Scrimmages....... win or lose? NOT!!!

[AggiesAreWe]

Hey--is this a practice thread for smackers--if so, you guys can do better than that.  So far some of you are really inhaling. 

If the field is marked and the referrees have whistles--its a game !! If you win then it counts--if you loose--call it a do-over!! ;D

Never in my 44 years have I seen a scrimmage result recorded in a team's win-loss column. :

[Guest band of brothers]

WE ARE, IN FACT, KICKING A DEAD HORSE!

[Guest WeedBegone]

WE ARE, IN FACT, KICKING A DEAD HORSE!

Hey--is this a practice thread for smackers--if so, you guys can do better than that.  So far some of you are really inhaling. 

If the field is marked and the referrees have whistles--its a game !! If you win then it counts--if you loose--call it a do-over!! ;D

Never in my 44 years have I seen a scrimmage result recorded in a team's win-loss column. :

No --we are scrimmaging in the forum.  We need to get our fingers ready for 10-14 weeks of typing.

Aggies--i agree with you totally on the official records.  I was just kidding by referring to the area outside the locker room frequented by parents and other experts who are ready to greet the coaches and share their opinions about whats they have observed.  To many--the whole season is judged by what they saw in the first scrimmage.  Myself, I believe the scrimmage is a good indication to see what areas a team may be lacking in depth.  But believe me--some coaches may feel the pressure of trying to make a good impression.

[AggiesAreWe]

WE ARE, IN FACT, KICKING A DEAD HORSE!

Hey--is this a practice thread for smackers--if so, you guys can do better than that.  So far some of you are really inhaling. 

If the field is marked and the referrees have whistles--its a game !! If you win then it counts--if you loose--call it a do-over!! ;D

Never in my 44 years have I seen a scrimmage result recorded in a team's win-loss column. :

No --we are scrimmaging in the forum.  We need to get our fingers ready for 10-14 weeks of typing.

Aggies--i agree with you totally on the official records.  I was just kidding by referring to the area outside the locker room frequented by parents and other experts who are ready to greet the coaches and share their opinions about whats they have observed.  To many--the whole season is judged by what they saw in the first scrimmage.  Myself, I believe the scrimmage is a good indication to see what areas a team may be lacking in depth.  But believe me--some coaches may feel the pressure of trying to make a good impression.

Totally agree with this comment.

[Gasilla]

Like I said, the question wasn't about someone giving more effort than the other. But for someone to tell me that team A "lost" a scrimmage to team B when team A's 1st team out scores team B's 1st team, let's say, 5-1 in dominating fashion, but team B's second and third teams outscore team A's second and third teams 6-1, that's crazy. Scrimmages are about how you perform, not the score. 

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.

[AggiesAreWe]

Like I said, the question wasn't about someone giving more effort than the other. But for someone to tell me that team A "lost" a scrimmage to team B when team A's 1st team out scores team B's 1st team, let's say, 5-1 in dominating fashion, but team B's second and third teams outscore team A's second and third teams 6-1, that's crazy. Scrimmages are about how you perform, not the score. 

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 suggesting that scrimmages are meaningless. But, scrimmages aren't meaningful enough to get a "win" or "loss" tag attached to it.

As for this theory only applying to 5A schools, I beg to differ. Silsbee has a 2nd team offense and defense with maybe just a couple of 2 way players in the mix. I went to Newton's scrimmage last Saturday against Center, and they ran 2nd team offense and defense. Newton is 2A, Center 3A and not a big 3A at that. In this scrimmage Newton 1st team tied Center's 1st team 1-1, but Center's 2nd teamers out scored Newton's 2-1. Do I think Center has a better team because they "won" this scrimmage? Absolutely not.

[tam2121]

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.

People keep saying Wo-s got their butts kicked 28-21 isn't a butt kickin. I know what your going to say, Dayton turned the ball over. Most of the time turnovers are caused by the other team and if you are a great team, you can overcome turnovers. Giving up 21 points to a team that you supposedly manhandled isn't good. Although Wo-s needs to work on alot of things.  Dayton does also. Doesn't mean in a real game that Wo-s would be manhandled. Although Dayton might have looked great offensive, defensively to give up 21(whether because of turnovers or not) shows you have enough work of your own to do. great teams will keep teams out the endzone regardless of a turnover.

[JS]

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.

People keep saying Wo-s got their butts kicked 28-21 isn't a butt kickin. I know what your going to say, Dayton turned the ball over. Most of the time turnovers are caused by the other team and if you are a great team, you can overcome turnovers. Giving up 21 points to a team that you supposedly manhandled isn't good. Although Wo-s needs to work on alot of things.  Dayton does also. Doesn't mean in a real game that Wo-s would be manhandled. Although Dayton might have looked great offensive, defensively to give up 21(whether because of turnovers or not) shows you have enough work of your own to do. great teams will keep teams out the endzone regardless of a turnover.

on the scoreboard it was a very close game but there is no question who the better was on that day--and on that day WOS was soundly beaten in every stat other than the one that counts

[Guest Kelly Football]

You are correct but your Coaches studied game film etc and played this like a real game as far as preparations go. WO-S didn't.

[AggiesAreWe]

You are correct but your Coaches studied game film etc and played this like a real game as far as preparations go. WO-S didn't.

I think Gasilla, who is a WOS fan, would disagree with that assessment.

[JS]

You are correct but your Coaches studied game film etc and played this like a real game as far as preparations go. WO-S didn't.

I really do not know how either teams coaching staff prepared or executed a game plan--that is not my job---but I do know that in regular game Dugat and Green(other starters as well) would not have been on the sidelines with the backup QB playing the entire 2nd half

[Guest Kelly Football]

The WOS coaches told me if it would have been a "Real" game then they would have GAME prepared, they didn't game prepare for a scrimmage as far as Film goes, scouting etc.

[JS]

The WOS coaches told me if it would have been a "Real" game then they would have GAME prepared, they didn't game prepare for a scrimmage as far as Film goes, scouting etc.

any way you slice it---for the first time that I can remember Dayton looked a heck of a lot better that WOS----it may not mean anything at all but is is a fact none the less

[texans]

You are correct but your Coaches studied game film etc and played this like a real game as far as preparations go. WO-S didn't.

How do you know what the coaches did.  Were you in the locker room.  WOS wants to win everytime they step on the field just like Dayton does.  That is why both teams win year in and year out.  That is what we like about WOS they dont make excuses they go out and try and whip your butt.  Just a scrimmage is the comments that losers make.

[adminbaberuth]

The WOS coaches told me if it would have been a "Real" game then they would have GAME prepared, they didn't game prepare for a scrimmage as far as Film goes, scouting etc.

Kelly, are you saying that Dayton would have lost the scrimmage if the Stangs had prepared ?

[Guest Kelly Football]

Well the Stangs beat Dayton TWICE in REAL games when they were prepared!!!!!!!!!

[JS]

Well the Stangs beat Dayton TWICE in REAL games when they were prepared!!!!!!!!!

you did not answer the question

[Guest Kelly Football]

They beat them twice before for game Preparation! You saying WO-S would have lost anyway even being game prepared??????????????????????????

[Gasilla]

You are correct but your Coaches studied game film etc and played this like a real game as far as preparations go. WO-S didn't.

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.

[stangchain]

I don't normally disagree with you, Gas, but I think the coaches prepared to scrimmage....I know, I know, they want to win, I know that.  However, they prepared to coach the kids during the scrimmage; they did not expect to be "outcoached" in a scrimmage because the other side watched game films.

[7mary3]

Its that old saying, "If it didn't matter than why do we keep score?", believe me it matters, scrimmage or not.

[dayton]

Scrimmages are practice for ... real games. So why is it so bad to prepare like it's a real game?? Lumberton or whoever may choose not to, but why is Dayton made out to be chumps because they watched some film and attended a first scrimmage?

One thing I can say for dayton is that the coaches don't just expect the kids to get better. They are constantly trying to be better coaches. If that means scouting some scrimmages and watching tape, I'm sure they don't mind the flack.

[bh34]

I want to admit that I was totally wrong about how much scrimmages matter.  I saw were BH did pretty well against a pretty good Pasadena team, who is 5a.  So now based on that scrimmage I am sure the BH will not only win their district, but I'm sure they will win State. 

I don't think anyone is saying that the players shouldn't play hard in a scrimmage, of course they should.  Anytime they are at practise, they should be going 100% no matter what their doing.  I think what me and others are saying is, you can't base how good your year is going to be because of a scrimmage.  Like BH two years ago, everyone said they were sorry because they didn't do well against WOS in a scrimmage.  Then they went 10-0, and played Central very well in the playoffs.  How many times have you seen a team do well in scrimmages or preseason and then lose most of their district games, the pro's the same thing.  Everyone go's overboard, one way or the other, just based on the out come of a scrimmage. 

It doesn't really matter now, because next week is the real deal.  I can't wait!  Good luck to everyone, well, not to Dayton, Crosby, Memorial, North Forest, King, etc..etc..LOL...just kidding!  Good luck to all the teams!

[Gasilla]

I don't normally disagree with you, Gas, but I think the coaches prepared to scrimmage....I know, I know, they want to win, I know that.  However, they prepared to coach the kids during the scrimmage; they did not expect to be "outcoached" in a scrimmage because the other side watched game films.

I agree with you. I am not saying that they are preparing to win a scrimmage, I know they don't watch films and scout the other team. I'm saying that the outcome is important. Not on your record, but on how your team has progressed. If it were just practice then why go thru the trouble of arranging and playing them in all kinds of conditions like we have the last few weeks. If the outcome doesn't matter, then why do it at all? Why risk having players injured? It's because coaches need to see how they stack up against someone else and how they perform against that team matters, it matters a lot.

[AggiesAreWe]

I don't normally disagree with you, Gas, but I think the coaches prepared to scrimmage....I know, I know, they want to win, I know that.  However, they prepared to coach the kids during the scrimmage; they did not expect to be "outcoached" in a scrimmage because the other side watched game films.

I agree with you. I am not saying that they are preparing to win a scrimmage, I know they don't watch films and scout the other team. I'm saying that the outcome is important. Not on your record, but on how your team has progressed. If it were just practice then why go thru the trouble of arranging and playing them in all kinds of conditions like we have the last few weeks. If the outcome doesn't matter, then why do it at all? Why risk having players injured? It's because coaches need to see how they stack up against someone else and how they perform against that team matters, it matters a lot.

See Gasilla, this is what I have been talking about all along. It matters how the team performs, not if they "win" or "lose" the scrimmage.