vs LA in the the 8A title game.
I believe it. The return of Scott Cavanaugh, this time via transfer, though.
I believe it. The return of Scott Cavanaugh, this time via transfer, though.
Naperville North
- Thread starter JCHILLTOPPERS
- Start date
Yes - THE Loyola Academy lost to NN in 1992, 21-11 but rebounded in 1993 to win State. They are hopeful of the same scenario after last year.
No... you have to lose to us (THE Naperville North) in the title game before the scenario can play out. I'm down with that.
I agree. As we know, its not always the most talented team that wins. Peter
I agree. As we know, its not the most talented team that wins. As for Peter Patton, he was one of the most celebrated players in the history of the Catholic League. A 3 year varsity starter in basketball, baseball and football. He accepted a scholarship to play basketball at Depaul for Ray Meyer. Pretty special. Typifies the LA student/athlete.
We'll see what happens. No offense because NN is a terrific school, but it lacks the consistency in football to be discussed with the day in and day out powerhouses.
JChill started the thread as a prediction of a big season for NN as they sported a return-to-glory season last year and are the beneficiary of a (possibly) big-time transfer QB.
Stirring the pot is his game baby
Alex Illich, Terry Glavin, Jamie Baisley...3 of the hardest hitters I've ever seen. Should have won 8A in 90.
I had dinner with a Prospect coach last night who was on the staff for them during their three early 2000 championships. He brought up Mt. Carmel, who was their opponent in the big game. On film, he stated that MC were beasts and Prospect had no business being on the field with them. However, their thinking during the week was that Mt. Carmel and by extension Loyola ( today ), were so good and play such tough competition during the regular season that they gain such confidence in their playbook and the system, that they don't add wrinkles or make significant changes for the Championship game. At that point he said, the Prospect coaching staff knew that through extensive film study they would be able to slow Mt. Carmel down on offense, and by adding wrinkles, change the formations and play their studs both ways for that game would move the ball on them and be able to compete. Sure enough, the game went as they thought and they ended up winning.
This is the issue I believe for the Catholic League. They are so talented and physical, that they believe if they run their system, they cannot lose. I think this type of thinking is misguided and that for that one Championship or semi game, there are no rules. There are no untouchable players. They'll have the off season to rest. It was a very interesting conversation with a very accomplished and respected coach.
This is some truth to that for sure, but I have a hard time fathoming ANYONE/ANYTEAM/ANYCOACH "being complacent" and/or being "over confident" in the state championship game....
.......Then I look at last years game and the under-utilization of Baby Gronk,..and have to begrudgingly agree..
I agree that it can lead to road blocks in certain situations. GW's two recent interactions showed both sides of that double edge sword. Against MC, GW was able to match MC's guys which allowed GW to scheme into MC's offense and effectively shut it down. LA just had an overwhelming o-line that was able to man handle GW's smaller LBs and line which made them unstoppable without the wrinkles. Of course the next week, MS had the answer with the baddest man in IL in the middle that destroyed the scheme at the LOS which threw LA off their game a bit.
I'm still amazed at the game MS threw at LA last year. Not sure anyone but @MS4EVER saw coming, and I'm not sure even he saw that game coming.
That guy looked more like an NFL player than any other high school kid I've ever seen....maybe Boo boo Thompson but not even sure he was as big as Jarvis.
I don't think it's about bein complacent - I think they have such tremendous success with their system and core plays all year that they gain confidence, so why change?