District 3AAA Week 9

[Knoxvul]

The onsides kicks were irritating to watch when Central was scoring against our second string. The game was far out of reach at that point.

I agree! Very irritating. Also irritating to watch your offensive starters play so late in the game with the "game far out of reach"

[MavMaximus]

I agree! Very irritating. Also irritating to watch your offensive starters play so late in the game with the "game far out of reach"

Onsides kicks are one thing.  Getting your starters reps against quality opposition, particularly when your starting QB isn't able to play, is another. 

[Knoxvul]

Onsides kicks are one thing. Getting your starters reps against quality opposition, particularly when your starting QB isn't able to play, is another.

So you are saying the Central defense was "quality" opposition? Come on now MavMax!

[MavMaximus]

So you are saying the Central defense was "quality" opposition? Come on now MavMax!

My mistake, I thought you were referring to the Catholic game.  We didn't leave our starters in late in the Central game.  We did leave them in a little long against Catholic when that game was out of reach for us.

[Knoxvul]

My mistake, I thought you were referring to the Catholic game. We didn't leave our starters in late in the Central game. We did leave them in a little long against Catholic when that game was out of reach for us.

Might wanna go back and check on that. I saw offensive starters in the game in the 4th qtr. Neither here nor there, just as irritating as the onside kicks.

[MavMaximus]

Might wanna go back and check on that. I saw offensive starters in the game in the 4th qtr. Neither here nor there, just as irritating as the onside kicks.

Ha, I don't remember it that way but oh well.  I do have the game recorded on DVR so if I get motivated enough I'll check that out.

[Mav4life]

Starters were in late in the Central game, but with that said do you think maybe that was done to make sure we get the win comfortably?  I mean we scored 60 on them last year and only won by 20 and this year we won by 24, Maybe they just wanted to make sure with the Athletes Central had to get into the fourth with that large lead to keep from having to put the starters back in late in the game and risk injury...just a thought, but from the way I remember our starters did play some on into the 4th qtr, but as soon as they came out Central scored 15 so maybe had we taken them out right after halftime Central could have easily put up 21-28 in the second half on our 2nd string then we would have had to put them back in cold and that is a bigger risk of injury than playing them on into the 4th.  If our 2nd string played the 2nd half than I could have easily seen that game getting a lot closer quick.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Mav4life

[Knoxvul]

Starters were in late in the Central game, but with that said do you think maybe that was done to make sure we get the win comfortably? I mean we scored 60 on them last year and only won by 20 and this year we won by 24, Maybe they just wanted to make sure with the Athletes Central had to get into the fourth with that large lead to keep from having to put the starters back in late in the game and risk injury...just a thought, but from the way I remember our starters did play some on into the 4th qtr, but as soon as they came out Central scored 15 so maybe had we taken them out right after halftime Central could have easily put up 21-28 in the second half on our 2nd string then we would have had to put them back in cold and that is a bigger risk of injury than playing them on into the 4th. If our 2nd string played the 2nd half than I could have easily seen that game getting a lot closer quick.

We will agree to disagree. Again, neither here nor there. Just stated what was irritating to me. No need to come to the defense of MavMax. He handled it well and we moved on.

[Mav4life]

We will agree to disagree. Again, neither here nor there. Just stated what was irritating to me. No need to come to the defense of MavMax. He handled it well and we moved on.

Didn't know I was disagreeing?  Didn't I say we had the starters in late in the game?  Also was not "defending" Mav Max, I was just giving possibility as to why we might have left them in, I actually think it shows how much of a drop off right now there is in AC's 2nd string

[Knoxvul]

Didn't know I was disagreeing? Didn't I say we had the starters in late in the game? Also was not "defending" Mav Max, I was just giving possibility as to why we might have left them in, I actually think it shows how much of a drop off right now there is in AC's 2nd string

I'm just saying that I believe there are motives behind it. I should also point out that I sometimes think that way about my team. Especially in recent weeks. Granted, I'm not going to ask kids to lay down and if the 2's and 3's are in, I expect them to go just as hard.

[Mav4life]

I'm just saying that I believe there are motives behind it. I should also point out that I sometimes think that way about my team. Especially in recent weeks. Granted, I'm not going to ask kids to lay down and if the 2's and 3's are in, I expect them to go just as hard.

I can see that, I just think there is a huge difference in AC and Fulton right now when talking about Talent, AC has a bigger drop off right now in the 2's and 3's than what a lot of the better teams in the area do.  I also never said I agreed with the starters being in so late, just that that may be the reason why, Central could probably put 35pts on our 2nd string in 2 qtrs no problem and that is a huge concern for us right now, I do think that we could have taken our starting backfield out after halftime and not have lost much on that side of the ball...that I do agree with and think is taking a huge risk on injuring a starting back

[BEAMERBALLMAVERICK]

AC 56 Halls 7

OR 42 Central 7

CC 35 Karns 28

Gibbs 35 Powell 7

Clinton 35 Sequoyah 14