TTownTigers

Well, no need to talk about it, but..........we actually have never talked about it because, lol, as I mentioned a few minutes ago........this is the first time it's happened to Gate City High School.

I pointed out the 1952 0-10 season, but I also pointed out that in 1952, it wasn't Gate City. In 1952, Shoemaker High was 0-10, not Gate City High.

I posted this on the score thread. This is the first time in the history of Gate City High School that we have started 0-7. I'm not talking about Shoemaker High and the 0-10 season in the early 50's, but since Gate City High formed in the mid 50's, I don't think we've ever started 0-7. I know Coach Fry had a couple of 2-8's and maybe even a 1-9 early on in his career, but I don't think those were 0-7 starts either. Another......"new first" for this 2017 Gate City regime. The 2015 season was started as an 0-6 season if I recall correctly, but we got the W. Tonight's game was statistically more meaningful, at least historically, than some may realize for Gate City. Hopefully Bluefield Researcher can check this, but I think 0-7 is actually a first time (another new record) in school history (this season).

Back in the early 1950's, we had an 0-10 season, but that was prior to Gate City High, and of course, that was the old Shoemaker High and I think "old man Quillen" was the Head Coach at the time. In 1998, the year after we won the state title, we had a 3-7 team, but it didn't start out 0-7. If Bluefield Researcher can check or knows this, I would be interested. I truly can't remember Gate City ever starting 0-7. In 2015, we started out 0-6, then got a W. Harry Fry had a couple 2-8ish type teams and maybe even a 1-9 team early in his career, but again, never started out 0-7. The new Gate City football coach has a new "first" in Gate City football. I'm not placing or getting into who's fault and this or that, but I'm just saying it is in fact, a new first for Gate City football. Since Gate City High Formed (not Shoemaker) but Gate City, the program has never started 0-7, again, at least to my knowledge.

Gate City. First time in school history starting 0-7, at least it is as far as I can remember.

24-6 Union. Lee High submits

Beavers ain't sceeeered of no Mothman!

Union Touchdown in mid 3rd, leads 10-6 over Lee

No offense to FC fans, but we are getting down the stretch and in the second half of the season, and you can see Galax starting to turn into Galax, and you are seeing Fort Chiswell turning back into Fort Chiswell and the slippers are no longer on.

Richlands needs to go O school with it's big OLine and still, a pretty good dang defense and play smashmouth, like the 1992 team. I know it's not in the nature of Mance and his offense is his offense, but for this year, just stop it with the passing on first down and trying to show opponents you are a "passing and wide open" offense and just run the ball and play defense and field position. Richlands will go further doing it this way for this year than trying that wide open stuff. If they do that, they are going to "be in more closer games" that they maybe should have won more by....for example, against Va High and Marion, a game Richlands should win by about 17 pts this year, but playing smashmouth makes it a closer game, but the payoff is......come playoff time, playing against a team that should beat Richlands by 17 or so points, the same applies in favor of Richlands (Richlands is going to be in more games that they maybe shouldn't). This is.....if Richlands goes old school. It's not in their Head Coach's nature, but this is the year to do it. High School games are short, and against a team like Graham in which Graham will likely seem to be the favorite, it only takes about 12-14 first downs that are heavy rushing type runs that lead to the first downs, killing clock, then getting a couple of key stops, and a turnover or two, and boom, it's a nailbiter in the late fourth. The first down incomplete pass that leads to 2nd and 10 and then a punt with only 1 minute and thirty seconds left off the clock against a team like Graham that gives Graham more possessions is going to hurt Richlands if they stay with that wide open style this year. Of course, against Gate City, it didn't matter what they did. It worked on us, running, passing, kicking, tackling, the waterboy, the cheerleaders, they beat us in every category. But I'm serious about Richlands for this season, they don't have the athletes to get open consistently and consistently catch the ball at the rate in which they are accustomed to, and they really need to consider the smashmouth-heavy run offense with that big line of theirs for this season. They go further in the playoffs doing it this way in my opinion.

Gate City is. I think we should be undefeated right now. (tic)

I think your proposal is respectful and similar to mine. I don't like the automatic district winner rule, but if you are going to put in back into place, then we need to consider cutting the amount of teams that enter the playoffs (much less) "don't cut it back as much" because we need to be absolutely sure a team out there that is deserving is not left out of the playoffs. Our criminal justice system centers on trying to do everything possible or "beyond a reasonable doubt" to ensure someone innocent (deserving of no punishment) is not punished compared to someone guilty (not deserving of being free in society) is punished. In summary, we error or allow some to go free (even though we know a substantial portion of those are guilty) compared to ensuring that few are punished, even though they are innocent. I know High School Football and the criminal justice system are not the same, but I think of it as similar. It's critically important to ensure a team that is deserving of the playoffs (not guilty) is allowed in the playoffs (not punished). This gives more weight to me than trying to screen out for a team that doesn't deserve to be in the playoffs being allowed to enter the playoffs. In short, we fix all of the above in my opinion by eliminating automatic district winners and ever so slightly increasing the amount of teams that enter the playoffs. If we go back 40 years and look at one of the 9-1 teams that Bluefield Researcher mentioned that didn't make the playoffs. If we eliminate the automatic district winner rule and also add 2-4 teams in that region as making the playoffs and do it on a power points system, then we have our cake and eat it also. The 9-1 team would have made the playoffs and the teams in the region that had a weak district winner (like a 6-4 team) would have still made the playoffs as one of the final teams to get in by power points (if the automatic district winner rule wouldn't have been in place). In summary, if you have 4 districts in whatever setting you wish to call it (region A, region 3, region 4 etc) allow 2 more teams than there are districts to enter the playoffs, so by the example here......6 teams enter the playoffs IF you have automatic district winners as getting in. Again, I don't like the idea. The power point system doesn't lie much, and it exposes strength of schedule. A 5-5 team that is solid (Appalachia state title winner back in the day) will still get into the playoffs by a good power point system because the power point system recognizes the strength of schedule a team like Appalachia back in the day played. The power point system would realize the 5 losses weren't to cupcakes, etc. Therefore, you don't need an automatic district winner to get in ....only my opinion.

I agree with you on the power schools coming from the East in 1A, but am not sure on 2A. I think 2A may be a bit closer. What would help the West in 1A is.... Galax and George Wythe need to be Galax and George Wythe again. Both appear a bit down this year. More important, one of the schools in my area really needs to rise up. Perhaps Appalachia? LOL, well, that's not going to happen anymore, but some 1A school in this corner needs to become like Galax or George Wythe and supplement the West with another very tough 1A program in far SWVA. Additionally, something between Wytheville, Bristol, and the Kentucky border becoming a solid program would also benefit (Chilhowie). Chilhowie is better this year, but it ain't there yet. In the East, Essex and Sussex are much like George Wythe and Galax. Both are good programs and they range from outstanding (state title challenging years) to 2nd round of the playoffs and out years, but Riverheads is a beast. They supposedly lost a ton of seniors and talent last year and just didn't miss a beat. The team they have this year is supposed to be one year away from next year according to the Richmond Newspaper.

Didn't know about Battle and Ridgeview, but no......the same applies. The chances of any other team in Class 1A winning a state title this year are similar, even with Battle and Ridgeview being 2A. That leaves Chilhowie and George Wythe as the only other 2 in the West than can play with Galax. Again, Riverheads is 25-30 points at LEAST better than all 3 of them. Even though Battle and Ridgeview are 2A, go ahead and add them in there also. Riverheads beats both of them by at least 25-30 also.

John Battle and Ridgeview and Chilhowie and George Wythe can play with Galax. All 5 are very close. By season's end, it doesn't matter because neither of the 5 are getting close to a Class 1A state title this year. The East had 3 teams (Riverheads, Essex, Sussex) that are at LEAST 15 points better and 2 of those 3 teams in the East are 20+ points better, and 1 of those teams (Riverheads) is 25-30 points better. Union, Graham, and Giles have a better chance of winning the whole thing in Class 2A even with Appo in the picture compared to a SWVA team winning a title in 1A this year. Next year is different and things change, but for this year, it's not happening for SWVA in 1A. As a matter of fact, if Appo wins the state title against a team from the West or East (however the playoffs work out), I bet the score of that game is closer than the score of the 1A team in the East in their state title game, IF....again...IF that state title game is against someone in the West. I don't know how the playoffs workout, but if their is crossbracketing or whatever, then two teams from the East will be playing in the Class 1A state title game, again, if the playoff brackets allow it. I don't want to get into the playoff system and cross bracketing, etc. The point I'm making is, the gap between Riverheads and the rest of the 1A West is greater this year, 2017, than the gap between Appo and the rest of 2A Virginia (Union, Graham, Giles, RE Lee, Goochland, Poquoson, etc).

Stop it.

One critical point that I think everyone gets and understands, but it still hasn't been pointed out enough in my opinion. Again, I have seen it touched on, but lets spell it out. The overwhelming, overwhelming, and more overwhelming majority of the 9-0-1 or 8-2, 9-1 or very good teams that had very good records that did not make the playoffs was before the automatic DISTRICT WINNER rule and you are in. I know, some teams tied for the district title and then it went to power points, but by in large, the overwhelming majority of the great teams that had good to great records, but didn't get in the playoffs have 2 key or critical events involved in the equation. 1. They likely either played in a very good district for that given year, or at least had a very, very powerful juggernaut that won its district. 2. There was a district winner or two or another weak district or districts with a worse record (but in the same region), but won its district and because of the rule, they automatically made the playoffs. Fact is, there will still be some outliers even in today's time where teams have good records, but don't make the playoffs, especially when you have a region with lots of teams like in Class/Div 6 Northern Virginia. But, the overwhelming majority of teams getting royally screwed like years ago (and they were royally screwed in most cases) are over with the new system. The trade off is an unfortunate won. We immediately think, "the trade off is weaker teams getting into the playoffs." That's not true. We simply allow more teams to enter the playoffs. We got 1 rule correct in eliminating the automatic bid for district winners, but the rule which simply expanded the amount of teams that got playoffs entries was a wrong one in my opinion. It doesn't have to be a trade off. Keep the power point system the way it is and keep the automatic district rule out of the equation, and simply limit the amount of teams that enter the playoffs. Cutting it in half would be a start.

Top 5 Union Bluefield Graham Giles Abingdon "Receiving Votes"- Fort Chiswell, Marion, Abingdon, Virginia, Narrows When it's all said and done, which team will do the best or go the longest in the playoffs of all the teams above? Giles.

Agree. Bluefield would beat you in a regular season game.

Giles fans can go ther as they whipped the Beavers in a scrimmage. Richlands is down Bluefield is solid, but not state title good. They exit in the semifinals.

Having seen one team on tape and one team in person, I think I can make a pick on this one with at least some knowledge of each team. Bluefield is fast and well coached. Richlands is very well coached and will get the best of Bluefield on the line of scrimmage. Bluefield has not yet played or seen anything resembling the line of Richlands. Graham's is pretty dang good, but it ain't Richlands on the line of scrimmage. Bluefield has met one team with a really, really good line on both sides of the ball in Giles which was a scrimmage, and Giles bested them. No offense to Bluefield, but the schedule in WV AA isn't exactly a juggernaut. Richlands wins and only punts the ball 2 times with both running and passing. Bluefield scores on 3 long athletic plays, but doesn't manage a passing threat or sustained drive. Richlands 35, Bluefield 24

You lost me again, respectfully I do write, but you lost me with the hyperbole used yet again with "parting the Red Sea."<--------hyperbole usually means "emotion" before rational thought, and I don't debate or argue with these types as it's often pointless. As for us not being good this year......... "ya don't say?" Of course we aren't good, but your argument is one with the premise of being not good is strictly talent based with very few other factors. That premise is false. The talent is there at GC. It's in the hallways. That talent is in the hallways BECAUSE of the AD and Head Coach. Because of these factors described which are root causes, you can then get to your point about us "not being good this year." Your statement is true, but it's only half true. There's a reason why we aren't good, and if you think it's lack of talent, then well, I disagree and gave reasons why.

Colobro would have won 5 games this year. Why? Because he would have had about 30 more kids out on the field to choose from. Colobro 0-10 and never had an issue in the past at GC, and all of a sudden, what are the law of averages? LOL, not likely. Your talent level is often a product of how many kids you have to choose from. How many kids you have to choose from is often a product of your AD and Head Coach. Your coaching certainly effects how talent looks to the common eye. As for Akers, I have always said this and still do. 3 years minimum is a must. I think that should be a given for any coach, even if 0-10 this year. Like I wrote, GC will be fine. Talent is down compared to where it has been, but not by much. What's down is.......the overall numbers coming out for football which is what makes up the talent pool to choose from. I don't buy the talent issue like many of you, and no, Akers doesn't "have the entire town up against him." That's a big load of horse manure. As for the talent issue, I have heard that before with a team like VT. They were on the ropes in Beamer's last years and their recruiting and wins/lossed had plummeted compared to where they used to be, and Fuente took over a team that had the lowest recruiting averages for 85 total players that VT had on its roster since pre-1999, and in 18 months, nearly a top 10 team with gameday coming. Did the talent magically get better in 18 months? LOL. Of course it didn't. It's called, coaching. What is different? The pool of talent to choose from is getting better meaning..........at the college level, VT's recruiting is taking an upward flight compared to where Beamer had it when he left, and the process is circular with good coaching, good recruiting, etc. At GC and the High School level, the kids in the hallway and not out for football go hand in hand (opposite) of the process described above with VT. It actually can get better, and it can get better quickly. Graham is an example. It takes the right AD and the right coach for that given program.

"Stupid ingrates." This would be hyperbole and your words, not mine. You gave "Doug" time in my opinion because a significant portion of your fans or one's with a loud voice allowed it to happen, and that was not being very smart compared to "classy program." We disagree on the matter. Just you like you feel GC is showing lack of class by wanting a change, I respect it, but disagree. We are very classy, but smarter, and we have been better because of those smarts. GC's future is fine. Interest in little leagues is down BECAUSE of the AD and coach. We have had little leagues struggle before and our junior high has struggled some, only to do very well at the High School level. GC is loaded with talent and trust me, there is talent walking the halls of GC at both the junior high and high school levels. With that written, could we have a drought? Sure we could. All programs experience such. We disagree a bit on the long, painful and protracted part.

That, I agree with you 100%