Gasilla

Is those players Stephen Cook and Matthew Provost? If so, they are two of the best defenders on the team. YES ONE OF THEM IS STEPHEN COOK, THE OTHER IS JACOBY ROBERTS. MATTHEW PROVOST IS NOT INJURED, JUST NOT GETTING THE PLAYING TIME HE DESERVES IN MY OPINION. KEEP YOUR HEAD UP YOUNG MAN YOUR TIME IS COMING VERY SOON. Well those players being out explains alot. They will be fine when they get back. Provost is an excellent player. I never understood why he wasn't getting alot of playing time. If I'm not mistaken, Provost is #81 and he is on the field most of the time. i think he plays both offense and defense. Another thing, I was very impressed with the Vidor Wing-T. I think it's a perfect offense for their personnell. They will not be 2-8 this year.

I've never seen 36 seniors beat 11 good football players.

They scored 21.

I think a Raider fan in another thread about this scrimmage said that lumbertons "vaunted" defense would be able to get more pressure on the QB than WOS did. Kind of funny, Lumberton makes the playoffs for the first time in history and all of a sudden they are better than a perenial defensive power house, without even seeing the team they are playing! Then they play that team and don't even sniff said QB... AWESOME! :D

Hopefully the team and Coaches will come around. I don't think we have anything to worry about. The offense moved the ball well, just made some mistakes inside the 20. Had 2 TD's called back. The defense played well in the first half. Vidor didn't move the ball that well. In the second half they wore us out and got a couple of late TD's. That wont happen when we have the starters back and in the rotation.

That's funny. You don't become "the team to beat" by proxy. You do it by beating everyone else year in and year out. You become "the team to beat" by, historically, owning the teams around you.

I think we've still got some work to do, but I feel better about this scrimmage than last weeks. Hypo threw the ball much better, he set his feet much better, but he's still waiting a little to late. He had more time, so the line blocked better. We had some pretty good runs by Hypo and Garret. Really, we moved the ball well between the 20's we just made some mistakes in the red zone which cost us points. I think we had 3 drives end inside the 20 with no points. I'm not worried about the defense. Vidor didn't have much success moving the ball in the first half. In the second half I feel like they wore us out, but, for those who don't know, we are missing our 2 starting defensive tackles who are out with injury. Not only does that kill you by not having them, but it also hurts your depth because their backups have no one to fill in for them. Over all, I was encouraged because we showed some improvement. Yeah, we tied Vidor, but I think Vidor is going to surprise some folks this year. That big old running back is a load and the Wing T is hell to defend.

OrangeFBfan, I totally agree with you. But, there are some Mustang fans who would disagree with you. It's not just a scrimmage to them, you know who you are. Are you trying to call me out or something? Yeah, I know who I am and my feelings about these scrimmages has not changed a bit and never will. Last night showed us EXACTLY where we are right now. We know what we need to work on. And another thing, there was no "second team" on the field last night at any time for either team. There were backups that filled in, but that's it. This was an extra game that both teams had the benefit of playing. Now, as for you, we are not going to agree on this, EVER. So you will be doing good by just dropping this and stop trying to pick a fight with me.

I've got to go by there this morning. I'll give a report on the field condition later. If I know Dan, that field will get mowed and the grass will be short as possible.

Was Asa wearing #4 or #21?

I think Gasilla, who is a WOS fan, would disagree with that assessment. Yes I would. I know they did not watch game film, but they prepared to win and tried to win and were beaten, soundly, by the better team that night. Those of you who say the game was close didn't see it.

I can totally see your point if you're talking about 5A teams that actually have platoon substitutions, but we both follow 3A schools and neither of them have the luxury of having a 2nd "team", they have 2nd string players that rotate in with the first string players. Not very often do you see more than 2 or 3 second teamers out there with the rest of the starters. The whole, "they scored on our "B" team" thing is usually more like they scored while we had a couple of 2nd string players on the field. Anyway, it's a good little debate that's beginning to get old. I just think these scrimmages mean way more than some want to admit. It's just to easy to say, "it was JUST a scrimmage". Now, I do not see why on earth a coaching staff would scout a scrimmage. Seems like a waste of man power, but I bet that, if Dayton did scout Lumberton. It had more to do with a potential match up in the playoffs than it did winning their scrimmage.

I am not debating the fact that you should practice hard or play hard in these scrimmages. You should always do that. I agree, it builds champions. But my point is the fact that some fans want to hang their hat on a scrimmage "win" or "loss". Too many variables go on during a scrimmage that would not give an accurate account to some team winning or losing. If team A scores 3 times and team B scores 2 times then all that means is team A had better results, no win or loss. It's just that simple. Sure are a lot of semantics going on here. The problem I have, and others do to, is that those fans from teams who lose always try to downplay a scrimmage when they lose. Scrimmages ARE an indication of where your team is, like it or not. Those people who come on here and say, "well, they were trying to win and we were just practicing" it's just a bunch of BS. They are trying to make themselves feel better about getting pushed around, whether you want to call it a loss or "having lesser results", it's all the same to me. Does that mean your team will have a bad year... no. It shows you where you need to improve and that's why you do it and you can't know that these areas need improving if you weren't giving a winning effort or the same effort that your opponent was giving. If you were giving less, then what would be the point of scrimmaging?

Being a 4qtr game scrimmage and vidor being so close, I'll bet it's going to be packed.

You try different things and different kids in different positions, but you are still playing to win. The coaches are playing to win and the fans who claim it doesn't matter are just trying to make themselves feel better. WOS got their butts kicked, but no one is here saying it doesn't matter. Oh heck yeah it matters, glad we won't be playing Dayton this year when it counts. No, it does not count on your record, but it IS an indication of where your team is and how they are progressing. So, yeah, it matters and their ARE winners and losers whether it shows on your record or not.

Don't worry about the haters man. WOS get's the same crap every year about these game scrimmages, "Oh, were were just trying different things... blah, blah blah". WOS treats them the same way and plays to win every time too. The subs get in when they get in, but those teams who do not prepare to win are the same ones who rarely see week 11 and never see week 12.

I bet it's due to all of the rain.

Ripoff or not, I like the cover. At least someone around is going above and beyond for what should be considered a national, or at least a state, holiday... week 0.

Ouch!!

I don't claim to know a lot about the spread or football in general, but to me dayton has been effective with a smaller athletic type O-line. I haven't seen BC but that may be what stump is going for rather he has bigger guys or not. the gaps are so much bigger with the spread I don't think real big lineman are entirely necessary. But, they do have to be able to block well like you mentioned and i'm sure that is improving daily with stump there. I'm no expert either, but from the coaches I've talked with and from what I've seen, you are correct, the spread actually helps to compensate for a small, athletic line. The gaps are bigger and you rely more on changing a defenders momentum more than power blocking them off the line. I think the spread will work at BC, just give it time. You can't compare what PNG did to BC. It's apples and oranges. PNG has the big physical power type of personnel to run the power game and be successful. BC does not. I think this is a good move on Stumps part.

I wouldn't say the pulled "the starters". They pulled Dugat and Green, the rest were the same. The back up QB looked very sharp. They didn't miss a beat in the passing game with him in there.

Well, all I can say is this year would not be a good year to renew the rivalry with Dayton. From what I saw out of Dayton last night, Liberty does not want one ounce of them.

Good to see Jasper back on the radar again. I've always kept an eye on them due to the rivalry they have with WOS. A couple of years ago, I watched their Freshman and JV teams lose to Orangefield while their varisty was man handled by them. I couldn't help but think that they were on a downward spiral. It looks like Brooks has turned that around and it's good to see. He's a great coach!

I thought they looked scrappy. They only gave up 14 points as one of the TD's was an INT returned for a TD. One of the 2 TD'S they did give up was when the offense turned the ball over on the 3. They did some bending, but didn't break. We drove inside the 10 a couple of times and came away with no points. Overall, they looked pretty good.

#13 is the starting QB. He played, nearly, the entire game because he needs the reps. WOS will be fine. In 2000, we lost a scrimmage to Lumberton then went on to the 4A state finals. We knew Dayton would be good, they went to the semi-finals in 4A last year and return most of that team. It was a good test and showed us what we have to work on. Good luck to Dayton.