What caught my eye Week 7?

[DinwiddieProud]

The fact that it’s week 7 already, caught my attention. Can you believe it? It feels like we were so excited for that first game.

Salem struggled with a no win Pulaski team. The Spartans won, but it was touch and go for three quarters.

Appomattox finally posting a win. And Lake Taylor being destroyed by Granby. My, how times have changed.

How about that little war over towards the Northern Neck? Essex and Rappahannock are averaging 50+ points a game and they ended up with the Raiders winning 13-8.

Little Rye Cove way out there in far SWV beat a previously unbeaten Eastside 40-7. RC has put 337 points on the board already this season.

Varina beating Glen Allen didn’t surprise me. But the margin of victory did.

Matoaca beating Thomas Dale must have been a slugfest. TD has their typical good defense, but apparently just don’t have all the pieces and parts they need on offense. Both Matoaca and Dinwiddie are not likely to loose to anyone else before they meet in the final game of the regular season. If it plays out that way, Dinwiddie’s loss to Maury should be the only blemish on two nearly perfect records. And the Warriors have shut out every opponent except Ponax. That final game between these two will be one for the ages.

Maury in a tight one with Manor, 97-0!

Other than that, I believe most of the teams that were expected to win, did.

Looking ahead to next week, I see several rivalry games and some important games with playoff implications.

How about you? What grabbed your attention this week?

 

[Phoebus Fan]

Wow had no clue that Salem’s shootout was with a winless team.

 

[SFUWO]

Wow had no clue that Salem’s shootout was with a winless team.

I give credit to Pulaski Co. They came out with a great game plan and executed it. Salem made adjustments in the second half holding them to 7pts. In the first half PC did what they wanted on offense except make extra points and FG

 

[ArcticBuc]

Union shellacking Ridgeview, in Clintwood no less, really surprised me.

 

[pizzzzza]

For me personally, I’m tired of seeing these All-Star stacked high school teams, shellack other high school teams, which consist primarily of local kids who attend the school.

I can’t imagine playing football nowadays, and every now and then, your school has a good crop of athletes.

The only problem is you end up facing teams like Hayfield or Maury (or John Marshall) in boys basketball) and the score ends up being something like last night scores.

To me, it seems unfair, and the playing field is no longer equal.

The fun and the sportsmanship has been lost.

What’s the point of even playing?

 

[falcettik]

For me personally, I’m tired of seeing these All-Star stacked high school teams, shellack other high school teams, which consist primarily of local kids who attend the school.

I can’t imagine playing football nowadays, and every now and then, your school has a good crop of athletes.

The only problem is you end up facing teams like Hayfield or Maury (or John Marshall) in boys basketball) and the score ends up being something like last night scores.

To me, it seems unfair, and the playing field is no longer equal.

The fun and the sportsmanship has been lost.

What’s the point of even playing?

pizzzzza:

Well said and I believe there are others out there who feel similarly, including me. There is already a drop in participation and if you attend a school where you know you are going to get an ass-whooping too often, I understand if a kid does not want to deal with that and, guess what, the numbers drop even more. These all star transfer teams are ruining the game. I think part of it is society's general transition to a "I need to get mine" mentality and straying away from the idea of "what is good for the larger group". Yes, I am older than many but the ethics and morals that the older generations usually possess is not what some - not all - of the newer generations embrace. One can only hope that the powers that be (looking at you, VHSL and local school systems) try to make it right.

 

[EPJr]

For me personally, I’m tired of seeing these All-Star stacked high school teams, shellack other high school teams, which consist primarily of local kids who attend the school.

I can’t imagine playing football nowadays, and every now and then, your school has a good crop of athletes.

The only problem is you end up facing teams like Hayfield or Maury (or John Marshall) in boys basketball) and the score ends up being something like last night scores.

To me, it seems unfair, and the playing field is no longer equal.

The fun and the sportsmanship has been lost.

What’s the point of even playing?

whatever happened to the mercy rule in high school football?

 

[1MoreHokie]

Easiest solution is to just alter current rules:

- If a team is down by 49 or more, the running clock applies regardless of what point in the game they're at (current running clock only starts in second half)

- If a team is down by 49 or more in the second half, there is no longer any way to stop the clock. Not for timeouts, injuries, change of possession, referees discussing/calling a penalty, nothing. If it's 49-0 at half, the second half will last literally 24 minutes provided the MOV doesn't drop below 49. Timeouts may still be called and they will stop play but no longer stop the clock. 60 seconds allotted between the 3rd and 4th to change position on the field.

Above rules would likely make games 60-70 point blowouts at the absolute worst.

 

[DinwiddieProud]

For me personally, I’m tired of seeing these All-Star stacked high school teams, shellack other high school teams, which consist primarily of local kids who attend the school.

I can’t imagine playing football nowadays, and every now and then, your school has a good crop of athletes.

The only problem is you end up facing teams like Hayfield or Maury (or John Marshall) in boys basketball) and the score ends up being something like last night scores.

To me, it seems unfair, and the playing field is no longer equal.

The fun and the sportsmanship has been lost.

What’s the point of even playing?

And another aspect of these all star teams. How unfair it is the homegrown kids on a team that get pushed aside by recruited kids that transfer in.

 

[DinwiddieProud]

My proposal for years has been that every student transferring between schools is prohibited from participation in athletics for one calendar year. I know this is overly drastic, and unfair to legitimate transfers, but it would damn sure put a stop to recruiting. A modified approach that has been discussed may actually be a workable solution. That being, transfers are not permitted to participate in any playoff events for a full calendar year after transfer.

 

[DinwiddieProud]

I saw on Scorestream Amherst lost to Heritage today. 31-24

 

[General172011]

For me personally, I’m tired of seeing these All-Star stacked high school teams, shellack other high school teams, which consist primarily of local kids who attend the school.

I can’t imagine playing football nowadays, and every now and then, your school has a good crop of athletes.

The only problem is you end up facing teams like Hayfield or Maury (or John Marshall) in boys basketball) and the score ends up being something like last night scores.

To me, it seems unfair, and the playing field is no longer equal.

The fun and the sportsmanship has been lost.

What’s the point of even playing?

Manor wasn’t going to compete with Maury’s JV they are bad

 

[cutnjump]

Easiest solution is to just alter current rules:

- If a team is down by 49 or more, the running clock applies regardless of what point in the game they're at (current running clock only starts in second half)

- If a team is down by 49 or more in the second half, there is no longer any way to stop the clock. Not for timeouts, injuries, change of possession, referees discussing/calling a penalty, nothing. If it's 49-0 at half, the second half will last literally 24 minutes provided the MOV doesn't drop below 49. Timeouts may still be called and they will stop play but no longer stop the clock. 60 seconds allotted between the 3rd and 4th to change position on the field.

Above rules would likely make games 60-70 point blowouts at the absolute worst.

I don't think the real issue has much, if anything, to do with a final score.

 

[1MoreHokie]

I don't think the real issue has much, if anything, to do with a final score.

Wholly disagree. There are blowouts across the state that never happened even twenty years ago. Has little to do with all-star teams pounding terrible ones because a William Fleming can beat a Hidden Valley by that much. Things are unraveling, lessening the ability for things to go even more wrong in a game will stem the tide of these 80, 90+ point blowouts and stop the normalizing of them and the worsening of the sport. Posters above are correct, kids pay attention to these, they're not signing up for the team if they think they're gonna lose 90-0 and because those are now an "any given Friday" scenario, that's bad news across the board.

If only all-star teams were doing it that'd be one thing but they're not. Got to shorten the clock to put a stop to it.

 

[wikki]

I saw on Scorestream Amherst lost to Heritage today. 31-24

It was hard fought great game. Amherst had the lead in the 4th with a little under 3 minutes left. HHS scored. Amherst was driving to the end zone with seconds left on the clock. Interception in the end zone to run out the clock .

 

[EPJr]

years ago I was at a Jamestown v Huguenot game. The Falcons had scored 50 points and knocked the JT quarterback out of the game.
They agreed to stop the game at halftime.

 

[GoBlue2109]

And another aspect of these all star teams. How unfair it is the homegrown kids on a team that get pushed aside by recruited kids that transfer in.

This is the part I hate the most.

 

[DinwiddieProud]

It was hard fought great game. Amherst had the lead in the 4th with a little under 3 minutes left. HHS scored. Amherst was driving to the end zone with seconds left on the clock. Interception in the end zone to run out the clock .

I’m sorry Wikki. You know I root for you each week. I picked Heritage, but I was hoping I was wrong.

 

[wikki]

I’m sorry Wikki. You know I root for you each week. I picked Heritage, but I was hoping I was wrong.

they played well. It could have gone either way. Heritage had to work for that win

 

[cutnjump]

Wholly disagree. There are blowouts across the state that never happened even twenty years ago. Has little to do with all-star teams pounding terrible ones because a William Fleming can beat a Hidden Valley by that much. Things are unraveling, lessening the ability for things to go even more wrong in a game will stem the tide of these 80, 90+ point blowouts and stop the normalizing of them and the worsening of the sport. Posters above are correct, kids pay attention to these, they're not signing up for the team if they think they're gonna lose 90-0 and because those are now an "any given Friday" scenario, that's bad news across the board.

If only all-star teams were doing it that'd be one thing but they're not. Got to shorten the clock to put a stop to it.

Do you really believe you are treating a condition by crafting rules to keep scores artificially closer or is this just another arm of the everybody gets a trophy philosophy? Seems to me all you are doing is treating a symptom as opposed to getting at the real causes of the problem which are talent and development deficits created by differences in approaches to eligibility rules between individual schools and systems, uneven enforcement of actual rules and the quality of coaching and support operations. It is akin to Spurrier's quote paraphrased, it is not his job not to score but, the defenses job to stop him from scoring. We will just have to agree to disagree.

If keeping it from being demoralizing I would do away with the running clock altogether in football and possibly basketball. When the point differential reaches a certain margin on or after a predetermined point stop the game. That would not only assuage feelings but, reduce the likelihood of injury in a contest long ago decided.

 

[1MoreHokie]

Do you really believe you are treating a condition by crafting rules to keep scores artificially closer or is this just another arm of the everybody gets a trophy philosophy? Seems to me all you are doing is treating a symptom as opposed to getting at the real causes of the problem which are talent and development deficits created by differences in approaches to eligibility rules between individual schools and systems, uneven enforcement of actual rules and the quality of coaching and support operations. It is akin to Spurrier's quote paraphrased, it is not his job not to score but, the defenses job to stop him from scoring. We will just have to agree to disagree.

If keeping it from being demoralizing I would do away with the running clock altogether in football and possibly basketball. When the point differential reaches a certain margin on or after a predetermined point stop the game. That would not only assuage feelings but, reduce the likelihood of injury in a contest long ago decided.

You think taking away the running clock but implementing an agreed upon "we quit" decision is the solution while lecturing about participation trophies?

My alterations solve the issue the current running clock rules cannot which is that the game is offensively more advanced than it was when that rule was first implemented.

 

[cutnjump]

You think taking away the running clock but implementing an agreed upon "we quit" decision is the solution while lecturing about participation trophies? lmao

My alterations solve the issue the current running clock rules cannot which is that the game is offensively more advanced than it was when that rule was

You think taking away the running clock but implementing an agreed upon "we quit" decision is the solution while lecturing about participation trophies?

My alterations solve the issue the current running clock rules cannot which is that the game is offensively more advanced than it was when that rule was first implemented.

Read the reply again. The comment about participation trophies was in the context of the running clock discussion which I do not consider a solution at all to the actual problem.

The comment about ending the game was made in the context of if we are going to be stuck with no solution or a bad solution, ending the game has a much greater probability of producing one good result, a reduction in the likelihood of needless injuries.

 

[1MoreHokie]

Read the reply again. The comment about participation trophies was in the context of the running clock discussion which I do not consider a solution at all to the actual problem.

The comment about ending the game was made in the context of if we are going to be stuck with no solution or a bad solution, ending the game has a much greater probability of producing one good result, a reduction in the likelihood of needless injuries.

You'll literally never get a consistent result with your solution because you'll never get any coach to agree to such a thing. Run rule in football isn't going to happen.

 

[cutnjump]

You'll literally never get a consistent result with your solution because you'll never get any coach to agree to such a thing. Run rule in football isn't going to happen.

It may not happen but, you are wrong about the likelihood of getting "any coach to agree" as I have had discussions with current and former head coaches and assistants that have indicated their preference for that type rule as opposed to a running clock.

 

[1MoreHokie]

It may not happen but, you are wrong about the likelihood of getting "any coach to agree" as I have had discussions with current and former head coaches and assistants that have indicated their preference for that type rule as opposed to a running clock.

Besides, that will easily alter gameplay and cause downstream issues. Playing a chump team? Boatrace them immediately, onsides everything, and try to end the game by midway through the 2nd quarter so you can rest everyone for the big game next week. Surely nothing will make fans happier than to come out for just 45 minutes after plunking down an increasingly larger sum of money for a ticket. That definitely won't affect week-to-week ticket sales.

It's not as simple as it is in non-revenue sports. That money matters and I absolutely guarantee you implementing a run rule in football will affect it.

 

[cutnjump]

Besides, that will easily alter gameplay and cause downstream issues. Playing a chump team? Boatrace them immediately, onsides everything, and try to end the game by midway through the 2nd quarter so you can rest everyone for the big game next week. Surely nothing will make fans happier than to come out for just 45 minutes after plunking down an increasingly larger sum of money for a ticket. That definitely won't affect week-to-week ticket sales.

It's not as simple as it is in non-revenue sports. That money matters and I absolutely guarantee you implementing a run rule in football will affect it.

It might affect some fans, it might also please some fans to not have to sit through the meaningless, mindless torture of a running clock. Your hypothetical is not realistic as just like a running clock it could start at any point in the second half.

 

[1MoreHokie]

It might affect some fans, it might also please some fans to not have to sit through the meaningless, mindless torture of a running clock. Your hypothetical is not realistic as just like a running clock it could start at any point in the second half.

Not mindless torture for most, even in a blowout. Sports are a community event. How many people do you know that go to games essentially so they can chat to this person or that person? I feel like every other person at a Salem game is just there to talk shop with a friend or family member (and that's fine!). You start putting these situations in where people can start betting on a game ending at half and people will without question quit showing.

Putting a hard scoring cap on a sport with revenue tied to it is just not smart. You will fundamentally alter how the game is played which is precisely why this doesn't happen anywhere for tackle football.

 

[1MoreHokie]

Some states do different things. Louisiana's clock starts anytime at 42 points and does not stop period, no matter if the margin is closed under 42. Mandatory shortening of quarters plus a running clock is another option. But run rule in tackle football? You're just not gonna see it happen.

 

[cutnjump]

Some states do different things. Louisiana's clock starts anytime at 42 points and does not stop period, no matter if the margin is closed under 42. Mandatory shortening of quarters plus a running clock is another option. But run rule in tackle football? You're just not gonna see it happen.

Never said it would happen. I only contended it was no worse than your "solution".

 

[DinwiddieProud]

I often wonder what the consensus opinion is of coaches mired in a few bad seasons where they are often hit with a running clock. Are they satisfied with the rules as they are, or would they like to see modifications?

I like to believe that most of the coaches on the side causing the running clock use the opportunity to let their third string and lower players get on the field for a few sets of downs. And hopefully, the coach on the loosing side inserts some of his up and coming younger players so they can get some game experience.

After all, for 95% of the kids, high school football is the end of the line for their football career. I hope that coaches remember that and use an out of hand game to give as many kids as possible a few minutes of memories.

 

[Ech8014]

Respectfully, there is so much misinformation in some of these threads. I often talk about older men speaking on or to younger men as if they were never that age. These young men's worlds are significantly different than ours, and times change. A young person (Because it's not just boys in football) family choosing to move so their child has a better opportunity is what any good parent should do. The older guys pointing out "how things used to be" seem to be forgetting that these young men today are far less active than we were. We learned how to play from spending countless hours outside. By the time we got to two-a-days, we were at least acclimated to the heat because we had spent the summer outside. These young people have far more than we could ever imagine; they come outside when necessary. So many of you are blaming the scores and foul play on "super teams" and not considering that many of these young men just aren't as good as we were. Now, they are exceptional at video games, social media, and everything they can enjoy from the comfort of an air-conditioned home. Why do you think there are so many guys going to trainers now? They have to go to them. The stuff we learned from playing outside, they have to pay for. Their parents are paying for what we got for free. Can you imagine any of us asking our parents for money to go to a personal trainer??? LOL Guys, it's a different time, and we must adjust. Oh, and a final thought to you guys who say this wasn't happening back in the day? It was; trust me, it has always been going on, it's just more open now with social media and platforms like this. Oh yeah, Maurys coaching staff went to the reffs and the Manor staff and asked that the game be stopped at half time and the coaching staff for Manor said no.

 

[SFUWO]

My proposal for years has been that every student transferring between schools is prohibited from participation in athletics for one calendar year. I know this is overly drastic, and unfair to legitimate transfers, but it would damn sure put a stop to recruiting. A modified approach that has been discussed may actually be a workable solution. That being, transfers are not permitted to participate in any playoff events for a full calendar year after transfer.

This rule does exist already. They need to implement it for cities and counties that have multiple high schools.

 

[EPJr]

This rule does exist already. They need to implement it for cities and counties that have multiple high schools.

"They" would be the regions; not the VHSL Office.

 

[SFUWO]

"They" would be the regions; not the VHSL Office.

I was under the understanding that VHSL determined eligibility. If it's up to the Regions then they need to implement it too