Keyser VS Alco

[OneRing]

If you wanna keep everyone updated on the score. How about you open a thread and report it like I did last week..

Or just put it in the thread already started. Like you did this week.

 

[52 to victory]

As freshman, Shirey and Swinton ran the ball up and down the field. A rather impressive duo. When they’d get in the red zone, QB sneak. I thought then that it was the name game. Three years can change a lot, but really expected the two S’s to have great varsity years.

 

[cumbfanatic]

How many runs did Powell have not many. He is a beast fast, strong and always plays hard. They don't use him.

 

[OneRing]

When we consider toughness, the average age of the young men who went ashore at Iwo Jima was 18.

Dont think so. There would have had to been 12 year olds on there to counter the sergeants and officers. The average age of WWII soldiers was 26.

 

[tim21502]

It went pretty much how I thought it would go. I had Keyser winning by 2 tds and they did. I just don't understand some of them calls. Why punt when your at the 50 down 2 tds 4th qtr.and your D can barely stop them? They did the same thing last week. It just blows my mind lol.. Also they stopped doing everything that was working on offense and put the game in the QBs hands and he failed once again miserably. Im so sick of the daddy ball treatment that starts in peewee all the way up to HS..

Nepotism is an infection here in Allegany County.

 

[4R341]

Nepotism is an infection here in Allegany County.

Not just in sports, my friend.

 

[Lagmeister]

Dont think so. There would have had to been 12 year olds on there to counter the sergeants and officers. The average age of WWII soldiers was 26.

Not sure where I read the specific number.... Maybe I can find it. I think the smaller pool that late in the war had something to do with it. I think most of the young men there were not the hardened vets, but rather many were 17 and their parents had to sign on for them to go. At any rate.... I read it somewhere.... Maybe what I read was 'large' or 'significant' and not average. Still, they all seem young to me.

 

[Argox66]

Paul Hardcastle’s song (N-N-N-N-Nineteen) says in the voice clips the average age of American soldiers in WWII was 26. In Vietnam, it was 19.

(N-N-N-N-Nineteen)

the 80’s

 

[OneRing]

Not sure where I read the specific number.... Maybe I can find it. I think the smaller pool that late in the war had something to do with it. I think most of the young men there were not the hardened vets, but rather many were 17 and their parents had to sign on for them to go. At any rate.... I read it somewhere.... Maybe what I read was 'large' or 'significant' and not average. Still, they all seem young to me.

I agree. It's not like 26 is old. While the pickings were definitely more slim in 44-45, America was in the best position of any of the major combatants to provide more men if needed. We were the most picky when it came to denying service. Turning away many soldiers (for things like not having enough teeth, or not being able to read) that other countries would have deemed perfectly capable of fighting. It's kind of crazy to think about, but I think like 25%-30% of those who enlisted were denied. I'm glad we were never in the situation, or mindset, of Russia, where we were desperate for manpower (or just throwing men at the enemy), but we could have easily changed our standards and had a much larger pool to select from.

Sorry to derail the conversation. Just enjoy military history.

 

[OneRing]

Paul Hardcastle’s song (N-N-N-N-Nineteen) says in the voice clips the average age of American soldiers in WWII was 26. In Vietnam, it was 19.

(N-N-N-N-Nineteen)

the 80’s

I think I've seen that that is not actually correct either, and it's something like 22 years old in Vietnam. Still, very young.

 

[foreverredandwhite1]

Nepotism is an infection here in Allegany County.

No, it can't be, not in Cumberland. Only the most deserving players are allowed on the field, no nepotism, no special treatment because your dad is friends with a coach, your mom is affiliated with an administrative staff member or you are related to somebody on the BOE - it's all about integrity and honor!

 

[Lagmeister]

I agree. It's not like 26 is old. While the pickings were definitely more slim in 44-45, America was in the best position of any of the major combatants to provide more men if needed. We were the most picky when it came to denying service. Turning away many soldiers (for things like not having enough teeth, or not being able to read) that other countries would have deemed perfectly capable of fighting. It's kind of crazy to think about, but I think like 25%-30% of those who enlisted were denied. I'm glad we were never in the situation, or mindset, of Russia, where we were desperate for manpower (or just throwing men at the enemy), but we could have easily changed our standards and had a much larger pool to select from.

Sorry to derail the conversation. Just enjoy military history.

My father was a bit older than most when he signed up. Thankfully he survived both landing at Normandy and Bastogne; but he did tell me that by the time they got into Germany that those filling the ranks were both older and younger... interesting.

 

[Lagmeister]

Nepotism is an infection here in Allegany County.

Robinette and Bratton (sic ?) would not have started or made the FH starting team.

 

[OneRing]

My father was a bit older than most when he signed up. Thankfully he survived both landing at Normandy and Bastogne; but he did tell me that by the time they got into Germany that those filling the ranks were both older and younger... interesting.

Did he ever say anything about the replacements out of bootcamp? I've read that many vets hated the habits that those fresh out of training would often have.
I've read that in basic they were often taught to things like conserving ammunition, and theoretical sort of stuff that didnt transfer over to real-world combat. Of course, they were also replacing good friends and experienced soldiers, so that couldn't help.

 

[rbg444]

Alco played much better defense in 2nd qtr. hopefully it carries into the 3rd..

Allegany was only down a td with the ball going into the 4th. A drive stalled deep in Keyser territory and that seemed to turn the tide. If they had scored there I think it could have been different.
A couple things - Keyser's offense is very tough to defend because even though they don't throw much they spread the field, have 3, 4, or 5 receivers forcing the defense to spread out and not allowing them to put 11 men in the box...huge for a running game. I think their pace and speed would be very tough for fh to defend, it's a shame they dropped them.
Allegany's offense does some things really well. Their qb is tough, he is throwing himself into every play taking a lot of hits. He reads the belly well and when he keeps it and rolls out he's very fast and gets the end just about every time. All their rb's run north/south and that is so much smarter than the east/west running out of room and going out of bounds after 1 yard or no gain.
As far as the 4th down punt late in the game I think you have to look at the previous two plays that are questionable. Second and 10 and you run a pitch that loses two yards. So it's 3rd and 12 and you have the ball at the keyser 48, you run the pitch again, the rb catches it at the Allegany
46...now you are 6 yards behind the line of scrimmage starting your play. Not only aren't you throwing on 3rd and 12 but you are running the same play you just lost yardage on just changing the side of the field you are running to. It looked like they decided to punt because they just didn't have anything in the playbook besides the pitch...very bizarre.