DLS-Gorman

[NorCalRuss]

46 minutes ago, steeler01 said:

If I'm BG, I walk up Gaoteote to the LOS and have him be disruptive there.

That can lead to some stuffs but also long runs up middle by Robinson. 

 

[1DayPGA]

41 minutes ago, Mjd33 said:

If I'm Sanchez this is exactly what I would do .... give him limited coverage responsibility .... just take the leash off and have him create mayhem. 

If I'm Alumbaugh. I'd slip Gaoteote a bunch of laxatives and have him create mayhem on the field. Might be the only way you can stop him. 

[NorCalRuss]

Is DLS flying or bus? That's a long ass bus ride thru the desert

[1DayPGA]

6 minutes ago, NorCalRuss said:

Is DLS flying or bus? That's a long ass bus ride thru the desert

Flying out Friday and returning Sunday morning.

[World Citizen]

1 hour ago, ThunderRam said:

Grant Union went up there the very next season and shut Bellevue out. Though they still won State, not really sure how good those Bellevue teams really were.

They were good enough that if you didn't have an extremely athletic, top end defense that played assignment football, you would probably lose.  Grant was all that imo.  Don't know how many points they gave up that year but it wasn't much.  They could have shut DLS down as much as anybody could shut them down that year.  That would have been a great game. 

[World Citizen]

1 hour ago, PrepGridiron said:

FWIW, this DLS team is extremely physical. They were a bit timid at the start of the SJC game, but once they started laying hat, the momentum started to shift. If they come out even more physical then they have in the first three games, I like their chances.

I love how DLS hits.  Just love it.  Almost to a man, year in and year out, they hit you.  Win or lose they hit you.  D1 talent or not, they hit you.   

[Pops]

52 minutes ago, Mjd33 said:

Eh it's a wash. 

The reason I put "talented" in quotes is that it's per recruiting analysts.  By that measure, I think it'd be hard to call it a wash.  This from scout:

Bishop Gorman

Seniors

5* LB

4* QB

4* TE

3* WR

3* OL

3* DE

3* WR

2* CB

2* LB

2* CB

Juniors

4* ATH

0 * OL (w 3 FBS offers)

0* CB (w FBS offer)

sophomores

QB w PAC 12 offer

RB w/ multiple PAC 12 offers

 

De La Salle

3 4* players -- Sr DL, Jr LB, Jr TE

2* RB

[1DayPGA]

32 minutes ago, World Citizen said:

They were good enough that if you didn't have an extremely athletic, top end defense that played assignment football, you would probably lose.  Grant was all that imo.  Don't know how many points they gave up that year but it wasn't much.  They could have shut DLS down as much as anybody could shut them down that year.  That would have been a great game. 

Grant had one badass defense that year  with Mola, Lopa, Sample, and Shaq. Thompson who was a soph. Think they had 7 or 8 shutouts that year. Don't know how they ended up losing to Rocklin in the last game. Grant gets on the national radar about every 10 yrs. It'd be good to see them back up there again. 

[ThunderRam]

1 hour ago, Mjd33 said:

BG was better than MD in the trenches last year and could match them skill position wise. JT better pro prospect than martell but Tate was an incredible hs qb .... he's a winner. Cocky as shit but still a winner ..... 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that MD would surely win a hypothetical game. Just trying to make the point that just because BG has lost 2 games this season doesn't necessarily mean that they are really down. Perhaps the opponents they lost to are just really, really good. And to re-enforce that idea, I made the comment that I believe this current MD team could hang with last year's BG team which obviously didn't lose a game.

In short, BG lost to 2 elite teams. That happens from time to time when you play these types of games. Even when you have the necessary horses.

[Mjd33]

1 hour ago, Pops said:

So you don't think my "1 chance in 3" is as outrageous as it was 2 weeks ago?

🤠

Things change pops! 

[ThunderRam]

47 minutes ago, World Citizen said:

They were good enough that if you didn't have an extremely athletic, top end defense that played assignment football, you would probably lose.  Grant was all that imo.  Don't know how many points they gave up that year but it wasn't much.  They could have shut DLS down as much as anybody could shut them down that year.  That would have been a great game. 

 

Totally agree. In fact I've cited that Bellevue game many times in support of the idea that DLS would have had their hands full with that Pacers team. They were upset by a Rocklin team that was exceptional not only on the ground, but in the air too. One dimensional offenses couldn't move the ball on Grant Union. They just completely stuffed the run and had a pass rush that overwhelmed pass heavy teams. As well balanced and talented as that Rocklin team was, they still only scored 21 points and had to rely on a missed 21-yd FG to pull off the upset.

It's funny how things work out. Having seen all those teams play a lot, the 2009 Pacers team that lost in the section semi's  to Rocklin was better than the 2008 team that won the Open State title. I think the 2010 team was better than the 08 team too, they just suffered too many injuries to key two way players and ran into a hot Folsom team with a very dynamic offense and dual threat QB.

[Rippers]

"Just trying to make the point that just because BG has lost 2 games this season doesn't necessarily mean that they are really down."

And you are probably right.  However, even if BG wins state and finished the season with 3 losses, someone somewhere will take up the narrative that they sucked and DLS took advantage of it sometime between the end of the season and beyond.  If they finish with 2 losses, implying that they beat DLS, someone will still use the loss to demean DLS's season, especially if DLS ends up with only that 1 loss (or even a second loss vs MD to end the season).

People have been decrying DLS's success since the invention of the internet message board.   The evolution of their digressions has been amusing to say the least.

[AztecPadre]

3 hours ago, ECHS05 said:

Would have beat BG every year but last year...?

You actually believe that dont you.

Last year was a somewhat down year for DLS.  At least by DLS standards so its entirely possible the bishop could have won last year.  But every other year?  The bishop had no chance.

[1DayPGA]

If BG loses their 3rd game in a row "Lucy will have some esplaining to do to Senor Ferrtita"

[Pops]

12 minutes ago, Mjd33 said:

Things change pops! 

Or enlightenment hits us at different times

i knew DLS was better and was BG wasn't going to be as good (I said they'd start 2-2, so now I'm hoping for 1-3). Still, they're a talented group of kids whose 1st 4 opponents are top 10 (or, for dematha, were at game time).  

I like "pick'em" as the current call in the desert 

[Cossacks]

3 hours ago, Pops said:

DLS was the underdog when both games were scheduled (2010, 2017)

they would have been a favorite if a game were scheduled anytime from 2011-2015

 

[Cossacks]

33 minutes ago, ThunderRam said:

 

Totally agree. In fact I've cited that Bellevue game many times in support of the idea that DLS would have had their hands full with that Pacers team. They were upset by a Rocklin team that was exceptional not only on the ground, but in the air too. One dimensional offenses couldn't move the ball on Grant Union. They just completely stuffed the run and had a pass rush that overwhelmed pass heavy teams. As well balanced and talented as that Rocklin team was, they still only scored 21 points and had to rely on a missed 21-yd FG to pull off the upset.

It's funny how things work out. Having seen all those teams play a lot, the 2009 Pacers team that lost in the section semi's  to Rocklin was better than the 2008 team that won the Open State title. I think the 2010 team was better than the 08 team too, they just suffered too many injuries to key two way players and ran into a hot Folsom team with a very dynamic offense and dual threat QB.

The 10' Grant team that played Folsom in the CIF/SJS finals was a shell of themselves. I was at the first game and it wasn't that close. Second game might have been a little tighter ( 2-3 TD's) against a healthy Grant, but Grant still wins for sure. 

Amd I do think the healthy version of Grant matched up wlll w DLS and def could have beat them.

 

 

[Eddyr2]

if BG starts off 1-3...

[Pops]

11 minutes ago, Cossacks said:

 

Prove me wrong

no question, I assume, on BG being the favorite when both games were scheduled

also, assume you're rationale enough to concede '11-'13

that only leaves '14 and '15 to debate

dLs win CP both years and in '15, started #1 in several human polls

maybe '14...... maybe

[Cossacks]

1 minute ago, Pops said:

Prove me wrong

no question, I assume, on BG being the favorite when both games were scheduled

also, assume you're rationale enough to concede '11-'13

that only leaves '14 and '15 to debate

dLs win CP both years and in '15, started #1 in several human polls

maybe '14...... maybe

Prove you wrong? C''mom Pops you know that's impossible since the games were never played. I'll succumb it's just my opinion I could be wrong.

[Pops]

Just now, Cossacks said:

Prove you wrong? C''mom Pops you know that's impossible since the games were never played. I'll succumb it's just my opinion I could be wrong.

I was responding to someone suggesting that DLS was waiting for the right time to schedule Gorman2

theyve been as good or better than Gorman every year since except last year

i wasnt trying to say who wins as much as I was making a point in who was considered stronger the offseason prior (for scheduling purposes)

DLS finished 3rd, 7th, 1st, 6th, 3rd, and 3rd in company polls from '10-'15 when they did NOT schedule Gorman and now they scheduled a 3x defending USAT champ against a team that was called DLS's worst team in last 25

[Las Vegas_JC]

4 hours ago, Pops said:

Will there be a pregame handshake?

Sure why not!

[Las Vegas_JC]

4 hours ago, Sammyswordsman said:

Not a chance.  And no postgame handshake from Sanchez if the Bishop were to lose.

Et tu Samuel?

I think the proper term for you is a nut hugger. First it's Servite, then Gorman and now it's MD. 

[Sammyswordsman]

1 minute ago, Las Vegas_JC said:

Et tu Samuel?

I think the proper term for you is a nut hugger. First it's Servite, then Gorman and now it's MD. 

 

[Las Vegas_JC]

1 minute ago, Sammyswordsman said:

 

Spineless and squidly