ONEIDA VS HARRIMAN

[muffin]

Harriman by 7.

[Sarah Beth]

I think that Onieda will win. Harriman lost alot of there best players last year. And plus who wants Harriman to win! He*He

[KruD]

I say ONEIDA.If they play how they are capable of playing through a whole game

why of corse yes

[wpasi]

harriman won 18 to 0

[KruD]

wonder how game outcome would went if it was dry filed and no rain

[goosevol]

Harriman would probably have more of an advantage on a dry field.

[WrittenWord]

A dry field would've probably made the game more interesting because it stands to reason that Oneida wouldn't have had the early fumbles, which led to the excellent field position for Harriman and the early points for the Blue Devils. A wet field is often seen as the great equalizer where speed is concerned, but it also tends to hurt the team that cannot hold onto the football, and that's exactly what happened last night. I doubt a dry field would've led to a bigger win for Harriman. Not that I'm saying Oneida would've won on a dry field; you don't gain 39 yards of offense and expect to have a chance. And good teams don't have the problems with the football that Oneida had on the wet field. This team has an unbelieveable problem with their ballcarriers holding onto the football and their receivers catching the football. Good teams don't have those problems. Period. No excuse.

 

But congratulations to the Blue Devils. All we've heard about is speed and athleticism but neither of those things necessarily tipped the game in Harriman's direction last night. It was hard-nosed defensive play that earned Harriman the victory.

[AngelCoach]

A dry field would've probably made the game more interesting because it stands to reason that Oneida wouldn't have had the early fumbles, which led to the excellent field position for Harriman and the early points for the Blue Devils. A wet field is often seen as the great equalizer where speed is concerned, but it also tends to hurt the team that cannot hold onto the football, and that's exactly what happened last night. I doubt a dry field would've led to a bigger win for Harriman. Not that I'm saying Oneida would've won on a dry field; you don't gain 39 yards of offense and expect to have a chance. And good teams don't have the problems with the football that Oneida had on the wet field. This team has an unbelieveable problem with their ballcarriers holding onto the football and their receivers catching the football. Good teams don't have those problems. Period. No excuse.

 

But congratulations to the Blue Devils. All we've heard about is speed and athleticism but neither of those things necessarily tipped the game in Harriman's direction last night. It was hard-nosed defensive play that earned Harriman the victory.

:Pyou are correct a wet field is suposed to be an equalizer, but give the devils credit they hang on to the same wet footballs as did the indians, coaching and the desire to win was the difference in this game

Edited October 9, 2005 by AngelCoach

[goosevol]

Harriman has not allowed a point in three region games.

I don't know what's wrong with Oneida on offense. Turnovers killed them against Harriman and Coalfield. They seemed to collapse against Midway in the second half and they needed overtime before they scored against Oakdale.

They'd better get things straightened out quick or they'll miss the playoffs. Right now they still control their own destiny and I wish them the best.