BleacherCoaches.com

DFFSBA wrote:

Crushersports wrote: 8.) Somerset - Scrappy and physical. If Hyde was on one of the top 3-4 teams he'd be a 1500-2000 yard rusher.

Totally disagree with this.  Big up front, but soft both sides of the ball.  If these guys were "scrappy and physical", with their size, they could make up some of where they lack in skill positions. 

Well I guess if you want to paraphrase someone and then take what they type out of context than yes I'd disagree as well. They are scrappy and physical which is most linebackers and smaller guys. The line is big, but generally underachieving hence why I stated Hyde would have crazy stats with a better line. I assumed that was laid out pretty well in what I said "If he was on one of the top 3-4 teams" with Somerset not being one of them one would think that you could easily infer that I in no way said Somerset's line. Hyde is a player, poor team but he's a tough kid and I respect the way he plays the game...But thanks

Cushersports,
I'm with you on the top 2 at this point and the bottom 6.... it is 3-6 that I'm still not sure on. I think I'd go
6 BG
5 BM based on their O. They have the players and the D. Just not much good stuff on O.
4 CR agree the least tested of any of the top teams.
3 Westmont I think they finish 8-2.

silentbob wrote:Cushersports,
I'm with you on the top 2 at this point and the bottom 6....  it is 3-6 that I'm still not sure on.  I think I'd go
6 BG
5 BM  based on their O.  They have the players and the D. Just not much good stuff on O.  
4 CR  agree the least tested of any of the top teams.  
3  Westmont  I think they finish 8-2.

McCort seems to have some oline issues. They have to make better use of all the weapons they have on offense. It seemed like they were very conservative against Bedford.
The strength is definitely the defense they get to the ball and have athletes everywhere. Minus the dumb penalties that plagued them the first two games. 
Outside of Richland and Bedford the top 5-6 teams are definitely pretty equal this year which should make for some interesting games.

theprophet wrote: August 20th, 2019, 11:27 am Can I remind everyone that before last year Richland hadn't had a winning season since 2013. They are not a powerhouse they will not have the year they had last year. They will probably finish 3rd or 4th because Richland is a school that has always have 1 good year followed by multiple average to below average years. They gave rings out for D6 championship for god sakes what program who is used to winning would do that lol. Sorry just being honest Richland is a very average sport school.

It might be time for a user name change.

They gave rings out for D6

Guess they didn't have one for you. I got mine.

Must me nice showing off your D6 championship rings then BG shows up showing off their real state championship ring. I would love to be in the room if that happens. So embarrassing lol

theprophet wrote: November 25th, 2019, 9:44 am Must me nice showing off your D6 championship rings then BG shows up showing off their real state championship ring. I would love to be in the room if that happens. So embarrassing lol

Especially if it one of the BG guys that has all 3 state championship rings

theprophet wrote: November 25th, 2019, 9:44 am Must me nice showing off your D6 championship rings then BG shows up showing off their real state championship ring. I would love to be in the room if that happens. So embarrassing lol

Enough with the petty ring envy. If Richland's boosters want to pay for LHAC championship rings that's up to them. My guess is most of these rings end up in a box in a drawer.

The person who decided they need a ring for a D6 is petty. I don’t think they will keep them in a drawer after the D6 game this year they had poster size pictures of them hahahahaha.

I guess when your not use to winning you don’t know how your supposed to act!