny.

Very interesting (but very unlikely) scenario, RR1. Yes, I think you would still host.

Go Knights!!!

RedRider1;501027 wrote:It will payoff.

Here's a scenario...say we beat Ashland and Clear Fork...but lose to Madison, Wooster & West Holmes (this is hypothetical of course).

Would we still host a week 11 game with a 6-4 record?

I don't want to find out, but that would be pretty interesting.

Slim chances that you would but you would for sure with 7 wins

Not sure it would be so slim....let's say we beat them both, and then Ashland beats CF....and both teams end up 8-2.

By my estimation, Orrville wouild end up with 30.5 1st level points, and 191.5 2nd level points......or 22.20 computer points (Figuring as realistically as i can).

Anything north of 20 computer points should be good enough for a home game.

22.20 pts would have put us in 2nd place in region 14 last season (a full point higher than Genoa in 2009).

That's more than a "slim" chance.

It's almost enough to say with 100% accuracy that if we win either the Ashland or CF game, we host in week 11. Even if we get beat by Madison or WH or....god forbid...Wooster.

I know it kills the Genoa folk that a team could lose 3 or 4 games and still have a shot at a home game. Could Genoa even MAKE the playoffs with 3 losses?

RedRider1;501360 wrote:Not sure it would be so slim....let's say we beat them both, and then Ashland beats CF....and both teams end up 8-2.

By my estimation, Orrville wouild end up with 30.5 1st level points, and 191.5 2nd level points......or 22.20 computer points (Figuring as realistically as i can).

Anything north of 20 computer points should be good enough for a home game.

22.20 pts would have put us in 2nd place in region 14 last season (a full point higher than Genoa in 2009).

That's more than a "slim" chance.

It's almost enough to say with 100% accuracy that if we win either the Ashland or CF game, we host in week 11. Even if we get beat by Madison or WH or....god forbid...Wooster.

I know it kills the Genoa folk that a team could lose 3 or 4 games and still have a shot at a home game. Could Genoa even MAKE the playoffs with 3 losses?

Haha you have an 18% chance of getting a home game at 6-4, Idk about your Orrville math but that's a slim chance. Now you have a 90% chance of home game with 3 losses. It'd be 50-50 for Genoa to get in with 3 losses but with our fairly easy schedule we don't have to worry about that

Classyposter58;501370 wrote: but with our easy schedule we don't have to worry about that

Fixed

I wouldn't disagree...but I think if the specific wins over Ashland and Clear Fork are factored in.....that 18% goes much higher.

The same site that says we have an 18% chance also projects us to lose to Ashland....my scenario involves us beating Ashland....so those numbers would again be skewed.

If we lose in week 7 and 9....we'd be lucky to get a home game. Win both and we may just win the region.

In 2005 we were 6-4 and hosted St. Vincent St. Mary.....should've won that game if the refs weren't paid off by the catholics! Then my senior year we ended up 6-4 and missed the playoffs by one seed. Anything is possible, these are high school kids.

Lets talk about our offense. We keep screwing up with turnovers like the last 2 weeks we may make it to the playoffs but it will probably end there. I am kinda bored so i will start an argument and see where it ends. Maybe it will keep the posts on Thursday a little interesting. We have a green QB to say the least. He is trying hard give him credit. He was thrown in as a soph. and has limited exper. but he is making many mistakes and we have been very lucky to come out with wins the last 2 wks. If our "RED CURTAIN" defense had not played as well as they have these posts would probably be very negative the last 2 wks. I was told that Tre had 34 carries for 160 yds. assuming that is fact 160 yds. is good but on 34 carries stinks. I heard coming into this season how we will have a "lights out" running game. We have not had that. Mason M. and Matt D. block for Tre and rarely ever get to run with a block in front of them. I don't think Matt has ever been permitted to run from the tail spot. These guys have proven they can hit and run just look on defense. They are getting ripped off by poor coaching on the offensive side of the ball. I don't think I have ever seen Tre line up as an H back. Why not? If he is tough enough to run he should be tough enough to block. I have watched a running game that has not come close to winning tough games. We win when we pass. We have the talent to run the coaches are just stuck on 3 letters TRE. I don't blame Tre he plays when and where they tell him to play and I'm sure like any player he wants to be out there and I don't blame him. Mason and Matt showed in the Copley game that they can lead a drive. We put them in for a series in the 2nd half and we drove for a TD. The running game should be our strength but the lack of foresight by the coaching staff has ruined that so we turn to the pass and we all cross our fingers and pray. I hope that Kyle becomes the Qb soon that we all want him to become for the playoffs but unless we change up the running game we will struggle against good teams. Cut the carries Tre has in half and spread them between Mason and Matt then lets see what happens. The other issue I have is what do we do if during the next few games Kyle keeps throwing picks? He really struggled against Senior. Do we look at wild cat with Drew or Mason? I believe that we have been very lucky the last 2 wks. This whole season we are just turning over the ball in an unacceptable manner game after game. Sooner or later luck runs out. The ball needs to be in the play makers hands and if we have to abandon our "Traditional" play book so that we can get the ball into the play makers hands that is what we need to be considering. This "hold your breath and pray the offense doesn't screw up" won't win playoff games. Time for changes. Ok now let the argument begin!

Huh, no argument here....of course what would expect haha. I have been puzzled with this for 2 years now. last year if you want my opinion it cost us a state title run. Tre was gimpy and Mason and Matt were healthy? go figure. I have my own theories that will stay with me and my closest buds. No argument Tre is a great back but I think Mason at tail and Matt at H bring something to the ground game also. Nothing radical, just change personnel up a bit once in a while. Give the D another look. All this talk in the off season of running a 2 back set and we are running an offense exactly like we have run in the past when we had very experienced and mobile QBs. Just keep hoping the O comes around. Good points. I wish we were more creative with all of our skill instead of putting the onus on the youngest guy out there?

Go Riders....you make very good points! I posted this on the week 6 thread a few days ago...

The passing attack we are using is different than when I played I think. I too am tired of running the streak route. I know when I played we had a bunch of different combo/Mirror routes:
Slant/out
Stop/Corner
deep in route/out
Streak/Deep Out
Fade/deep out
All choice (meaning they run a stop or streak depending on CB alignment)
Flood route, which is roll out passes to the left and right where (Wr runs streak, slot/Te runs deep out, TE/RB runs short out, backside runs post)
and of course the "hot route"

I don't know if we are calling the choice route, but only choosing to run streaks, or if the coaches are calling all these streak routes, but it's safe to say we have probably completed 10% of those streak passes. I had a lot of success with the Hot Route, which is just the slot receivers or tight end replacing the blitzing linebacker. It works everytime, but I don't see it at all anymore, even Joey didn't do it. A lot of people criticized me of "staring down the receiver" but it was because of that hot route, I knew who was coming on the blitz and where I was going with the ball.

I personally think that our offense needs to run first, throw second and be ball control offense having nice long drives eating up the clock. We do not have to score a lot of points to win games especially with the way our defense has been playing, which is OUTSTANDING!!! If I were the OC, I would line up in a Right formation (Wr to the left, TE right, Slot to the right, one Rb, QB under center) have Tre be my feature back and on the field at the critical times, when you need him, and I would have Mason and Matt Davis carry on first or second down and in short yardage situations since they run with more power. This would keep players fresh, and give them breaks because all three play both ways. Then I would just run base dive/counter, stretch plays, and use playaction passes to keep the defense guessing. You establish the run early on, and it will loosen up that defense and then you can spread them out. We need to do a better job at changing up the offense on each drive, by this I mean we need to go from 2 back sets to 4-5 wide sets to make the defense really have to think what are we going to do now. We have become a little predictable lately, and I think that is part of the reason we aren't having that same offensive output we are used to. I still think we need a "Wild Rider" package, just to make teams prepare for it, even if it means we run 1-2 plays a game out of it. Put Turner and Tre in the backfield together and run different plays, last year we had it every play because of Joey's illusiveness and running ablility teams had to constantly worry about him beating you with his legs.

And Finally, set our young QB up to be successful and call simple pass plays where he has 3 options,
ex: Right Gun Mirror 21 (which is the slant/out combo) 1. Slant pass 2.Out pass 3. tuck and run. For this play all he has to do is read one player and it will make it easier on him and teach him how to read defenses. Also running rollout passes will help keep the defense in front of him, and gives him an opportunity to see all the different levels of the routes being run right in front of him.

Great teams get their playmakers the ball in A LOT OF DIFFERENT ways. After the Triway game, Drew Brenner has been non-existant, and Turner may get the ball 1-2 times a game. That is not enough. I have also said all along that Mason and Matt need more carries. It keeps everyone fresh, and gives them breaks since all three go both ways.

Great teams also use different packages in the same series. I notice we don't sub guys in and out like in the past, instead Kyle goes to the sideline every time to get the play. WHY NOT ROTATE THE 3 BACKS IN EVERY PLAY???? I love our coaches and they have done great things here, but sometimes they are really stubborn and don't do things to put our players in the best position to win.

We sub Max in and out sometimes. Tre puts the ball on the carpet and it gets returned for 7 and then he limps and hobbles after runs like he is hurt. When Tre is limping and u have guys like Mason and Matt ready to run explain to me the intelligent reasoning behind running Tre again? Some people say he is faking I don't believe that. We have some outstanding talent on offense. The means to an end is where all the problems are. We need to change the means desperately if we are to expect the end we know this team is capable of producing in the playoffs.

A line up that I think would be interesting: Line, qb kyle, split backs Mason and Matt, tight end Max and Drew subbing, receivers Turner & Tre. & Rice subbing.
Tre can catch seen that in Genoa game. Mix these guys around mix up plays and it could be exciting. Tre can play both back and receiver. We just don't maximize the talent we lock it into one position and say this is your spot and it never changes.

All interesting ideas..
this probably isn't a healthy topic for me....I think I will back out for a while.

Great players know what to do at all the positions. I remember when Tommy Brenner played, we moved him around to ALL X,Y,Z,H spots so he had different guys covering him and creating mismatches. Same thing in 06 and 07. All the receivers moved in at different positions to create mismatches. I just don't see the mismatch this year.


We should be able to put Drew, Stewert, Tre, Mason, Cody, Matt, and Max at anyone of the X, Y, Z, or H positions. We could be very lethal if we rotated guys around position-wise.

Good conversation going on.

For all the talk about lack of depth on this team...one position where we have some depth is RB...but we dont exploit that depth.

Davis has made the most of his opportunities....and Mason runs hard even though most of his runs are into the teeth of the defense with barely a step of momentum.

This was on my blog...very similar thoughts here tonight.

The last thing I'll ever call myself is an expert when it comes to X's and O's...but we seem to be a little bit predictable in our playcalling. If we were clicking on all cylinders, I'm sure nobody would care, but that hasn't been the case either. Lexington had 42 points scored on the by Clear Fork...one week after we scratched and clawed for 21 points (actually, only 14 since one of the scored versus Lex was an interception returned for a TD).

We seem to be trying too much for the homerun ball and not the intermediate passing game (running slants, WR screens and RB swing passes.) We have the talent to run those routes, and Kyle Lichti has the ability to throw those balls. Drew Brenner has been almost invisible the past few weeks. Don't know that he was targeted more than twice (and that was early in the first quarter) this past week.

A little creativity and unpredictability would be neat to see this coming week. Who knows, maybe we're keeping a few pages of the playbook stashed away for the stretch run?

I wouldnt at all say Tre is sulking...and he had every chance to do so last week after the fumble...but he carried the mail. But only 5 yards per carry? That's nothing that Mason or Matt could have done with 30+ carries.

He's carried the ball nearly 120 times this year, plays on kick returns and on defense too. He's durable...but since about week 5 last year, he's limping each and every game. Is it hurting his explosiveness? Maybe. He had 2 carries for 10+ yards (one was for 21, the other was for 12) against Senior. That's 33 of his 160 on 2 carries. Take those away and he has 30 carries for 120.

Of the top 6 OCC backs....he's got the lowest YPC average (4.6). Anderson from Wooster is tops with 8.2 yards per carry.

I GUESS that a ball control offense is what you want come playoff time. Time of possession and the ability to run the ball are very important.

I am mostly on the same page with you all, except for Go Riders saying 34 carries for 160 yards "stinks". That's almost 5 yards per tote, bro! But if you read way back, I said that I believe that is too many carries for him and I don't want him beat down for the play-offs. Since people are throwing things out for consideration, here's one that I have bit my lip on for a long time. I think that Brenner should have been molded into the QB spot.

His throwing ability is a lot worse than Lichti's and Infield....Just keep him at WR. Maybe have an open punting competition??? A former punter can't stand these really high 25-30 yard punts. Field postion is huge in this game.

IMO...Go Riders hit the "nail on the head" regarding our offense...too much talent on the sidelines watching when we have the ball. Use them all and as often as possible. I believe that we should see ATLEAST 2 fresh subs coming in after every play....most of those guys can play multiple positions. We need to take advantage of that!

We should have different packages; Playing College football helped me realize the value of mismatches and changing personel. I know college football is a lot more advanced than high school, but their are still some good offensive ideas that high school players can do, and remember.

If we had personel packages:

Pro: 2 WR, 1 TE, 2 RB
X-Brenner
Z-Turner
Y-Pirman/Rice
H- Monheim
RB- Simpson

Cheetah: 3 WR, 2 RB
Rb-Monheim
X-Simpson
Y-Brenner
Z-Turner
H-Simpson/Rice

Bull: 2 RB, 2 TE, 1 WR,
RB-Davis/Monheim
X-Brenner/Rice
Y-Pirman
Z-Turner
H-Monheim/Davis

Tiger: 4 WR, 1 RB
X-Turner
Y-Brenner
Z-Rice
H-Simpson
RB-Monheim

Sonic: 4 WR, 1 TE
X-Brenner
Y-Pirman
Z-Rice
H-Turner
T-Simpson

Bear: 2 TE, 3 RB
X-Brenner/Rice
Y-Pirman
Z- Monheim
H-Davis
T-Simpson

You use these different packages in certain situations during the game, let's give an example:
1&10- Pro personel
Run a dive to the right

2&6- Sonic Personel
Rollout pass to the right

1&10- Tiger personel
sweep left

2&1- Bull personel
Run the the left for 1st down

1&10- Cheetah personel
play action pass for TD


Keeping the defense guessing on what you are going to do, and rotating different players in and out to different positions really keeps the defense thinking, rather than playing. When you have the defense guessing and thinking, that is when the offense is going to succeed.

Look at todays Daily Record. On the Internet version an article about this weeks match ups lists other teams players yds. rushing and the carries to get there. If i'm not mistaken Tre has more carries then any of them but less yds per carry then almost all of them. I think the constant carries with little rest is damaging his effectiveness. On the other hand when you only give Mason and Matt a few carries and those are spread apart from each other they hardly have a chance to get warmed up. Give Mason and Matt lead blocks like Tre always gets and I believe the running game will become the "promised threat" we made to our opponents prior to the beginning of the season.