King William 33 West Point 20 10 min left
- Thread starter kwhs95fan
- Start date
39 KW WP 26 Final. WP driving to tie with about 15 seconds to go at the KW 12 yd line and KW with a pick six to seal it
WP's #23 averaged 11 yards per carry and #44 averaged 14 yards per carry. These YPC averages have been consistent the entire season (as well as last season). Either one of them could have easily covered the 5 yards for the TD and the follow on 2 pt conversion for the win. #23 and #44 were never in the backfield together the entire game because of a perpetuated myth that they do not have the stamina to play both ways the entire game. #23 had 5 carries for about 55 yards and and #44 had 11 carries for about 150 yards. In contrast, WP's two other runners (who never came out of the backfield) had a combined 26 carries for 4 ypc and 6 ypc respectively.
#23 and #44 are 200+ pound bruisers and could have attrited KW's defense by halftime. It would have been a different outcome if #23 and #44 were in the backfield together and given some of those other 26 carries. WP's refusal to adjust the backfield when playing tougher opponents is the same reason Rapp was up by 6 points for 4 quarters and almost beat WP and the same reason WP lost to Colonial Beach--not putting the best 11 on the offense every down and choosing to run less productive backs instead of running the more productive backs. Friday night was Senior night at WP in more ways than one and WP lost the game because of it. Stats don't lie, look them up. If WP doesn't acknowledge this problem and adjust, it will be doubtful they can move forward in the playoffs against better teams.
Kicking short to give KW the ball on the 50 wasn't too smart either, considering WP already knew they were not consistently stopping KW's offense and KW was capable of long sustained drives. The one 68 yard deep kick WP did kick was well covered by WP and pinned KW inside their 5. So I'm not sure why WP did not continue to do what worked and instead gave KW a short field all night. WP's kicker and backup kicker can both kick the ball deep and accurately.
I don't see WP changing their backfield for the Charles City game; it will be a game they can use to pad their senior stats. But if they do the same backfield for the playoffs, don't expect a different outcome.
#23 and #44 are outstanding runners and Linebackers. Keyword: Linebackers, I am not going to post the 2 glaring stats that were left out and the sideline conversations in a public forum because that is for the TEAM Only!!! However, to the above poster. You have tried several times to get a response and this will be the only one you will get. So with that being said have a good rest of the season "WATCHING" West Point Football!!!
All I am saying is that if your same offense plan did not work for you against Rappahannock and Colonial Beach, then why would you do the same against KW and expect a different outcome? You had an 8-2 team last year and went 4-6 because you refused to adjust the offense plan. You had a 10-0 team this year and you are 7-2 (1 point from being 6-3) because you refuse to adjust your offense plan. The TEAM is not just the players and coaches--its the entire community; administrators, teachers, citizens, parents, etc. You owe it to the ENTIRE TEAM to put your 11 best on the field to win. So I hope you make the changes that need to be made so we all do have a good rest of the season as we face better teams in the playoffs.
I never said they didn't have good runs--what I'm saying is they could have had better runs if WP made an adjustment to the backfield for this game. The issue is asking a 155# RB to run against KW's defense without a lead blocker when you have two 200+ true fullbacks that could lead block for him. Asking your only remaining QB to run behind a 155# lead blocker against KW's defense when you have two true fullbacks to lead block for him instead. Not having #23 and #44 in the backfield at the same time was a major contributing factor to WP's loss. I'm sorry if that obvious truth hurts people's feelings.
Just to provide clarity for everyone reading this post - MGF is a parent that thinks his son should be getting more carries. He was also a coach that was fired from the staff he is now bashing.
Funny to me that MGF is bashing last years performances when he was part of that staff, and was part of that underachieving team. You have a lot of great ideas from the stands, but last year, I didn't see too many great ideas or creativity out of that defense you were in control of.
Funny to me that MGF is bashing last years performances when he was part of that staff, and was part of that underachieving team. You have a lot of great ideas from the stands, but last year, I didn't see too many great ideas or creativity out of that defense you were in control of.
I will say I did question Briggs not using the first timeout when they stopped KW on 3rd down with about 2 minutes left. That said, he might have made the right choice considering the methodical nature of the WP offense.
And it certainly makes sense to give breathers to key players when there's only 21 active. I commented during the game at how winded the WP offense seemed when they needed to be in hurry-up mode. Easy to say your kid is good enough to play 48 minutes, but my eyes told another story this past Friday vs. KW.
And it certainly makes sense to give breathers to key players when there's only 21 active. I commented during the game at how winded the WP offense seemed when they needed to be in hurry-up mode. Easy to say your kid is good enough to play 48 minutes, but my eyes told another story this past Friday vs. KW.
44 was not winded, he was playing with a separated shoulder--he was in pain. I find it hard to believe that you come to that assessment after watching him carry the ball and lead the D in tackles. 13 yards per carry after being on the offense for 37 plays and the defense for all but 1 play and with an injury. That doesn't support your assessment that he was winded. I don't think he's come off the field more than 2 or 3 times a game for the entire season.
I am taking a wild guess that number 44 must be your family of some sort?
There are excuses and there are reasons. Reasons can be supported with facts, like stats and video. Excuses cannot be supported by any facts, just opinions.
Myth: I was fired.
Fact: I made the decision not to return as a volunteer coach three months before the HC said he was not turning my name in as a volunteer. My reasons were the same as today--poor coaching, losing games we should have won and him blaming his loses on the players. 2016 was an 8-2 season but we went 4-6. 2017 was supposed to be a 10-0 season and we are 7-2 (1 point from being 6-3 with Rapp game).
Myth: I only want my son to have more carries.
Fact: Anyone who knows me, knows that I just want to win, I don't care who carries the ball so long as the choice makes sense. Losing games because you are hell bent on running the RB with the lowest YPC when you have 2 backs who have 2x-3x the YPC is simply setting yourself up to lose against tougher teams. The HC is the only coach I know who gives the most carries to the lowest YPC back.
Myth: #23 and #44 are LINEBACKERS not running backs.
Fact: These two players lead the team in YPC and tackles. Only a fool would argue that they are not the best RBs WP has had in years. Not taking anything away from the other RBs, just making a statement based on consistent stats over a two season period.
Myth: #23 and #44 do not have the stamina to carry the ball more.
Fact: Their YPC stats (11.2 and 13.1 respectively) suggest otherwise. I would call into play stamina if they were averaging less than 5 YPC. They play just about the entire game, while injured, and still crank out 2x-3x the YPC than other backs. The truth is the HC has yet to give either of them enough carries to determine what their stamina threshold is.
Myth: RB with less YPC is due to the D keying on him.
Fact: Scout video and game video will show this to be a convenient excuse. But for sake of argument, let's presume this excuse is true. What HC worth their salt would develop an offensive game plan that gives the most carries to the smallest RB with the lowest YPC without giving him a lead block if the HC thinks the D is keying on him? That game plan is doing nothing but setting that RB up for failure. The real reason we have RBs with low YPC is the HC insists on an offensive formation that is an extremely easy read for LBs and sending the smallest RB we have up tackle to tackle without a lead block. So the great irony to this great excuse is that the design of the offense and personnel in the backfield is causing the primary RB to have low YPC. All the while, you have two 200+ pound fullbacks that are taking turns sitting on the sideline instead of lead blocking for our smallest RB with the lowest YPC. Or how about run the RBs that the D is not "keying on"? Because you "think" they don't have the stamina. You just cannot make this up.
Myth: The halftime score with KW was because #23 and #44 played "like soft Bit$%es".
Fact: #23 and #44 gave 100% and both played with separated soldiers. A coach should recognize when a decline in performance is due to a physical injury and not for lack of effort. Certainly, no coach should be using that language as a "pep talk" at halftime, really not appropriate at any time. They were so soft that #44 lead the D with 13 tackles and #23 had 12 tackles. The halftime score was what it was because of two factors. Our DBs gave up some big passes and our offense not putting up points, which I covered completely above.
The last thing I will say is how sad is it that there are coaches that are so upset with being exposed with the truth that they are willing to threaten me with "keep my mouth shut on social media, or else"?
The point you are trying to make is moot. It changes nothing about the facts that I've stated. Give #44 a different name and everything I stated remains facts. I've advocated for #23 just as much and he is not my son. I've advocated for better lead blocking for #12 and he is not my son. I advocated for more carries for #12 last year the entire season, and he's not my son but my son was on the team with him last year. If it were all about my son, then I would have advocated for him to have more carries than #12 last year and that was not the case. It is about putting your best 11 on the field to win. So because my son is one of the best 11, he shouldn't play? So, what is your suggestion? Keep doing the same thing and expect a different outcome?
He's sounds like a disgruntled person who was asked not to be around anymore and can't handle it.
Everyone with any football knowledge knows that with no timeouts you throw the ball on 3rd down and if you don't get it you still have options on 4th down to run or pass. The kid didn't throw a pick on purpose - if its incomplete or a TD then you still have options. If you get stopped running it on 3rd down then there are no options - game over. Didn't WP running backs have a few fumbles earlier....
Bottom line is WP is many people believe they are a product of their schedule and can quiet the naysayers next Friday night in the playoffs.
Everyone with any football knowledge knows that with no timeouts you throw the ball on 3rd down and if you don't get it you still have options on 4th down to run or pass. The kid didn't throw a pick on purpose - if its incomplete or a TD then you still have options. If you get stopped running it on 3rd down then there are no options - game over. Didn't WP running backs have a few fumbles earlier....
Bottom line is WP is many people believe they are a product of their schedule and can quiet the naysayers next Friday night in the playoffs.
Separated shoulders and you want them to have more carries???
I didn't say 44 was winded. I said the WP offense appeared winded. 44 is a tank of a kid. No disrespect intended. I just don't think you run the ball with 14 seconds on 3rd down when the team hasn't show they can effectively hurry up when necessary.
Don't try to be rational with this guy, its a waste of time. You should see his FB comments, they are pure gold. Its so bad that sometimes it goes away from being funny and turns into being sad
You're reason not to return to coaching was because of poor coaching? You do realize you were part of that poor coaching correct?
You were so mad about not getting to coach anymore you took down all the Krossover film so nobody could watch it. Doesn't sound like someone who made the decision to not coach on their own does it?
I'm sorry you think my post was about the last play of the game. We have had fumbles every game. You don't want to go there because you would be surprised who leads the team in fumbles.
Play the bests
Krossover film has been debunked several times. Sad that you were put up to posting that for someone else.
You play the best 11 to get the game in hand early, then sub. Unless you want to lose early and then sub because there's no way you can catch up. Are there coaches out there that start second string in the first quarter against teams you know can beat you?
If a player can play nearly every down on both sides of the ball for four quarters and still put up 13-14 yards per carry, (and lead in tackles) how can you argue that he has a endurance problem?
He's enjoying his season just fine, except when he's called a "soft bit#%" and blamed for the loss by his coaches. He's a team player and does what he's told to do, even when he knows he's being lied to and used. He's got a pretty strong BS filter.
Your yards per carry theory sounds like a good one, but heck one carry of 47 yards can make yards per carry average in a game seem pretty good.
Very good point NND. How about 11 carries for 151 yards in the KW game alone? Remove his 62 yard TD run on his second carry of the game and you are left with 10 carries for 90 yards.
What can you extrapolate from this season's rush data?
Senior: 134 carries for 995 yards, 7.4 YPC.
Sophomore: 59 carries for 685 yards, 11.7 YPC.
Junior: 30 carries for 300 yards, 10.0 YPC.
Give the sophomore 134 carries and he has a 1,568 yard season.
Give the junior 134 carries and he has a 1,340 yard season.
Last season's rush data was even more telling. Ray Charles can see what's going on here.
I recall reading similar posts this year about similar issues with other teams and nobody got attacked for it that I recall. I think posts about the PM coaching issue went on for what seemed like 4 weeks.
So here's an idea dringtuoiti, let's keep him to just 11 carries and 150 yards and see how that works. Oh, wait. It didn't work.
#44 has a mild separation since the week of game 4. He separated his shoulder in practice because the HC thought it would be a good idea for him to do a 1-1 tackle drill with WP #72 as the running back. #72 is our DE and PG and is 6' 4" and 265 lbs. Because our LBs will see a 6' 4" 265 lb running back this season. So stupid coaching caused an unnecessary injury to his shoulder and the team is still suffering from that stupid decision.
His orthopedic surgeon cleared him to play and said 44 could take himself out of the game if needed. Yes, he played injured, but he only knows one speed--100%. #44 is willing to endure the pain in order to win. That commitment and dedication got him called a soft bit@# in front of his entire team at halftime.
I dont even know where WP is, so any of these KIDS can have any yardage they want, doesn't bother me.
But you as a coach know that you can't just use a multiplier to figure average, just as using ypc doesn't give you the whole story.
59 carries is around 6.5 a game and 30 is 3.3 carries a game. If they are surprise plays (which that leads me to believe) then they will average more per carry.
More carries lends itself to more stops.
Perfect example: Saquon Barkley, the assumed front runner for Heisman, had 21 carries for 44 yards against THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY. 2.1 yards per carry. Take away 1 run of 36 yards, that's 20 carries for 8 yards.
Again, I dont care if they have great stats, but your logic in this instance is easily refuted
