foxbat

The district model has been there a long time in Texas ... easily back into the 70s when I was a youngster playing junior high ball. I think, given where Indiana is with conferences and the all-in model, it would be hard to implement a district model given the disruption and/or dissolution of the conference model and the flexibility that it tends to provide. With that said, if a district model did find its way to the Hoosier state, I wouldn't be surprised if it came concurrently with a reduced-participation/qualification to the post-season. There'd actually be little reason to impose a district model, at the detriment to conferences and several potential rivalries, and still retaining an all-in model. Having come from the Texas model, I must say that I rather enjoy the all-in model, but do understand the issues of putting some "skin on the bones" of the regular season games, so I'm not adverse to retaining an all-in and doing some type of seeding or first-game homefield guarantee or even a combination to add some relevance to the regular season play ...maybe something like 1 & 2 are guaranteed to be on opposite sides of the bracket and also get home field for the first game of sectionals. Could also see, if a more pragmatic way could be determined for "ranking/rating" rather than using the bottom/top team-in-the-bracket for homefield tie breakers, you'd use use the ranking/rating. Do that into regionals and you'd see folks playing for keeps ... of course you'd have to find a ranking that takes out the differentials or scrap the mercy rule if that's the route taken.

You are correct in the assertion that the need for conferences diminishes drastically under the Texas model. If implemented in an Indiana environment, it wouldn't necessarily preclude the existence of conferences, but it could certainly alter their make-up or even the relevance of the games in those. Some folks would argue, with an all-in format, the conference model games are already diminished to playing for pride or bragging rights as opposed to post-season relevance. There are also some conferences where, because of the make-up, a district model would probably fundamentally change the conference ... almost to the point of maybe disbanding. The Hoosier Conference, which has 1A, 2A, 3A, and 4A in it, would likely see about half the teams get peeled off in one form or another. There would, potentially depending on the size of the districts, be room for a couple of other non-district games thrown in, but for some programs that wouldn't help retain them in the conference. Western is currently the lone 4A program in the HC and LCC is the lone 1A program in the conference. If Indiana went to 8-team districts in class/grouping, those two teams would only be able to schedule, at most two non-district games with the rest of the HC to still potentially be able to qualify for post-season. The HC crossover game would go away and, you might find that proximity might mean that the same two teams might be scheduled over and over ... e.g., in the case of LCC, West Lafayette and Benton Central.

Most likely, like Texas, the districts would be created as artificial groupings ... usually with a tie to proximity, but not the only thing. It would potentially end up diminishing the role of conferences in some places, or as in the case of Texas, pretty much all together. Of course, new rivalries would pop up due to being forced into districts and those games carrying not just bragging rights implications, but specific post-season tournament implications.

Given that Prairie beat Central by nearly 5 TDs and Sagarin has Prairie ranked 23 points higher than Central, there's no sandbagging involved. It will indeed prove a bigger test than Week 1 of sectionals; especially for the Knights to work on the things that were noted above.

My bad, I was thinking Linton ... which fits with @BendNotBreak's issue of 1A/2A teams knocking off other teams with D1 players.

At times it looked good and at other times, not enough pressure. Seems like LCC's playing more reserved with the LBs this year than has typically been the issue in the past. In the past, the LBs often seemed like part of the defensive line and made it easier for the D-line to raise holy he// because that offensive line was often dealing with linebackers coming all the time. It seems more like LBs are doing more bend-not-break watching for screens or short slants and also covering sideline to sideline. LCC's horizontal play was really good last night and that's a result of that side-to-side flow from the linebackers. My concern was more with D-line penetration on run plays; especially in the gut. I haven't seen stats for last night's game, but there were a few runs off that right side, guard-tackle and tackle-end, that ended up yielding first downs on 3rd and medium and 2nd and long plays. The pass rush is probably less of a concern, at least in my mind, because the secondary plays well and those LBs keep the short passing game in check fairly well. Onken, LB, had a pick 6, and Regich, CB, also ended up with a pick as well. Central had a couple of decent passes, but for the most part, I never got the feeling that LCC was in danger from the Central passing game on a regular basis.

Most likely Kiser.

I think that's just us Catholics ... last week a couple of parishioners were outside the confessional betting a round of drinks on whose list of sins would draw the bigger penance from the priest. In case you were wondering, I won. 😄

And drinking Jobu's rum before last night's game didn't help matters either.

When you are 2A, frankly it doesn't matter how much bigger a 6A school is. For 2,200 vs. 6,000 in the same class, the marginal increase in the thousands are important. For 542, once you get to 2,000 a couple thousand more won't make any difference.

Actually, I'm still going to pick, but Northwestern and Oak Hill let me down and dropping those seven points, plus trying to pick-up a couple going against Twin Lakes, makes any type of long-shot comeback virtually impossible unless @CoachDurham is going to make everything else 10-pointers from here on out ... *wink* *wink* *nudge* *nudge* ... A nod's as good as a wink to a blind [fox]bat!

Really not a need to question Mr. Kiser's abilities ... nor Mr. Bell's. I only know of Mr. Kiser what I've been told by those who know him and from what I gathered from a couple of very brief interactions with the young man at LCC-Pioneer games, but I think he'd probably be the first one to tell you that his Mr. Football title was as much a team title as an individual title. He'd probably tell you that he's a product of his coaches, his teammates, his parents, and even his competitors and, without them, he wouldn't be the player that he is. He strikes me as a young man would give up 10 Mr. Football titles for one blue ring for his team, even as a back-up QB, as long as he got to help the team. He strikes me as a young man who's likely to forget his own helmet on the field making sure that his fellow players didn't forget theirs. I enjoyed watching him play and what his team could do because of him and also because of what he could do because of his team. In the end, regardless of the team he plays for, I think he's a fine young man ... and that will be true for him long after he's stopped playing the game of football.

For the most part, it was the same for LCC when they went to 2A. They were eliminated by fellow HC member, Tipton, who was state runner-up that year, in the second sectional game. The next year, they got bounced in semi-state by fellow HC member, and state champion that year, RCHS. With any luck, Pioneer will get a similar type opportunity next year to see some additional teams through at least regionals. Let's be honest, for LCC and Pioneer, being good and getting bounced early has kind of been the storyline. For the last ten years, LCC and Pioneer have been knocking each other out of tourney play early on. For the last ten prior seasons, LCC and Pioneer have ended each other's seasons eight of the ten years and the only two years that didn't happen, LCC was in 2A and had their seasons ended by fellow HC members. This year LCC and Pioneer were spared ending each other's seasons only to have an HC member do it to Pioneer. 2021 marks the potential return of the an awaited LCC-Pioneer match-up ... possibly even in 2A pending Pioneer besting LCC's run in 2A by picking up a semi-state win next year or LCC picking up a couple of visits to LOS this/next season.

Still got next year to win a regional.

LCC looked good last night, but they have some work to do on defensive line penetration. It was good at times, but inconsistent. Too many big runs for first downs without necessarily hitting the edge. Secondary looked good. Special teams were very good. Good test coming against CP and a chance to get crisper and sharper.

Then why post a score of loss to a 3A team?

I do recall LCC playing the #1 team in 3A at the time and coming away with a win. Don't recall where RCHS was ranked when they won 2A.

You do realize that LCC's been there before? Played the 2A state champion to a 3-point game and played the2A state runner-up with a minute of likely taking their place when they were there.

The question is "How good is Laville's passing game compared to West Lafayette's?" Cass has had two opportunities to prep against that type of air war and come out with a win recently. Is Laville's run game, coupled with their passing game, similar to West Lafayette's ability to balance the two AND run an up-tempo offense? If not, I'll take the Kings.

Clinton Central scores on last play of game. LCC wins 40-6.

Looks like the Knights will host Clinton Prairie next week as Prairie is in complete control over Frontier 54-6 at final.

Gallo with a 39-yd field goal. LCC 40 - CC 0 with 11:02 left in 4Q.

Twin Lakes 28-14 over Hanover Central toward end on 2Q.

20-yd TD reception by Roach. PAT good. LCC 37 - CC 0 with 4:55 left in 3Q.