Tough close game. Pima up 14-0 at half, 20-0 at end of third quarter. SD scored on a big defensive play in early fourth, sack and recovered fumble run for TD. Pima had chance to go up three scores in middle of fourth quarter first and goal. SD made a big defensive stand to deny Pima at the 1 foot line. SD drove 99 and a half yards to score and get within 8. Pima turned it over with about two mins left. SD drove to 4 yard line and turned it over on downs. Fourth down pass in endzone just out of bounds. Pima took over and almost gave up the ball again. SD had the momentum at the end. Had it gone to OT, it looked like SD would have won. Pima appeared gassed at the end. Pima played very good swarming defense, especially first half. SD had one TD called back in first half on a very unusual and suspect offensive face mask penalty that looked like a normal stiff arm. Pima scored on a big play QB draw with seconds left in first half. Very good game to watch. Hard hitting, close, exciting to the end.
FballFan99 wrote: Tough close game. Pima up 8-0 after first, 14-0 at half, 20-0 at end of third quarter. SD scored on a big defensive play in early fourth, sack and recovered fumble run for TD. Pima had chance to go up three scores in middle of fourth quarter first and goal. SD made a big defensive stand to deny Pima at the 1 foot line. SD drove 99 and a half yards to score and get within 8. Pima turned it over with about two mins left. SD drove to 4 yard line and turned it over on downs. Fourth down pass in endzone just out of bounds. Pima took over and almost gave up the ball again. SD had the momentum at the end. Had it gone to OT, it looked like SD would have won. Pima appeared gassed at the end. Pima played very good swarming defense, especially first half. SD had one TD called back in first half on a very unusual and suspect offensive face mask penalty that looked like a normal stiff arm. Pima scored on a big play QB draw with seconds left in first half. Very good game to watch. Hard hitting, close, exciting to the end.
Pima had this game well in hand after three quarters leading 20-0. SD couldnt do much most of the 1st 3 quarters on offense. SD came up with a turnover and defensive score in the 4th to get on the board and the momentum quickly shifted. Pima clearly the superior team. Overall, did not play their best game. Give SD credit though. They have tough kids and they hung in their and gave them a good fight.
(Its all a matter of perspective I guess. What side of the bleachers you sit on when you watch the game. )
It is funny how perspectives can be so different sometimes when people see the same thing, maybe from different sidelines, and see things so differently. Here is another perspective. First, just to clarify it was 0 -0 at the end of the 1st quarter. Neither team could do very much offensively to start the game. Then in the 2nd quarter Pima scored on two long, 50 plus yard, plays and converted one two point conversion to go up 14 - 0 at half time. St. David did get one called back because of an offensive face mask, where one of the officials was overheard saying "I don't think it was a facemask" and received a response of "Well I already threw my flag". (???) Then midway throught the 3rd quarter Pima scores again on a long run. Not moving the ball much otherwise. So to say they had the game in hand is an overstatement. in fact, when you take into consideration that St. David had an excellent opportunity to score and tie the game (from Pima's 2 yard line) late in the forth quarter you realize that they didn't have it in hand. The reality is Pima was two plays away from loosing that game. Give St. David the touchdown that got called back or have them score on that possession that they drove to the 2 yard line and then take away any one of Pima's long scores. and Pima goes down 14 to 18.
I say what you had is two pretty good teams that got in a dog fight and one team missed 2 too many plays. I know this Those boys from St, David gave Pima all they could handle!!!
There is always the great power of "if". In reality what happened is Pima won, and St. David lost. Just one quick question though why would you even say "if" Pima didn't get that long run and "if" St. David would have scored on Pima's two yard line. When what happened is Pima ran a good play and scored on a long run. And Pima played excellent on defense at the end of the game holding St. David from going up six, still two points from winning the game, and who knows if SD would have converted the two point, to Tie, and then in overtime who knows! Hats of to both teams!!!
My opinion of this game was that Pima has better athletes and St David had far better coaching. I don't even know Pima's play book and I could tell what their offense was gonna do most of the time. As for pima's defense SD just kept sending a RB out of the backfield for little dump passes that went for 10+ yards and twins crossing routes that they never adjusted the way they were guarding receivers. And they were dead tired in the second half for lack of any conditioning. The coaching staff doesn't know how to make adjustments or they are too stubborn to. If Pima wants to have a snowball's chance in hell at a state title they better change something because right now they'll lose by 50+ points at least to Bagdad.
Tractor, I only point out the "IF" scenarios to illustrate some points. First, the game was not "well in hand", and second that the game could have gone either way. I never tried to say that St. David was better than Pima or should have won, just that they were in it.
As far a Pima having a snowballs chance in hell, having seen St. David scrimmage Bagdad and play Pima I will say this: Pima does have the kids to play and even beat Bagdad. Not saying they will, in fact, I would have to go with Bagdad right now, but take this into consideration. When St. David played Bagdad they never showed up. SD scrimmaged Bagdad on a Thursday and had a game against Mayer two days later. They just kind of had a oh well this is just a scrimmage and doesn't matter attitude and even held back a little thinking they had to play a game 2 days later. Yes, Bagdad took it to St. David, but SD did not play with near the same effort or intensity that they took to Pima Friday night. St. David had a Freshman QB, a new D coach, and some key Seniors who showed up this season way out of shape. Those things are getting fixed and St. David is a much better team now than they were a month ago.
I watched the Bagada scrimmage. Football is football whether its a scrimmage or not. I will tell you this, SD did not get a single positive yard against Bagdad's starting defense, while at the same time Bagdad could have scored at will.
I agree with Elk. I think Pima and SD were pretty even. I didn't agree that Pima was completely predictable. I thought Pima did well mixing up the run and pass--something they heretofore have not done very well. They had some big run plays, but most of the time their runs were stuffed. First downs seemed pretty even for both teams. Rushing yardage seemed to be in Pima's favor, and passing yards to SD. Total yards seemed to favor Pima. Pima did pass quite a bit, and although most were incomplete, the passing helped open up the run. There was some questionable play-calling on Pima's side near the end of the game, but as it turned out, it did not hurt them. SD's called back TD was a big factor as it was a very questionable call and it sounds like it was even debated by the refs. SD's young freshman QB played much better and more confidently in the second half than the first half and seemed to find a rhythm. He did NOT play like a freshman, in my opinion.
Also, Pima was the home team.
If they met again on a neutral field, I think Pima would be favored, as they already beat SD, but I don't think anyone who watched this game could realistically put the spread any more than one score. Whoever predicted a 6 TD blowout severely overestimated the Roughriders.
Fan 99; I would agree with your assessment of things and would add one more thing and that is that St. David did a better job of taking care of the ball. I don't remember what the turn over margin was, but am pretty confident that it was in St. David's favor. I know Pima gave away at least one pick and two fumbles, and fumbled another time, where SD recovered, but the officials, said he was down. NOT! Film don't lie he was still up and the whistle had definitely not blown. That is one area where Pima has got to improve they struggled with that against Valley Union too.
However, I suspect that maybe they didn't overestimate Pima, they are a good team, but rather the 6 TD spread was probably based on under estimating St. David, based on Bagdad scrimmage. St. David is not the same team that they were a month ago.
First, what an enjoyable game to watch. Physical and fun. St. David is classy and extremely well-coached. Pima is a load.
The facemask was a terrible call. Legit straight arm with no grasp of the facemask. However, there was no TD called back as the runner was stopped on the five by Tavesi. Clearly, still a scoring opportunity for St David but they still could have been stopped as well.
The Pima fumble ruled down. Exactly the right call. The runner was stood up and driven back by five or six defenders. By the time the ball came lose the runner was almost horizontal being bent backwards. Forward momentum had been stopped for a couple of seconds. The officials can make that ruling even if the whisltle comes a second late.
Pima gained 360 on the ground. St. David 27 carries for 48 yards. St. David 250 through the air to Pimas 104. The officials continually missed the most unsublte pick play I've ever seen. On the crossing route, one receiver would just flat out block the Pima defender. On one long downfield pass (not even a cross) the off St David receiver crushed a Pima defender with the ball in the air like he was cracking back on a punt return. More power to them if they don't get called but a better crew would catch those.
One last thought on Pima. As talented as they are, they actually only have two players that played significant time last year and one of them missed the St David game. Every player on the field other than Kieffer was playing basically their third varsity game. First at home. First against a tough team. They'll be fine.
Sheepdog, you're right. St. David facemask call didn't take away TD outright. Stat girl had SD ball at the 2 not 5. Hard to tell for sure, however, as the ball was never set due to penalty. I agree with the fumble ruled down, but I haven't seen any video on it. That was just impression watching it live. As far as the pick plays, that may have been a reaction to the blatant defensive holding going on most of the game. Two bordered on obscene as the receivers were almost tackled 10 yards downfield, which resulted in sacks and negative yards as the ball wasn't thrown.
Officials also had some strange ball placements throughout the game. It was later reported that they told coaches they were placing the ball on yard lines to make it simpler. On one Pima possession after a fourth down run, it appeared that a measurement would be in order as it looked very close and maybe even a first down, but instead, refs called it a turnover on downs, changed balls, then clearly RESET the ball backwards for SD (or forwards for Pima) to make it match a yard line. So, in a game of inches, they round to the nearest yard? I haven't seen refs do this in a HS game. To say the officiating crew wasn't stellar is an understatement, but I heard that could be the status quo for this year due to shortages of refs and rookies having to move up to call varsity games.
And regarding all the new players starting for Pima. Wouldn't that be expected for a team that lost a wagon load of seniors? Having two returning starters is pretty good, but Pima has the numbers to just reload every year. No "rebuilding" necessary for the Roughriders.
I'll watch my film again for the defensive holding. Funny thing is, I remember two picks in particular that I would also call obscene. We might be thinking of the same two plays just viewed from our obviously biased perspectives.
We agree on ball placement as well. We had a running discussion during the game about how bad it was for both teams. There were a couple of tackles for loss for Pima that were returned to the line of scrimmage.
As far as my comment about Pima's experience. It wasn't meant in the context of the St. David game, but more as a response to Pima's standing overall, especially in comparison to Bagdad. Yes, Pima (and Jo City, St. David, Mogollon, etc.) tends to reload rather than rebuild, but as much as they're considered an elite team, they are actually very inexperienced. Fortunately, that won't be the case in October.
Hey sheepdog; While you are looking at film take a minute and look at the fumble/non-fumble play and I think you will agree that that was a fumble. I am not sure we are talking about the same one, but I am talking about the one where Pima is on about SD's 30 (driving west) and the Pima player gets hit by two SD players (not 5), the first SD player pulls the runner over to where the runner is almost sitting on the SD players chest just as the second player hits the runner in the chest. The ball gets flipped out and goes about 5 yards backward and SD recovered it. No whistle, runner not down, and ball is out. Stopping forward progress does not end the play. player making contact with the ground with a part of his body other than feet or hands, or an officials whistle is what stops the play.
We are talking about the same play and I've watched it numerous times. I agree that the runner hadn't hit the ground but it is inaccurate to say that only the runner hitting the ground or the whistle stops the play. Sometimes whistles come late. If a runner runs out of bounds and the whistle comes a second or two later, the play isn't live until the whistle. If the officials determine that forward progress is stopped they can rule the player down even if the whistle is late. This is simply fact and something called quite differently at the high school level than college or the pros.
It was a call that could have gone either way. If I'm St. David I want the turnover. If I'm Pima and they rule it a fumble I'm arguing that forward progress was stopped. All I'm saying is that the official can rule forward progress stopped and the play dead even if the whistle comes late.