WK1 Ironton @ Wheelersburg AUG 29

[Gray Fighting Tiger]

Regarding Ironton's enrollment, I think it has been noted elsewhere on SEOP that Ironton is now graduating about ONE THIRD as many students as was the case when Bob Lutz started as head coach back in the early 70s. Does that make a difference? I say yes.

[ohbuckeye2]

Regarding Ironton's enrollment, I think it has been noted elsewhere on SEOP that Ironton is now graduating about ONE THIRD as many students as was the case when Bob Lutz started as head coach back in the early 70s. Does that make a difference? I say yes.

Ironton Graduating classes:

1974 - 188 - (112 Boys)
2014 - 81 -- (41 Boys)

[YOU'RE TIGER BAIT]

I remember in the late 70's ironton st. joe having more males than 41.

[YOU'RE TIGER BAIT]

and I predict next time they do the enrollment figures we will be squarely into division 6. I think we only missed it with this new change by 2 players.
unless we have some bigger classes coming up.

[Mad-Dogg]

Does anyone have all the scores from this series

[Jason Vorhees]

2013-Wheelersburg 49 Ironton 12
2012-Ironton 32 Wheelersburg 27
2011 Ironton 42 Wheelersburg 13
2010 Ironton 12 Wheelersburg 7
2009 Ironton 24 Wheelersburg 8
2008 Wheelersburg 23 Ironton 22
2007 Wheelersburg 39 Ironton 6
2006 Ironton 24 Wheelersburg 21
2005 Ironton 7 Wheelersburg 6
2004 Ironton 21 Wheelersburg 0
2003 Ironton 22 Wheelersburg 10
2002 Ironton 24 Wheelersburg 9
2001 Ironton 49 Wheelersburg 0

Since 2001, Ironton owns a 10-3 advantage. Ironton has scored 297 points in 13 games, averaging 22.8 points against Wheelersburg in the last 13 matches. Wheelersburg has scored 212 points, averaging 16.31 points per game.

[Trojan_Pride]

my question is if ironton loses to burg this year whether its close or even half of last years margin, why is that necessarly mean a long year for ironton. its a little bit of an insult, imo, to burg, to look at it from that standpoint as wheelersburg is capable of beating every team on irontons schedule. both teams are same div. should this game be a dogfight as most of these have been in the series, i still see ironton going on to have the potential to win 6 or 8 of the games ontheir schedule. russell, amanda, raceland, ashland, portsmouth, jackson, meigs, all could still be winnable, i dont know that much about col st charles. they are a larger school and were pretty decent last year. i thought last year they were completely unprepared for the burg game, i didnt see a noticable lack of talent or size or speed they just didnt block or tackle, didnt look like they were in the right postitons, and couldnt decide if they were a T formation team or a spread team. irontons schedule is really not that much of a monster this year like it has been in years past. i just dont think they have been very well coached or prepared early in the season the last 2 years and lack of identity i think certainly has had a lot to do with it. not tackling very well , also injurys have played a big part in their lack of success. i think certainly, they should be capable of winning 6 to all 9 games on their schedule , i just dont think it will happen. i like wheelersburg by at least 2 tds. i will continue to root for them to have success but the glory years are clearly over , imo and if they make the playoffs i dont have a problem admitting i was wrong.

burg , Jackson, meigs , Portsmouth , Ashland = all 5 of these games will be dogfight games

raceland , Amanda , Russell = ironton should win these games

st Charles = unknown

[victor creed]

Ray, well said, i agree completely. i think rrt and my graduating class in 83 may have been the largest class ever in ironton, at right at or just over 200. i live in burg now, with kids enrolled, and lots of times my work takes me to gallipolis, i have had numerous people come to me and question why in the world ironton would go into the ovc, and when i have told them i think its a great thing and we discuss the enrollment among other things they look at me with their collective chins on the floor. they cannot believe ironton is practically the smallest team in the ovc and in a few years may be smaller than even cg. the late 70's and 80's were a thing the likes of which we will never see again. its just a different world trying to play with 20 to 24 kids per class vs maybe 10 a class . i have been pretty critical of the existing coaching staff and probably should say its a little unfair. i am extremely loyal to the last regime of coaches who in my oninion should have about 10 plus of them in the hall of fame, and following that is amazingly tough. on top of that changing the offensive that has been a thing of legend in my opinion to a more wide open offense is basically sacrilege imo, lol but i get that running that kind of offense, which is extremely physical is pretty tough when you got 30 kids out instead of 60. hopefully they get it turned around and make a run at the playoffs this year, but i still stick with my prediction of and 0 and 1 start to the season.

[Tigercannon71]

VC, I think you got the wrong thinking on the offense. When you dont have numbers you run our basic offense. When you have numbers you can run the type they are running now. To run a spread you need certain types of players if you only got 30 players out that limits the type of those players you will have. Where as you run the T you can plug guys in and it works year in and year out. As for physicality of one vs the other thats nothing that a hardcore training regiment cant handle.

[Gray Fighting Tiger]

Tigertown.com (the official Ironton City Schools web site) has alumni info for each graduating class. I don't know where they got it, but I think it should be fairly accurate. I haven't checked every class to see which were the biggest, but I know 1968 was at least 206 and there were bigger ones than that in the early 70s. The class of 1973 had about 230, I'm told (Tigertown shows 228).

[RiverRatRay]

Victor I'm thinking that next year's graduating class may be even smaller than this last year's class. My niece, who transferred to St Joe in the 6th grade, was a member of this class and I'm just going on what I used to see going to Awards Programs at the grade school. Now on a positive note, the classes start to increase in size after next year. How much they increase I'm not sure but I do think they start back the other way after next year. It also is just of my opinion that the athletic programs seem to be picking up a little steam not only in boys but also in the girls programs. It may be do to this increase in class sizes and of course athletic abilities. I think you are going to see the lull at Ironton cease and a spark return where the fire was once put out. Just this writer's opinion.

[pembrook burrows III]

I have to agree with VC that running the grind-it-out, T-formation offense Ironton is historically known for presents a problem when numbers are down. It is an offense that requires brawling, physical play by both linemen and skilled players. Having a running back who can level someone with a solid block is about as important as having a physical tackle or tight end.

In contrast, spread offenses rely more on finesse and one-on-one matchups spread over the field. Linemen are backing up and not initiating the contact in many plays. Anyone who watched a pretty good Fairland squad last season knows they were small in numbers, but they were able to beat opponents by out-flanking them, not over-powering them.

When you combine the physical nature of Ironton's traditional offense with fewer numbers of capable players and a stout schedule, you are more apt to end up with a physically depleted squad in the latter half of the season. Ironton has unfortunately experienced that in each of the last two years. As a Tiger fan, I have enjoyed our style of play for the past four decades. But I often find myself wondering if we can sustain that style given the current circumstances.

I do agree with TC71 that in order to do so, at a minimum, it will take a renewed commitment to physical fitness by a much larger percentage of the Ironton roster than we have seen in recent years.

[victor creed]

tigercannon, yeah i agree, with your point to a degree. if your going to spread it out and be successful you have to have certain talent year in and year out such as a specific talent at qb, recievers etc. however i disagree with you that when you run the T you just plug guys in. there are other qualities that have to be successful running the T such as backs that are willing to block when they are not getting the ball, a qb who is willing to carry out a fake completely instead of handing it off and watching the play. the T is actually as much as about misdirection as it is about power football. the point i was making above is in order to be successful running the T you have to commit to having at least 2 full pads, full go, physical practices a week, and stick with practicing that style all week not breaking it up to do a little of that, then a little of this formation, and a little spread etc. its the physicality of that offense every week that takes its toll in injuries when your #s are down, vs maybe a little more of a finesse offense such as the spread. then you go out and run it against a russell, burg, amanda hartley, st charles, belpre, johnathon alter, etc who are all physical themselves then you gotta play sophs and freshman cause your so beat up. its exactly as pembrook said.

[Tigercannon71]

I have to agree with VC that running the grind-it-out, T-formation offense Ironton is historically known for presents a problem when numbers are down. It is an offense that requires brawling, physical play by both linemen and skilled players. Having a running back who can level someone with a solid block is about as important as having a physical tackle or tight end.

In contrast, spread offenses rely more on finesse and one-on-one matchups spread over the field. Linemen are backing up and not initiating the contact in many plays. Anyone who watched a pretty good Fairland squad last season knows they were small in numbers, but they were able to beat opponents by out-flanking them, not over-powering them.

When you combine the physical nature of Ironton's traditional offense with fewer numbers of capable players and a stout schedule, you are more apt to end up with a physically depleted squad in the latter half of the season. Ironton has unfortunately experienced that in each of the last two years. As a Tiger fan, I have enjoyed our style of play for the past four decades. But I often find myself wondering if we can sustain that style given the current circumstances.

I do agree with TC71 that in order to do so, at a minimum, it will take a renewed commitment to physical fitness by a much larger percentage of the Ironton roster than we have seen in recent years.

I see what you are trying to say in your theory both you and VC, but you're looking at it wrong. You're talking about 1 on 1 matchups and spreading the field. In order to do that you need to players to be able to go 1 on 1 with somebody. You need a skilled QB that can get them the ball and you need quick linemen to be able to pass block. These are skilled things you need to be able to do. If I got 270 boys in a school I can find skilled players easier to be able to run that offense than I can if I got 175 boys. I might be able to find a skilled QB, but I might not have anybody that can catch or can beat somebody 1 on 1. So that takes away my offense.
Now whether I got 275 boys or 100 boys in a school. I can always find a guy to hand off the ball. I can find a couple kids with speed to run the ball and I can always find 7 guys that want to hit somebody and I can teach them proper technique and all they got to do is get in somebodies way for 2 seconds while my running back goes by them. The T is about power, but that power isn't always somebody getting knocked on their butt sometimes its about just getting in their way enough so that a back can go by.
Plus think about this. Look through the years the T has always been the basic go to offense for Ironton, but when Coach Lutz had the talent and players he would throw in wrinkles and pass and different things yet all the while sticking with the basic T formation. That way if he didn't have that great QB or receiver he could still run the ball effectively. In a spread offense you are taking that away because it is a whole different mindset. If you don't have the players and you try to run the spread well you have cut out 50% of your offense and now your stuck.

As for injuries maybe we have been getting more injury prone because of a lack of fitness and strength conditioning than because of a lack of numbers.

VC, I understand what you are saying about practice and things, but doing the little things like blocking when you aren't getting the ball and stuff. That's a discipline thing. If your players don't do it right they sit the bench. The coach has to deal with that. As for practice you can tweak a practice to where you get the physicality done without killing each other. Again that goes back to off season conditioning and weight lifting and just plain mental toughness of players.

[YOU'RE TIGER BAIT]

great, great points are being brought up.

[YOU'RE TIGER BAIT]

the bottom line in all of this is everybody has to be taught the fundamentals and execute every play regardless of the numbers out.a good disciplined, good fundamental team can a lot of times beat a bigger , physical team.

[Trojan_Pride]

tigercannon

we have 2 kids that in one on one situations can score 85-90% time , another 2 kids in one on one situations that can score 70% time.

if we come out with same offense (1 of worst ppg in tristate last year) because only 2 kids touched the ball almost 80% time 2014 ironton will be 2-7 or 3-6.

defenses in 2013 was onto this scheme and those 2 boys took a beating.

I sure hope ironton can use all 6 playermakers this year and watch the point total go to in 30's per game.

[Tigercannon71]

Where do you see we got 6 playmakers? We dont we got 2 maybe 3 playmakers. The reason we had the worst offense was because we had no offensive identity. You cant score if you cant even make a 1st down. You cant just throw plays out there and hope it works. Whether you run the T, Spread, Pistol, I, or Single Wing you have to have a plan on why you are running plays. You dont just run something to say you ran a play. You run plays to set up other plays and sometimes you run something off the wall to see how a defense reacts. No matter what though you have to have a gameplan you cant just run something to run it. Thats why the offense was the worst in the county last year.

[Trojan_Pride]

Where do you see we got 6 playmakers? We dont we got 2 maybe 3 playmakers. The reason we had the worst offense was because we had no offensive identity. You cant score if you cant even make a 1st down. You cant just throw plays out there and hope it works. Whether you run the T, Spread, Pistol, I, or Single Wing you have to have a plan on why you are running plays. You dont just run something to say you ran a play. You run plays to set up other plays and sometimes you run something off the wall to see how a defense reacts. No matter what though you have to have a gameplan you cant just run something to run it. Thats why the offense was the worst in the county last year.

2 playmakers 80% time =1 very bad outcome=2013

on any given play you have QB, WR/TE , RB's =6----use them

[Tigercannon71]

Only 1 guy can carry the football at a time. How do you expect to use all 6 of these so called playmakers at once?

Go with your stat that 2 players had ball 80% of time and we had a bad season. That proves my point that A. We only have 2 playmakers because if we had more we wouldve spread the ball out to more guys and B. The offensive gameplan was flawed because you need to set up your playmakers to make plays, and C. Need more out of the line to help playmakers make plays.