Pearl-Cohn at MBA

[VandyHoosiers]

I think Pearl Cohn might pull this one out. I expect them to rip off a number of big plays against this MBA defense. In the past two years, the Big Red have fallen victim to the big play numerous times under their new defensive coordinator. I don't see that changing. Really wish MBA had a great defensive coordinator like they did pre-2008.

[mobile24]

Thats the huge difference in MBA football. The staff every year comes back with less experience and little continuity. Coach Elliotts departure continues to be the most glaring and the defensive schemes since he left leave lots to be desired. Nothing against current staff just lacks experience. Lots of great coaches are no longer on the hill:Elliott,Redmond,Sutton,Matthews,Counce Sr,Counce Jr,Black,Rutledge,Hiett,Caudill,Moran,Mittens,Whitfield have all left in the last 3 or 4 years. The consistancy of the staff has always been a strength of the program. Sign of the times I guess. Looking forward to Friday night and a great season from th Big Red.

[shakinthefat]

Thats the huge difference in MBA football. The staff every year comes back with less experience and little continuity. Coach Elliotts departure continues to be the most glaring and the defensive schemes since he left leave lots to be desired. Nothing against current staff just lacks experience. Lots of great coaches are no longer on the hill:Elliott,Redmond,Sutton,Matthews,Counce Sr,Counce Jr,Black,Rutledge,Hiett,Caudill,Moran,Mittens,Whitfield have all left in the last 3 or 4 years. The consistancy of the staff has always been a strength of the program. Sign of the times I guess. Looking forward to Friday night and a great season from th Big Red.

 

From 2006 to 2009 points allowed average for MBA, BA, Ensworth

MBA - 16.1 pts

BA - 14.8 pts

EHS - 15.5 pts

Not much "glaring" difference!

[KWoodroof]

Thats the huge difference in MBA football. The staff every year comes back with less experience and little continuity. Coach Elliotts departure continues to be the most glaring and the defensive schemes since he left leave lots to be desired. Nothing against current staff just lacks experience. Lots of great coaches are no longer on the hill:Elliott,Redmond,Sutton,Matthews,Counce Sr,Counce Jr,Black,Rutledge,Hiett,Caudill,Moran,Mittens,Whitfield have all left in the last 3 or 4 years. The consistancy of the staff has always been a strength of the program. Sign of the times I guess. Looking forward to Friday night and a great season from th Big Red.

Of the names you mention, only coach Elliott was at MBA for what I would consider a long period of time (although I can't place how long Caudill was there). Certainly I'd love to see him still out there (more because of the quality and class he brought to the school than his contributions to the football team), but change is inevitable. And MBA has done fairly well with young coaches over the years...Allen, Owen, and Bowers come to mind. I don't think there are any major problems on the Hill, and I certainly don't see any with the coaching staff.

[rollredroll]

Sure, there has been some turnover, and with a new participant in the game heckbent on throwing enough money at something until it sticks, the threat of turnover will likely continue. Yet, even with the changes, sometimes year-to-year, some trends have emerged in the DII era for MBA:

 

> The two head coaching changes have resulted in state titles in the new coaches' first years

> All three coaching eras have featured blockbuster out-of-state opponents (Bolles, Trinity, Byrnes, Moeller)

> All three coaching eras have featured MBA teams that don't like to lose twice to the same team in the same season and don't fall victim to the "hard to beat a good team twice in the same season" theory....

 

DII Era 1 '97-'01: 2-2 avenging a loss in the same season, 5-0 protecting an earlier win in the same season

DII Era 2 '02-'06: 4-1 avenging, 2-1 protecting

DII Era 3 '07-'09: 3-0 avenging, 2-0 protecting

 

If someone wants to call it paralysis by analysis, I can accept it, but if you look beyond the numbers, there's a very strong argument that tradition and pride carry over from year to year in any era. To me, these numbers really speak loudly: MBA has avenged a loss 75% of the time; their opponents have avenged losses only 10% of the time. And, for what it's worth, those 9 avenged victories haven't been cheapies: 8 of the 9 have been double-digit turnarounds, and 2 of those have been 40+ point turnarounds.

 

Heck, just the BA games alone speak volumes. MBA is 4-for-4 in flipping the tables on BA when losing to BA earlier in the regular season and 2-0 when facing BA in the playoffs ('00 and '07 title games) after beating BA earlier in the year. And these, too, are trends that have carried over all three eras.

 

I think the past doesn't play much, if any, role in a single game scenario. MBA's 15-0 record versus P-C will likely not be in any of the kids' minds on the field at kickoff tomorrow. And, as they say on Wall Street, past performance is not an indication of future returns. But, I think anyone who saw the three regular season games versus EHS, BGA, and BA last year and then saw what happened in the playoffs against the same three would have a difficult time not believing that there's something in the water on West End that's working.

[wingman10]

This is the game to weatch in Metro this week

[KWoodroof]

This is the game to weatch in Metro this week

I always believe the world should come to a halt while MBA plays. But I would have expected Father Ryan-Overton to have generated a little more noise than it has.

[56dad]

Pearl-Cohn will play well...lots of speed and some good line size. Absolutely pummeled Hillsboro in a scrimmage..ran thru Hillsboro's defense like it was not even there. Should be a good game. MBA by 10.

[cbg]

Sure, there has been some turnover, and with a new participant in the game heckbent on throwing enough money at something until it sticks, the threat of turnover will likely continue. Yet, even with the changes, sometimes year-to-year, some trends have emerged in the DII era for MBA:

 

> The two head coaching changes have resulted in state titles in the new coaches' first years

> All three coaching eras have featured blockbuster out-of-state opponents (Bolles, Trinity, Byrnes, Moeller)

> All three coaching eras have featured MBA teams that don't like to lose twice to the same team in the same season and don't fall victim to the "hard to beat a good team twice in the same season" theory....

 

DII Era 1 '97-'01: 2-2 avenging a loss in the same season, 5-0 protecting an earlier win in the same season

DII Era 2 '02-'06: 4-1 avenging, 2-1 protecting

DII Era 3 '07-'09: 3-0 avenging, 2-0 protecting

 

If someone wants to call it paralysis by analysis, I can accept it, but if you look beyond the numbers, there's a very strong argument that tradition and pride carry over from year to year in any era. To me, these numbers really speak loudly: MBA has avenged a loss 75% of the time; their opponents have avenged losses only 10% of the time. And, for what it's worth, those 9 avenged victories haven't been cheapies: 8 of the 9 have been double-digit turnarounds, and 2 of those have been 40+ point turnarounds.

 

Heck, just the BA games alone speak volumes. MBA is 4-for-4 in flipping the tables on BA when losing to BA earlier in the regular season and 2-0 when facing BA in the playoffs ('00 and '07 title games) after beating BA earlier in the year. And these, too, are trends that have carried over all three eras.

 

I think the past doesn't play much, if any, role in a single game scenario. MBA's 15-0 record versus P-C will likely not be in any of the kids' minds on the field at kickoff tomorrow. And, as they say on Wall Street, past performance is not an indication of future returns. But, I think anyone who saw the three regular season games versus EHS, BGA, and BA last year and then saw what happened in the playoffs against the same three would have a difficult time not believing that there's something in the water on West End that's working.

 

The new participant in D2AA that is throwing $$$$ around is not the only school that has gained an advantage. Back before D2 was formed and schools that gave financial aid could only have three student athletes on the football team that received financial aid there was much more parity. With schools now allowed to have no set number of student athletes receiving financial aid MBA has excelled. MBA had some very strong teams before D2 but when the rules changed and they could throw around as much and often times more money than other schools the program went to another level. I am not saying that MBA is doing anything wrong but when the TSSAA formed D2 and the financial aid rules changed you now have the haves and the have nots and MBA is one of the haves. Let's be honest and say that the Big Red has thrown around a few bucks to kids that have helped make their football team play at a higher level on a regular basis.

 

As for turning the tables on teams that have defeated MBA I would like to know when the Big Red is going to play Byrnes again? Will MBA be making a trip to Duncan, SC in the next coulple of years? I am sure that the Big Red faithful could stop in @ the Beacon and order a chili cheeseburger a pleanty from Ole JC before the game.

Edited August 20, 2010 by cbg

[msms06]

The Big Red will handle Pearl-Cohn! Pearl-Cohn does have one or two D1 players (well one for sure...the kid going to Duke) and they looked good at the Vandy 7-7 from what I saw. However, Pearl-Cohn's players are not discipline enough to beat the likes of MBA or other private schools nor do they have the heart or composure to do so. If I remember correctly they also lost to BGA last year as well... a team they should have beat! If If Pearl-Cohn is to have any chance of beating the Big Red they will have to play as a TEAM...an quite frankly I don't think they can on their best day! Speaking of beatings if I remember correctly Thats EXACTLY what they took from the BIG REG last year. Get ready for history to repeat itself! Pearl-Cohn is VERY OVERATED!

 

 

MBA 35

 

Pearl-Cohn 14

[msms06]

The Big Red will handle Pearl-Cohn! Pearl-Cohn does have one or two D1 players (well one for sure...the kid going to Duke) and they looked good at the Vandy 7-7 from what I saw. However, Pearl-Cohn's players are not discipline enough to beat the likes of MBA or other private schools nor do they have the heart or composure to do so. If I remember correctly they also lost to BGA last year as well... a team they should have beat! If If Pearl-Cohn is to have any chance of beating the Big Red they will have to play as a TEAM...an quite frankly I don't think they can on their best day! Speaking of beatings if I remember correctly Thats EXACTLY what they took from the BIG REG last year. Get ready for history to repeat itself! Pearl-Cohn is VERY OVERATED!

 

 

MBA 35

How dare you say that Pearl Cohn should have beaten BGA last year. We beat them and MBA what is your point.

Pearl-Cohn 14

[shakinthefat]

Sure, there has been some turnover, and with a new participant in the game heckbent on throwing enough money at something until it sticks, the threat of turnover will likely continue. Yet, even with the changes, sometimes year-to-year, some trends have emerged in the DII era for MBA:

 

> The two head coaching changes have resulted in state titles in the new coaches' first years

> All three coaching eras have featured blockbuster out-of-state opponents (Bolles, Trinity, Byrnes, Moeller)

> All three coaching eras have featured MBA teams that don't like to lose twice to the same team in the same season and don't fall victim to the "hard to beat a good team twice in the same season" theory....

 

DII Era 1 '97-'01: 2-2 avenging a loss in the same season, 5-0 protecting an earlier win in the same season

DII Era 2 '02-'06: 4-1 avenging, 2-1 protecting

DII Era 3 '07-'09: 3-0 avenging, 2-0 protecting

 

If someone wants to call it paralysis by analysis, I can accept it, but if you look beyond the numbers, there's a very strong argument that tradition and pride carry over from year to year in any era. To me, these numbers really speak loudly: MBA has avenged a loss 75% of the time; their opponents have avenged losses only 10% of the time. And, for what it's worth, those 9 avenged victories haven't been cheapies: 8 of the 9 have been double-digit turnarounds, and 2 of those have been 40+ point turnarounds.

 

Heck, just the BA games alone speak volumes. MBA is 4-for-4 in flipping the tables on BA when losing to BA earlier in the regular season and 2-0 when facing BA in the playoffs ('00 and '07 title games) after beating BA earlier in the year. And these, too, are trends that have carried over all three eras.

 

I think the past doesn't play much, if any, role in a single game scenario. MBA's 15-0 record versus P-C will likely not be in any of the kids' minds on the field at kickoff tomorrow. And, as they say on Wall Street, past performance is not an indication of future returns. But, I think anyone who saw the three regular season games versus EHS, BGA, and BA last year and then saw what happened in the playoffs against the same three would have a difficult time not believing that there's something in the water on West End that's working.

 

So there is a possibility of a "wall street collaspe" tonight on West End?

Don't think so. I'm going with historical averages even though the kids play one game at a time.

Edited August 20, 2010 by shakinthefat