BleacherCoaches.com

I see Central Cambria has changed their game on Friday to Saint Francis.  Is there any other changes for this weekend because of field conditions. 

The field in Boswell was a mud bog on Friday night. Mud Bath at North Star

We had the conversation earlier about muddiest games...this one is way up there.

The FH JV's played in Sidman Mon. and the field will host the BG Marauders this Fri. -after- more rain tomorrow.  Should be in great shape!  LOL
***EDIT:  The soccer team is using it today as well. 

Something interesting I've noticed, over the years:

A lot of teams that play on a muddy field, and lose,....can't grasp the reality that, the team that won,...played on the same field.
Odd how that works out.

223113 wrote:Something interesting I've noticed, over the years:

A lot of teams that play on a muddy field, and lose,....can't grasp the reality that, the team that won,...played on the same field.
Odd how that works out.

Agree. Clairton and Wade are still blaming that soggy field at CT instead of owning the fact that Berlin was the superior team and played on the same soggy field. 

223113 wrote:Something interesting I've noticed, over the years:

A lot of teams that play on a muddy field, and lose,....can't grasp the reality that, the team that won,...played on the same field.
Odd how that works out.

This is true.......to an extent. I think it largely depends on the strengths of each team. If a team who relies on speed, backs who can cut, quick passes, spread type offenses will not be as efficient as a team that runs 60 times a game. The speedy team may be the better team but will not play as on a sloppy field. But, it should never be an excuse for losing, you just can't ignore that it may change the game in some way. 

CCDevil2012 wrote:

223113 wrote:Something interesting I've noticed, over the years:

A lot of teams that play on a muddy field, and lose,....can't grasp the reality that, the team that won,...played on the same field.
Odd how that works out.

This is true.......to an extent. I think it largely depends on the strengths of each team. If a team who relies on speed, backs who can cut, quick passes, spread type offenses will not be as efficient as a team that runs 60 times a game. The speedy team may be the better team but will not play as on a sloppy field. But, it should never be an excuse for losing, you just can't ignore that it may change the game in some way. 

So, maybe field conditions can expose which team can overcome unexpected adversity better. And, maybe it exposes the "one trick pony", so to speak.
Ya gotta play the hand you're dealt.

A team with speed is at a disadvantage in bad field conditions. There's not really much question in that.  We can talk about how the one team overcame and dealt with the adversity. If both teams are power running teams, then yea one team is going to deal with it better than the other.  If the one team is a speed-based offense with a lot of passing ect. versus a team that can run the ball straight ahead, then yes they are at a disadvantage. 

We've seen some 3 win Central Cambria teams knock off some good Johnstown teams in the past in Ebensburg.  Should CC get credit for dealing with the conditions and pulling an upset? Absolutely.  If the game was on a turf field, would they have won?  Well....

Now the Berlin/Clairton game is a good example for several reasons.

1. Both teams played on grass all year.
2. The field was perfectly fine.
3. Berlin had speed too, especially with Fochtman who was right there with anyone Clairton had.


So that's a case where it did not matter at all.