233 replies to this topic

[JohnMcClane]

Rd2Glory, on 02 November 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

Well, so far, no non-NWC fan has come on here and said they felt the NWC will be better off without LCC.

As you said, "everyone outside of the NWC is A LOT of folks"... not one of them has said otherwise to my knowledge.

I believe you are correct. I haven't seen anyone from outside the NWC on here saying the NWC would be better without LSCC. Also no one from outside the NWC is saying they want LSCC either. So why should the NWC be stuck with LSCC and their baggage if no one else wants to deal with it either. Addition by subtraction is the case here.

[paynepanthers]

It was a mistake for the NWC when they asked/voted/pushed/kicked/shoved LCC out of the conference. Some of the schools would probably never be able to compete with LCC in any sport but that shouldn't really matter. Whatever school represents the conference in whatever OHSAA tournament brings recognition to the rest of the conference. I really think it was a shortsighted decision that does nothing to enhance the reputations of the remaining members.


*Full disclosure I live in a NWC community that was probably one of the schools that asked/voted/pushed/kicked/shoved LCC out of the conference.

[clutch]

TheFan, on 02 November 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

Look at it this way... IF Decker was playing for LCC this year, then LCC would be a "legitimate" threat in this years playoffs! Heck, they would probably get out of their region!?!?!!?

If decker played for lcc, he would get <10 carries a game. Decker would be such a game changer and would make the difference in lcc getting out of the region? He couldn't bring his team to a victory over lcc though?

Stop the comparisons. Two very good backs. Decker won back of the year and he deserved it so let's leave it at that.

Oh yea....congrats to coach cooper - COACH of the year

[Johnstown Benny]

JohnMcClane, on 02 November 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

I believe you are correct. I haven't seen anyone from outside the NWC on here saying the NWC would be better without LSCC. Also no one from outside the NWC is saying they want LSCC either. So why should the NWC be stuck with LSCC and their baggage if no one else wants to deal with it either. Addition by subtraction is the case here.

Now here's an interesting spin on the decision to toss LCC out of the NWC. . . ."the league was stuck with
LSCC and their baggage". . . .the reference to LCC as "LSCC" is baseless unless you can provide some
specifics and exactly what is the "baggage" you refer to ? Again, please clarify with some examples. Until
then, I'll consider this as your "baggage claim".

Apparently the NWC believes that the best way to improve the status of the conference is to simply boot the
most athletically successful member out. I guess to use your logic, that would be considered as "strengthening
by weakening".

JB

[Kennedy]

osufan512, on 02 November 2012 - 06:27 AM, said:

If this is your opinion then you clearly are clueless on LCCs offensive philosophy. They run motion on every play with the threat that the motion man will have the ball pitched to him or handed to him running full speed at the snap of the ball using the quickness and athleticism that they possess. Off of that threat is the inside power run game and the passing attack to keep teams from keying outside every play. Washington is the HB and is used in the inside run game. Notice I said earlier LCC wants to get the ball outside more than up inside. This means Washingtons plays are all the second option to what they really want to do with the ball. So, in order for the offense to work the way it is supposed to, yes other kids need to carry the ball. It's not a 1980s I-form offense where the TB gets 30 carries a game. I bet if you looked at the stats he probably averaged 10-13 carries per game. They run about 50-55 plays in a game. Meaning he can only account for around 20% of their offense. Do some homework on teams play style and philosophy before you come on here and say that if he was that good he would be the only one needing carries.

Oh ok. Thank you for educating me. I'm still lost as to why you wouldn't feed him non stop if hes so good. Because the defense will "see it coming"? Is that what your saying?

[osufan512]

Kennedy, on 02 November 2012 - 01:04 PM, said:

Oh ok. Thank you for educating me. I'm still lost as to why you wouldn't feed him non stop if hes so good. Because the defense will "see it coming"? Is that what your saying?

It's just not their system. It's like saying Kenton may have a really good back that gets the ball 6 times a game. He could be better than a lot of backs but the system doesn't allow for it.

[TheFan]

The truth of the matter is this..... the folks who voted felt that Decker was the #1 back in the NWC this year. Fortunately, they didn't leave the voting up to the folks who frequent the "corner".

[maddog20/20]

In regards to the Decker/Washington debate:
Let's say they switched teams. Would Ada be better with Washington or would LCC be better with Decker? I think both are great backs, but I think Decker would make LCC better than Washington would Ada. Washington probably has Decker in overall speed and quickness, but I just think Decker has an edge running between the tackles as well as his receiving ability. Just my opinion.

In regards to whether LCC should be in the NWC:
All schools in the NWC are public schools. They draw their student body (for the most part) from the poeple who live in their school district. The "problem" with a private school like LCC, there is no school district. Thay can draw students from anywhere parents are willing to drive from in order for their kids attend a private school and/or get a Catholic education. FYI, I attended a Catholic school and feel it was exceptionally beneficial. I believe that the fear among many NWC schools was that without true district boundaries, how big could LCC end up getting? I realize that the facilities would limit the student population to some extent, but the possibility to grow is there. More students = more athletes (potentially). With that being said, if Paulding were to get really good in all sports such as LCC, do you think there would be a push to get them out based on the size of their school?

[Rd2Glory]

maddog20/20, on 02 November 2012 - 01:28 PM, said:

In regards to the Decker/Washington debate:
Let's say they switched teams. Would Ada be better with Washington or would LCC be better with Decker? I think both are great backs, but I think Decker would make LCC better than Washington would Ada. Washington probably has Decker in overall speed and quickness, but I just think Decker has an edge running between the tackles as well as his receiving ability. Just my opinion.

In regards to whether LCC should be in the NWC:
All schools in the NWC are public schools. They draw their student body (for the most part) from the poeple who live in their school district. The "problem" with a private school like LCC, there is no school district. Thay can draw students from anywhere parents are willing to drive from in order for their kids attend a private school and/or get a Catholic education. FYI, I attended a Catholic school and feel it was exceptionally beneficial. I believe that the fear among many NWC schools was that without true district boundaries, how big could LCC end up getting? I realize that the facilities would limit the student population to some extent, but the possibility to grow is there. More students = more athletes (potentially). With that being said, if Paulding were to get really good in all sports such as LCC, do you think there would be a push to get them out based on the size of their school?

Maddog, I'm not arguing that LCC is a good fit in the NWC, I do not believe that they are.

My question though, is that if the "problem" is a lack of boundaries, doesn't open enrollment by public schools nullify this?

Personally, I think the difference lies in geography, rather than any differing rules. LCC, obviously, is from a city where there are 7 high schools and students/families often switch between these schools. All other schools in the conference (except Jefferson) are in a town with one high school. I don't think the one high school towns are comfortable with kids moving in and out of schools like they do in cities where there are more than one choice.

I don't know that there are any numbers out there to back this up, but I would be willing to bet that LCC has a smaller percent of transfers each year than the other Lima schools (except Temple).

Edited by Rd2Glory, 02 November 2012 - 01:44 PM.

[Kennedy]

osufan512, on 02 November 2012 - 01:14 PM, said:

It's just not their system. It's like saying Kenton may have a really good back that gets the ball 6 times a game. He could be better than a lot of backs but the system doesn't allow for it.

So you're saying that, hypothetically, Barry Sanders could have moved to Lima, enrolled his son at LCC and cooper would only get him 10 touches a game because thats his system?

[clutch]

Kennedy, on 02 November 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

So you're saying that, hypothetically, Barry Sanders could have moved to Lima, enrolled his son at LCC and cooper would only get him 10 touches a game because thats his system?

Probably more like 15 but yes I think that's what he's saying.

[Kennedy]

clutch, on 02 November 2012 - 04:39 PM, said:

Probably more like 15 but yes I think that's what he's saying.

Sounds like a waste to me. Mayb he'll get it to washington more in the playoffs, assuming he is that good, in an attempt to actually make it out of the region.

Edited by Kennedy, 02 November 2012 - 04:48 PM.

[clutch]

Kennedy, on 02 November 2012 - 04:46 PM, said:

Sounds like a waste to me. Mayb he'll get it to washington more in the playoffs, assuming he is that good, in an attempt to actually make it out of the region.

Maybe.

Instead of a lead blocker, he uses misdirection with jet and rocket motion. Obviously for this to work, those motion backs need to also get the ball. Just the way it is I guess.

[jeffcat-bucki]

maddog20/20, on 02 November 2012 - 01:28 PM, said:

With that being said, if Paulding were to get really good in all sports such as LCC, do you think there would be a push to get them out based on the size of their school?

10 years ago, you could have said, "If Ada were to get really good...". The answer is clearly no.

[TheGreatBambino]

Kennedy, on 01 November 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

More excuses. If he was head and shoulders above the rest like you claim, no one else would "need" carries.

If you have a team full of top athletes they need to touch the ball. The easiest way of getting them the ball is giving them a pitch or hand off.

[Badlands]

Johnstown Benny, on 02 November 2012 - 12:25 PM, said:

Now here's an interesting spin on the decision to toss LCC out of the NWC. . . ."the league was stuck with
LSCC and their baggage". . . .the reference to LCC as "LSCC" is baseless unless you can provide some
specifics and exactly what is the "baggage" you refer to ? Again, please clarify with some examples. Until
then, I'll consider this as your "baggage claim".

Apparently the NWC believes that the best way to improve the status of the conference is to simply boot the
most athletically successful member out. I guess to use your logic, that would be considered as "strengthening
by weakening".

JB

How many people do you ask to add evidence to LSCC.....your toast admit it....nobody is rooting for LCC...you destoyed your own empire.....

[Rd2Glory]

Badlands, on 02 November 2012 - 07:07 PM, said:

How many people do you ask to add evidence to LSCC.....your toast admit it....nobody is rooting for LCC...you destoyed your own empire.....

He'll probably keep asking people to give evidence or facts backing up their "LSCC" comments until someone provides evidence or facts.

[GATA]

Badlands, on 02 November 2012 - 07:07 PM, said:

How many people do you ask to add evidence to LSCC.....your toast admit it....nobody is rooting for LCC...you destoyed your own empire.....

Still waiting on your answer big fella....

Ha

[dawgs87]

Lcc simply has outgrown the NWC, it was a good ride while it lasted, time to move on people. The NWC will be fine, and Lcc will move on. Both the conference and lcc have produced fine athletic teams before 2005/06, and they will continue to do so. Once again, Lcc is starting to get some major D1 (B1G not MAC) talent on their team, playing up will benefit them and the development of these kids. The rest of the NWC communities will continue to compete at their level D5-6, and every once and a while produce some MAC quality college athletes. I think it will be interesting to see how these communities develop over time, I feel that a lot of people that grew up in these NWC communities are living and working in more metropolitan areas, not sure how many of these towns and villages have experienced growth over the past 10 yrs, I know CG has declined slightly in population, though they have had one of the biggest K classes enroll a few yrs ago.

[Mr Bearcat]

maddog20/20, on 02 November 2012 - 01:28 PM, said:

In regards to the Decker/Washington debate:
Let's say they switched teams. Would Ada be better with Washington or would LCC be better with Decker? I think both are great backs, but I think Decker would make LCC better than Washington would Ada. Washington probably has Decker in overall speed and quickness, but I just think Decker has an edge running between the tackles as well as his receiving ability. Just my opinion.

In regards to whether LCC should be in the NWC:
All schools in the NWC are public schools. They draw their student body (for the most part) from the poeple who live in their school district. The "problem" with a private school like LCC, there is no school district. Thay can draw students from anywhere parents are willing to drive from in order for their kids attend a private school and/or get a Catholic education. FYI, I attended a Catholic school and feel it was exceptionally beneficial. I believe that the fear among many NWC schools was that without true district boundaries, how big could LCC end up getting? I realize that the facilities would limit the student population to some extent, but the possibility to grow is there. More students = more athletes (potentially). With that being said, if Paulding were to get really good in all sports such as LCC, do you think there would be a push to get them out based on the size of their school?

This what I have been saying the whole time bout the boundry/enrollment thing. Some LCC supporters do Not understand they have an advantage in enrollment and geography wise. The only argument is weak, because Public schools lose students in open enrollment also. The only way Private schools get students is open enrollment. 90% of the Public School Enrollment is district bound, therefore the Geography advantage is big.