tornado99

Despite criticism, under Harris, Tazewell has really developed a culture of hard working kids. I don’t know them personally, but they seem like good kids and community support has grown steadily. Regardless of the outcome on Saturday, they deserve applause.

For a totally out of left field perspective, is it common or effective to recruit a coaching staff and players of fathers and sons? Hear me out… 1. Coaches aren’t paid enough. Dads coach for free because they love the game and care about their children’s welfare. 2. Our cousins across the county line have multiple dads on staff who recently brought their kids with them. (In basketball, another head coach brings his kids to new school.) 3. While I don’t know any of the coaches personally, Union and Graham for example seem to have a huge staff of coaches who are not teachers and don’t appear to be actively coaching on Fridays and Saturdays. So, could the solution be as simple as getting a good head coach? Then a knowledgeable OC and DC (bonus points if athlete’s’ father. Fill the rest with rising little league coaches/fathers. The smaller the school, the quicker it works. (Tongue in cheek/conspiracy theory, but the more I think on it, especially from the money/job perspectives, the more I believe that it could work.)

I don’t know if this is or ever has been their MO, but I like this idea. He does give them a physical presence if the OL can move the LOS.

Rye Cove in a close one. Great season by both these schools. Small community football at its best.

I probably echo Gridiron 60 when it comes to rooting allegiance, Richlands>Tazewell >Graham>Region D, although we differ in Tazewell County order. I’ll admit besides the occasional underdog story, I find myself rooting for Union afterward simply due admiration and tradition. Besides Graham, and occasionally Ridgeview/Gate City being exceptions, there is definitely some basis to the stereotype of Union and their fans’ belief of their physicality. Over the years, I think that belief gives them the edge over most teams that are even talent wise. During the Mance years, I spoke with a coach who said the main difference with the kids was that they “expected to win.” I think that applies to Union in most games throughout the years. I buy into the belief that Union is more physical than most teams based upon my observation over time.

I can see the offensive linemen enjoying running the T. I enjoy seeing it myself. I think in that case, the best athletes are running backs instead of WR. They are sharing carries the same way as the WRs share the hall with the QB spreading it around. I think this is somewhere between the pass happy spread offense and a smash mouth I/Power I where the happiest are the OL and the TB getting continuous carries. Yes, Union is an anomaly.

Is there some merit concerning affordability about scholarships being prioritized for prospects from out of the area from disadvantaged backgrounds? I’m basing this on a conversation a few years ago with a friend whose son was going through the recruiting process. For example, whether local politics or simply talent, my observation locally is that the better players often are from middle or sometimes upper class backgrounds. I’m certain the development is influenced by stability at home and the resources to attend various camps and practices outside what is provided through the schools. The perception leads to the conclusion that that prospect if they are serious about playing can afford to pay for all or some of their education. Meanwhile, the scholarship goes to attract prospects mentioned earlier. Those prospects likely don’t have a backup plan to complete their education. This doesn’t include clear Division 1 outliers that are clearly gifted with extraordinary size and/or speed. Is this scenario a real phenomenon?

In my opinion, Creasy is one of the most talented quarterbacks that I have seen in recent years. I won’t/can’t compare him to his peers mentioned, but we are blessed with several talented quarterbacks. Tazewell is also blessed with some of the best skilled position players around. That said, the criticism and outcome of the game will likely come down the line of scrimmage. As some of said, the poor performances against the better teams are usually the result of a merciless pass rush. Good luck to Tazewell! However, I go with Union, not because of the skill position players and scheme, but because the results I have seen between the offensive and defensive lines.

Confirmed, he is one of those examples, that I honestly believe loves it and enjoys the game and working with those students. Without speaking for them and their motives, he and others made a positive impact on my life and I appreciate it, whether by design or a byproduct. I was obviously not a part of a state title team (district, yes), but the pressure couldn’t have been as much to win at time as lately and now.

Good luck to you. My experience in growing up was similar to yours in both little league and school, but 1/2 or so of mine did not have kids on the team.

Thank you for the response. Warner at Twin Springs is the prototype of the one example of my question. Your disclaimer (and thank you) reminds me of another observation or reason and you may be one of the exceptions, but many coaches often are coaching their children which is or can be a concurrent goal, but sometimes is at the expense of the team (“daddy ball”). This isn’t a bad thing when the whole is made better due to the presence of a truly benevolent coach/dad. It’s when the line is blurred when it possibly reflects nepotism rather than talent. My perception is very few are doing it solely to teach or give back or for the love of the game. (This post isn’t to throw rocks. I have both coached little league to give back and also as a way to do so while spending time with a child. I am particularly interested in the non-parent perspectives.)

Thanks for the clarification and the well wishes. Your post inspired another thread. I’m one of the few who are old enough to remember those darker times prior to 1992, so I hope normal is at least 1992 forward or 2004-2016. The old standard prior to Vaught and Mance was certainly nothing to brag about even though the community has always seemed passionate about football.

Over my lifetime, my observation is that coaching careers are generally shorter. Some areas are more successful in regards to wins and losses than others for a variety of reasons. Those expectations likely increase the amount of stress leading to those shorter careers. I know the values are not mutually exclusive, (striving to win helps instill many virtues), but I’m curious how much the experience and reasons vary from community to community. For example, how different is the prevailing reason for coaches in powerhouses versus the average community with little hopes for state titles? Why do you do it? If any posters are current or former coaches, thank you for your service to your communities regardless of the answers. (This may be a good question for ATW, as the hosts all coached at smaller schools.)

Whoever is selected, is likely to have a heavy lift initially. That said, whether you support an outside hire or inside, the biggest factor in selection is cost. Salary or stipend is only a small part of the equation. The biggest advantage of an insider versus an outsider is the personal cost involved, such as housing, commute, time, and possibly allegiance. An outsider must consider all these things, especially if they have a family. I don’t know anything about the applicant pool, but I’m excited to see about the future.

I may have the wrong impression, and I acknowledge the growth into possibly having both now. However, I believe when Palmer was hired, he embodied the leadership and community support part. I credit the scheming part initially to having great assistants. My opinion was that Mance was able to out coach Graham initially at a time when Graham was getting arguably better athletes. Let’s face it, even before the leverage of the transfer portal, there have been more college caliber athletes coming from the greater Bluefield area. Not only has the talent disparity widened, it is no coincidence that D. Palmer and other coaches have helped immensely on scheme and preparation. I don’t have knowledge specifically of the other coaching staff or longevity, but I know likely that Isabelle and Horton (not meaning others don’t), know football and strength and conditioning. Tony Palmer hasn’t had to be every where and everything. He has wisely delegated and improved by learning from the experience of his staff. Now success continues to breed success as athletes wanting to win continue to deepen the talent pool.

Congratulations, Dogs!

It’s amazing how well the Titans have done since Warner’s arrival. That and Hurley with Tester at the helm a few years ago, are some of the best examples of doing a lot with few resources.

One of the biggest tragedies in Richlands Athletics history. The Mance staff consisting of Palmer, Davisx3, Daugherty, Tarter, Strong, Wess, etc. was one of the best around.

Collier at Rye Cove has done a great job, but not knowing him, I assumed geography would be an issue. I wasn’t aware of Warner’s connection, but know Nickelsville is closer than Duffield. Both of their results cannot be overlooked. Union was very blessed to have Travis Turner ready to step up during consolidation to steer the ship that is usually stacked with talent and tradition.

This is a very interesting take. My biggest concern with talent development trends in most sports is the way to early separation of the haves and have nots. Football especially is dependent upon physicality and way too many potential players are prevented from learning and developing due to injury, burnout, or negative experiences due to bad coaching or late maturity. Smaller teams with seemingly more equitable talent breeds more playing time and fewer blowouts.

This, if doable, is very logical. Occasionally, especially with transfers, Honaker has more absolute talent than Richlands, but usually simply because of numbers, Richlands usually has more talent. Honaker has the advantage of talent relative to enrollment. One or two athletic kids means a world of difference in Class 1, compared to competition. They are clearly the most talented 1D team. When compared to Union, Graham, and Radford, I believe it’s a sizable gap. The Tigers are currently the big fish in the small pond.

From the latter category, how about Rhodes (reportedly turned down before), Warner (Twin Springs), Tommy Crigger (Twin Valley)? Admittedly, I’m not terribly familiar with local ties other than Crigger, but I feel each would have a larger talent pool at their disposal. As far as records, I’m particularly impressed by Twin Springs in recent years.

My question, besides the obvious reason of wanting a challenge (a big one) and the opportunity, would he or the other names mentioned be interested? I’m not against this name, Shane Wicks (as mentioned on After the Whistle), Dennis Palmer, or Greg Mance (a stretch). All of these guys are certainly in better situations currently and some would be difficult healing old wounds or dealing with those who had crossed them, right or wrong. For the life of me, I can’t think of any qualified candidate that would have such a love for Richlands that would take on such a heavy lift. I do think it is going to take 2-3 years, so we as a fan base must be patient. Another thought is who from a smaller school would be bettering themselves?

Didn’t Tazewell have a Moss kid that was a freshman last year or 2 years ago that played well during one of Creasy’s injuries?

I, for one, am not a Tazewell hater. As a matter of fact, I root for them when not playing Richlands. Tonight’s the same; however, otherwise, I am happy for Dennis Palmer’s success. That said, as hopeful as some are (me included), I can’t help but doubt Tazewell. I’ve seen it too many times, and human nature causes me to sometimes wrongly doubt, the same way I have been overly optimistic about the Blues. The reasonable part of me thinks the following: 1. Tazewell wins by “out-athleting” most on their schedule. 2. Graham is one of the few teams that Tazewell does not have an edge in this category. If Graham doesn’t beat themselves by penalties and turnovers, I’m taking the G-men by 10-14.