[specialteams5]

Great game tonight . Valleys offense struggled in th second half . But there defense stepped up big . Valley truly should have won this game by 3 or 4 touchdowns . Had a fumble on the 3 yard line ready to score . And had 1 or 2 more fumbles on the night . But there defense were pretty lights out in the 4th qt. LCA scored late in the 4th when the second string was in . LCA was a pretty good football team . May have had the best offense line Valley had seen all year . Bring on the BLACKCATS next week should be another good one . The first one was a dandy .

LCA did have the best O-line that SV has seen. There were several times that LCA's QB had 5, 6, 7 seconds to sit in the pocket. I was very surprised by this because SV's D-line is pretty doggone tough. I really think if LCA had the injured running back it would have went to the wire. Having said that I still think that SV would have still pulled out the win because as has happened so many times before this season, Ratliff will call on the Rowe kid and he will pull through. This is not a slight to the other two RB's because they are good players but Rowe is a great player. It is so good to see power football, props to coach Ratliff for keeping a dying art alive. Also I agree SV's defense played well in the second half. I was worried because I thought pre-game that LCA could pick SV's 5-2 D apart. Again props to SV's Staff and players and congrats to LCA on a great season. They are going to be very tough in the future, they have a very good freshman class as well as sophomore class. Before I shut up I have to say that I am from Pike County, not the SV area though. I sat on the LCA side and man, what a great bunch of people. Good luck next season LCA congrats on this one. SV and coach Ratliff, keep at it get ready for the game of SV footballs life next week and lets bring a trophy home to Pike County.

[Football fan 0]

I don't know what football team you watched last year to say that the offfence last year was as good as this one . I will give coach Hampton some of the credit for this defense playing the way they are but you have got to be joking if you think coach Ratliff is not the man behind this football team. Hampton has been there for years and Valley has never had the defense they have this year .just a coincidence I guess . Know what your talking about before you post and put someone down . Ratliff is the best coach this valley team has had since Saunders . Give him the credit and respect ha deserves .

[baseball1974]

I honestly don't think he would have made any difference. LCA's problem tonight wasn't offense, it was their defense. I believe SV only punted once all night, and were stopped on downs twice.

Valley actually should have had 2 more touchdowns in the second half, but a couple of untimely fumbles deep in LCA territory kept the score where it was.

If their issue was on defense then Whitman would have made a big difference. He is the leading that defense in tackles this year. Having a team's biggest offensive and defensive threat out of a game absolutely makes a difference and it was a difference in a win or loss. I'm actually shocked it was as close as it was.

[More Cowbell]

If their issue was on defense then Whitman would have made a big difference. He is the leading that defense in tackles this year. Having a team's biggest offensive and defensive threat out of a game absolutely makes a difference and it was a difference in a win or loss. I'm actually shocked it was as close as it was.

LCA's defense could not stop Valley's rushing attack, but a couple of fumbles deep in Eagle territory prevented what likely would have been 2 more Wildcat touchdowns. Also, with SV up by 17 points, LCA scored their last touchdown with about a minute to go to make the score a little more respectable.

With better ball security, this game easily could have been a 3 or 4 touchdown margin.

[Old Jumper]

LCA did have the best O-line that SV has seen. There were several times that LCA's QB had 5, 6, 7 seconds to sit in the pocket. I was very surprised by this because SV's D-line is pretty doggone tough. I really think if LCA had the injured running back it would have went to the wire.

LCA has some very nice players up front. The Ach kid, number 53, should be considered one of the best offensive linemen in next year's senior class. Maybe not "D-1 skills" (i.e., height), but a very athletic kid who understands leverage and a very effective high school lineman.

[new o]

if Whitman is better than #52 then it would have been closer. #52 was everywhere last night, if not for him this game would have gotten real ugly real quick. He saved several touchdowns last night.

[baseball1974]

if Whitman is better than #52 then it would have been closer. #52 was everywhere last night, if not for him this game would have gotten real ugly real quick. He saved several touchdowns last night.

#52 is Clay Ach and he's a good defensive player with great instincts. Imagine how LCA would have done with Ach as well as their leader in tackles this game? Shelby Valley deserves credit for showing up and beating the team put in front of them, but I don't think it's fair to say Whitman wouldn't have made a difference. I know you didn't say that in your post. I'm just speaking towards other comments that were made. I know everyone will say that one player doesn't make a difference in a sport with 11 on the field. However, that is a statement that can only be made when the player you're referring to doesn't lead the team in every major offensive and defensive category. I don't know if they win, but it'd been a completely 180 degree difference of a game with Whitman on both sides of the field.

[Old Jumper]

Shelby Valley has a very good team and I consider them a very-slight favorite next week against P-burg. But yes, if Whitman didn't play, they didn't face an LCA team at anywhere near full-strength.

Would it have changed the outcome? Personally, nah, I think the Wildcats would've pulled it out in a close one, anyway. Just hate that the Whitman kid didn't get to finish out his senior season the right way. He was fun to watch, a real throwback-type player.

And my prior post incorrectly designates Ach as number 53. He is number 52. One heck of a player, too.

[AlittleRusty]

If their issue was on defense then Whitman would have made a big difference. He is the leading that defense in tackles this year. Having a team's biggest offensive and defensive threat out of a game absolutely makes a difference and it was a difference in a win or loss. I'm actually shocked it was as close as it was.

LCA's defense could not stop Valley's rushing attack, but a couple of fumbles deep in Eagle territory prevented what likely would have been 2 more Wildcat touchdowns. Also, with SV up by 17 points, LCA scored their last touchdown with about a minute to go to make the score a little more respectable.

With better ball security, this game easily could have been a 3 or 4 touchdown margin.

Not saying that LCA being without their best player would have not made a difference but I have to agree with Cowbell on this one the game wouldn't have been as close without the two untimely fumbles by SV and a fumble by LCA that hasn't been mentioned were two of SV players had a chance to recover the ball in bounce but LCA got a break and the ball went out of bounce, LCA then got the ball back and scored on the next play. Therefore it could have been at least a 3 or 4 touchdown game.

[oneijoe]

This "we're even better than the final score because we fumbled the football" line of thinking is getting a mite old.

A couple of things to keep in mind (not even taking the wing-t into consideration)... The simple ODDS say if you run the football 50 times in a game, the football will find the ground once or twice (just like if a team threw it 40 times 1 or 2 INTs wouldn't be a shock). As to when they happen, that's pure blind luck and part of every game to a degree.

Everyone knows SV is an excellent team. But all the comments about fumbles come off much like complaining about an hourglass-figured girlfriend's big feet.


:biggrin:

[baseball1974]

If Whitman would have been on the field it'd have been a different game. How LCA approached the game offensively would've been different. Defensively it would have been different. Those fumbles may not have happened and several Shelby Valley's first downs and touchdowns may not have happened because the best defensive player wasn't on the field. Even if you only add in his averages on offense and defense and nothing more than that, this game changes significantly. To suggest otherwise is just insane to me. He is the best player on either team and a difference maker on offense and defense.

[EKUAlum05]

Hats off to Valley.

What a remarkable season!

[Real Badman]

I don't know what football team you watched last year to say that the offfence last year was as good as this one . I will give coach Hampton some of the credit for this defense playing the way they are but you have got to be joking if you think coach Ratliff is not the man behind this football team. Hampton has been there for years and Valley has never had the defense they have this year .just a coincidence I guess . Know what your talking about before you post and put someone down . Ratliff is the best coach this valley team has had since Saunders . Give him the credit and respect ha deserves .

Like I've said in other Valley threads, Eric Ratliff is one of the best in the mountains. The cards he was dealt at Jenkins and Magoffin were horrible. Had he been at East Ridge from consolidation until today, ER would have built a dandy program at ER.

[More Cowbell]

With better ball security, this game easily could have been a 3 or 4 touchdown margin.

This "we're even better than the final score because we fumbled the football" line of thinking is getting a mite old.

A couple of things to keep in mind (not even taking the wing-t into consideration)... The simple ODDS say if you run the football 50 times in a game, the football will find the ground once or twice (just like if a team threw it 40 times 1 or 2 INTs wouldn't be a shock). As to when they happen, that's pure blind luck and part of every game to a degree.

Everyone knows SV is an excellent team. But all the comments about fumbles come off much like complaining about an hourglass-figured girlfriend's big feet.

Not saying Shelby Valley is a better team than what the final score showed. On the contrary, the scoreboard at the end of the game said SV was 11 points better than LCA, so that's what I'm going with.

My point about the fumbles is just to state fact: with better ball security, the score could have been more lopsided. Which is 100% true, if Valley had scored touchdowns on those two drives instead of turnovers, the margin is much greater.

But I can't say that Shelby Valley is an even better team than what they showed, simply because they turned the ball over. Like you said, fumbles are a part of the game. The good teams are able to limit them, and overcome them when they do happen.

Look at the first SV-Prestonsburg game for example. Valley outgained P-Burg on the night, but lost partly because of costly fumbles. Am I saying Valley was the better team that night? No, because they were not good enough to overcome those turnovers. At the end of the night, the scoreboard shows that Prestonsburg was the better team, and that's all that matters.

The only reason I mentioned it was because some were attempting to discredit SV's win by saying "things would have been different" if Whitman had played. Would they have been different? Would LCA have won? Maybe, but we will never know. Part of having a good football team is developing depth, so that when injuries occur you have other guys ready to step in. And injuries are as much a part of the game as turnovers, so you might as well expect them to happen.

I guess it just comes down to this. If Valley hadn't fumbled, would the margin have been higher? Probably, but they did fumble, so that's that. And if Whitman had played, would the score have been closer? Probably, but you play with who you got, and that's that.

[oneijoe]

Not saying Shelby Valley is a better team than what the final score showed. On the contrary, the scoreboard at the end of the game said SV was 11 points better than LCA, so that's what I'm going with.

My point about the fumbles is just to state fact: with better ball security, the score could have been more lopsided. Which is 100% true, if Valley had scored touchdowns on those two drives instead of turnovers, the margin is much greater.

But I can't say that Shelby Valley is an even better team than what they showed, simply because they turned the ball over. Like you said, fumbles are a part of the game. The good teams are able to limit them, and overcome them when they do happen.

Look at the first SV-Prestonsburg game for example. Valley outgained P-Burg on the night, but lost partly because of costly fumbles. Am I saying Valley was the better team that night? No, because they were not good enough to overcome those turnovers. At the end of the night, the scoreboard shows that Prestonsburg was the better team, and that's all that matters.

The only reason I mentioned it was because some were attempting to discredit SV's win by saying "things would have been different" if Whitman had played. Would they have been different? Would LCA have won? Maybe, but we will never know. Part of having a good football team is developing depth, so that when injuries occur you have other guys ready to step in. And injuries are as much a part of the game as turnovers, so you might as well expect them to happen.

I guess it just comes down to this. If Valley hadn't fumbled, would the margin have been higher? Probably, but they did fumble, so that's that. And if Whitman had played, would the score have been closer? Probably, but you play with who you got, and that's that.

You GOT it !! :notworthy