PDB26

I'm certain the defense got through the game (physically) unscathed! Mentally––very, very scathed. I suppose you could argue we didn't have a single able-bodied player from the opening kickoff given the results. We for sure had one unreported head injury on special teams––of course those were the dying days of the bell-ringing era.

Bruce was big, but he might have been the fifth back on the depth chart for that team. Post and Boehnlein were strong sturdy runners. T-West was, of course, the speed guy, and we had Tyler Iams and Frank Duong competing for reps, too. My recollection of that game is basically gone, but, I seem to remember Valpo making a goal line stand that you describe in regulation in the South end zone. They beat us in OT in the North end zone that year. Unfortunately, I've lost track of the highlight tapes from those years––so I can't verify anything. I'm much sharper when it comes to '02. Same thing happened that year except worse. We had at least three drives get killed inside Valpo's five. Same scenario as you described, except we ran all of the backs into stacked boxes in that game.

Strength of schedule in any single season is less important than it is when repeated year over year, but, to your point, there are many important factors that bear on any program's success. SoS really only comes in once everything else is in place. We had several drives die inside of Valpo's 5. Some might say Gees called that game too tight more than we played awful. There was some procedural controversy around Valpo's go-ahead field goal, but we still got the ball back with enough time for a legitimate chance to win. We were really good that year, and 2002 was a huge lost opportunity for Penn. To bring it back to SoS for a second, Sagarin from '02 is pretty interesting. Penn's SoS was 23rd with 5 top 25 games on the schedule. Warren Central (1) and Penn (2) both went out in the Regional. Also, Ben Davis beat WC and CG in consecutive rounds after losing to both in the regular season. If––not to overlook a semi-state matchup with Snider––Penn had made it to state, then Ben Davis's last three tournament games would have been against the three teams they lost to in the regular season.

I think we agree it was an error for Penn to make their public announcement this way. It always going to be connected to and viewed alongside the masterful production for Notre Dame football by Fighting Irish Media after Freeman was hired with no chance of capturing any of that energy––let alone editing. My contention is that the players' reactions tell us nothing about their willingness to play for Pete. The answer to that question will come on Friday nights.

I wouldn't put too much stock into their "reaction". I don't recall our reaction being all that different when Cory was announced as head coach. We had a pretty simple team meeting in LGI A. There was no dramatic reveal, no hugging and cheering, and Cory didn't spend any time trying to fire us up. We wanted Cory to be the guy, he told us he was going to be himself, it was a relief when the announcement came, and it was business as usual from there.

Really good point. Also, it's weird to be used as a prop for PR as a high schooler and the guys aren't exactly bouncing off the walls listening to the strength coach. @BLACKGOLD2007 I share a bit of the sentiment in that I don't care for handling our business through this type of contrived PR stunt––I have to believe this is Thacker's work. I'd expect a high school's PR misstep wouldn't be enough to affect your optimism given the number of your thoughtful and intelligent contributions to this board.

If he is successful in making Penn a threat in 6A, it will be because he had the courage to force the program into evolving instead of simply iterating on what already exists. Only time will tell on that.

Maybe that's the answer.

It isn't often that I get to feel like I'm right there in those moments anymore, but, for some reason, this did the trick. Thank you.

When Penn was among the elite teams there was greater diversity––relative to the past 20 years––in state finalists, champions, and where they hailed from in the state. I can remember that WC and NC were basically as big or bigger than Penn by 2000. Here's a link from the IHSAA that used enrolled boys in grades 9-11 for the 2001, 2002 season classifications (based on '99-'00 enrollments). https://legacy.ihsaa.org/archive/media/2000-01/121900.htm Certainly, Penn has fallen off to some degree. I'd argue it's related more to which schools have not closed an enrollment gap than those that have, and I don't know if they've necessarily fallen as far as we think. While suburban Indy has grown substantially and more large schools are playing great football here, that growth has not impacted Penn's success in football.

Unless I've lost it, it's four state runner ups for Cory. No need to qualify his success, but, to your point, there are plenty of good programs that would love a single state finals appearance.

I'm agnostic so far as the tournament's format is concerned, but nobody should indulge this type of thinking––especially not from coaches. The idea that there is nothing to play for once you cannot win any type of championship is shameful.

Yes. I think the full statement should be, “everyone wants to feel like they have a chance to win, even though they didn’t earn that chance during the regular season when they had the opportunity, despite substantial evidence that they have no chance to win––especially in football."

I agree with your conclusion, but it's not about uniqueness of the all-in format. As you note, there is no incentive to institute a qualifier because of membership interests. Just as membership interests resulted in the demise of the single-class tournament. In the end, everyone wants to feel like they have a chance to win.

Stares in single-class basketball tournament.