Westfield playing again tonight so all of the other games don't matter

bulldog booster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Westfield playing again tonight so all of the
> other games don't matter


Damn! I want to argue, but I can't. The truth is just to true to dispute.

handdown Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jrogue44 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > falcettik Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > 757FridayNiteZ Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > >
> > > > Excellent game summary as always. It's
> > getting
> > > to
> > > > be some kind of syndrome for SouthCo, that
> > they
> > > > play tough, close games but seem just fall
> > > short.
> > > >
> > > > Any thoughts about what's missing for them?
> > >
> > >
> > > To be honest, I am not that educated in the
> > > intricate schemes and tactics required to
> > analyze
> > > a football team well. But I have found over
> the
> > > years that I can see some scores, watch a few
> > > games, and then be quite accurate as to which
> > > teams are the better ones. That said, I
> expected
> > a
> > > SC win last night based on the egg that CV
> laid
> > > last week against Champe, but I think the CV
> > loss
> > > last week was just a bad game after I saw
> them
> > in
> > > person last night. The CV running game was
> > > certainly able to exploit the SC defense with
> > its
> > > speed and quickness, but the most important
> > factor
> > > was that CV's #13, Anunay, played exceptional
> > > defense on Spalding. He tipped away the first
> > > three passes thrown to Spalding and was only
> > beat
> > > on two pass plays all night, limiting
> Spalding
> > to
> > > just 3-4 catches. Spalding's ability just
> kills
> > > most teams so the defense of Anunay was the
> > > deciding factor, IMO. When SC had the ball on
> > > their last drive with about 2 mins to go I
> > thought
> > > they might pull it out since they marched
> right
> > > down the field on CV the previous drive using
> > > their bread and butter, the passing game. But
> > when
> > > Tull did not/could not throw the ball away
> and
> > was
> > > sacked near midfield, that was huge as far as
> a
> > > single play in the game. The Maxwell kid for
> CV
> > > then made a great read and got the INT that
> > sealed
> > > the win.
> >
> >
> > It simply says Centreville's Defensive
> Coordinator
> > knows what every other Coordinator should know,
> > You press Spalding and provide Safety help over
> > the Top. Westfield Chose to stay in Zone most
> of
> > the night allowing Spalding to catch a ball
> > underneath and run through several Arm Tackles.
> > Very few HS QB's are afforded more than 3
> seconds
> > in the pocket if you as a defense can hold up/
> > disrupt the receivers route(s) for even 1.5
> > seconds the Reads change dramatically and with
> one
> > or two exceptions most QB's at this level are
> > lucky to get to their second read before
> tucking
> > and running or getting Sacked. Westfield
> utilized
> > that Template to great success the Previous
> year
> > when Joey Free had as many interceptions as
> > Spalding had catches in their 2 Matchups. We
> all
> > know Spalding is going to get his, it doesn't
> mean
> > Teams should pad his stats by refusing to
> > implement the demonstrated scheme that Works.
> #13
> > for Centreville did a great job and battled all
> > night. There are several more Langleys on South
> > County's schedule so Tull and Spalding will
> have
> > ample opportunity to exploit overmatched
> Defenses.
>
> Westfield did press Spalding with help over the
> top on almost every snap. He caught one ball with
> three defenders on top of him and his catch in
> overtime for a TD with was with two defenders
> closely covering him. In both cases Spalding made
> a tremendous adjustment to the ball which he does
> so well. Tull threw the ball into coverage because
> Spalding wins the majority of 50/50 balls. The
> hitch he caught for a 76 yard TD was a good
> adjustment by South County's coaches (and poor
> tackling by the Westfield secondary) by moving
> Spalding from the outside position in trips to an
> inside slot. Lastly, Spalding had 4 catches for
> 101 yards against Centreville. Although he did not
> have a receiving TD, 25 yards a catch is very
> impressive. Spalding deserves his due. So to say
> teams are choosing to refuse to implement schemes
> work is totally inaccurate.


There is no better possession Reciever in the Northern Region than Spalding, and if I needed a Big play his would be the number I would call. The vast majority of the Teams in the Region simply don't have an Athlete the caliber needed to match up. No disrespect to Mr. Spalding.

Au contraire, Cobbs from Hayfield is by far the best receiver in the region. Both are good athletes but Cobbs gets the nod in terms of athleticism. Bigger, stronger and faster and he excels on both sides of the ball.

Neither better though than the receivers from Westfield (where everything is better and the shit don't stink)

The real Bulldogs are from Stonebridge, not Westfield. Its a good thing we dont play you,this year Stonebridge is the far superior team. Tonight we beat another team from Fairfax county. Madison QB is out, so no passing. They wont be able to run against us. No chance. 3-0 for the real bulldogs baby!

Game of the Week is going to prove to be not such a Game after all. I'm going to watch Stonebridge Run all over Madison...Stonebridge by 21

sure make it through the easy 5A playoffs and then choke again at States Stone Bridge ha ha

TJ Update -

Halftime from Manassas Park:
Manassas Park 41
Jefferson 7

Mt.Vernon 52-27 Washington lee half time

Wa po is reporting that Stone Bridge has defeated Madison 35-10

Final from Manassas Park:

Manassas Park 51
Jefferson 21

Decent showing from TJ in the second half, scoring their highest total since the beginning of their now 36-game losing streak on two second-half scores against MP's second string D.

Yorktown 32, Woodson 27, final

Hayfield 30, Fairfax 24, final

Edison 19, McLean 7, final

Wow TJ is absolutely terrible lmao.

Westfield 21, Stonewall Jackson 0, final.

South Lakes 42, Dominion 7, Final

NR Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> South Lakes 42, Dominion 7, Final


Correction. Dominion's score was 10

FAIRFAX COUNTY GAME-DAY FINALS
Week 4 (September 15th)

- Bell Multicultural (1-0) at Falls Church (1-2)
--- FALLS CHURCH WINS, 21-16.

- Dominion (2-1) at South Lakes (3-0)
--- SOUTH LAKES WINS, 42-10.

- Eastern (0-2) at Wakefield (1-1)
--- WAKEFIELD WINS, 26-12.

- Forest Park (2-1) at Centreville (2-1)
--- CENTREVILLE WINS, 33-15.

- Hayfield (2-0) at Fairfax (2-1)
--- HAYFIELD WINS, 30-24.

- Herndon (2-0) at George Marshall (1-1)
--- MARSHALL WINS, 30-14

- James Madison (3-0) at Stone Bridge (2-0)
--- STONE BRIDGE WINS, 35-10.

- McLean (0-2) at Thomas Edison (0-2)
--- EDISON WINS, 19-7.

- Mount Vernon (3-0) at Washington-Lee (0-2)
--- MT VERNON WINS, 79-27.

- Potomac Falls (1-2) at Langley (0-3)
--- POTOMAC FALLS WINS, 37-21.

- Robert E. Lee (0-3) at J.E.B. Stuart (1-1)
--- LEE WINS, 42-39.

- Thomas Jefferson (0-2) at Manassas Park (0-3)
--- MANASSAS PARK WINS, 51-21.

- W.T. Woodson (1-2) at Yorktown (2-0)
--- YORKTOWN WINS, 32-27.

- West Potomac (2-1) at Chantilly (0-3)
--- WEST POTOMAC WINS, 35-24.

- Westfield (2-0) at Stonewall Jackson (1-2)
--- WESTFIELD WINS, 21-0.

nat4lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Westfield (2-0) at Stonewall Jackson (1-2)
> --- WESTFIELD WINS, 21-0.

The first half of this game saw a grand total of five possessions between the two teams, and the pace was also moderately quick in the second half. With just a handful of penalties and both teams preferring to run the ball more than throw, there wasn't a whole lot of time for scoring.

Stonewall opened the game on their own 29 yard line and moved all the way to the WF 14, but then SJ's Boxley was intercepted by Steinhilber on the WF 4 yard line to stop the drive. WF ran a few plays but was forced to punt and SJ took over on their own 37 yard line. After a few SJ plays, the first quarter ended scoreless. After the second quarter started SJ did move downfield to the WF 37 yard line but their drive stalled and they were forced to punt, pinning WF on their own 12 yard line. This time, primarily behind the running of Asante, WF marched 88 yards and got the game's first score. WF scored when Kim hit Cirillo with a short pass and Cirillo broke three tackles on the way to a 22 yard score. 7-0, 3:24 to go in the half (Steinhilber XP). SJ then managed a short drive before giving the ball back to WF with just enough time for one unsuccessful play and the half ended with WF ahead 7-0. In the first half WF used the running game almost exclusively, with the few passes they attempted often ending up with a QB sack by the SJ defense or just a short gain on a scramble. SJ relied heavily on Boxley's running ability with a few runs mixed in from Royster, and also tried a few passes to their main target, Howard, but many were off the mark. This same pattern held in the second half for SJ, with Boxley probably taking on 75% of the SJ offense himself.

The second half saw WF with the ball first and they came out throwing, getting to the SJ 44 yard line where they faced a 4th and 10. WF's Kim lined up as the punter and attempted to run for the first down but was stopped well short and SJ took over on their own 40 yard line. SJ went three and out, giving WF the ball on the WF 33 yard line. This time WF put together a 67 yard drive, scoring for the second time in the game when Kim hit Morin on a 22 yard pass to extend the lead to 14-0 (Steinhilber XP) with 4:24 to play in the third quarter. After getting the ball back SJ again went three and out, and WF wasted no time, with Kim hitting Kiley on a 56 yard, one play drive to extend the lead to 21-0 (Steinhilber XP) with 2:03 to play in the third quarter. The fourth quarter was mostly uneventful with both teams putting together three short drives each, combining for two drives ending in punts and three on failed 4th down attempts before WF's last drive reached the SJ 15 yard line and the clock ran out.

PYPTJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Final from Manassas Park:
>
> Manassas Park 51
> Jefferson 21
>
> Decent showing from TJ in the second half, scoring
> their highest total since the beginning of their
> now 36-game losing streak on two second-half
> scores against MP's second string D.

Manassas Park never scored a single damn point this entire season until they met TJ. Dear God, TJ really is terrible.

nat4lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Bell Multicultural (1-0) at Falls Church (1-2)
> --- FALLS CHURCH WINS, 21-16.

CORRECTION:
Final score of the Falls Church game was 42-36 according to their twitter. Falls Church was the victor.

Article from the Washington Post.

Stone Bridge senior Daniel Thompson has 237 receiving yards as Bulldogs fly past Madison

By Dillon Mullan September 15 at 11:13 PM

Last season, Daniel Thompson was a luxury. The Stone Bridge tight end impacted every game as a deep threat, but the Bulldogs emphasized their running game. Every throw was set up by success on the ground. Play-action was preferred to straight drop backs. In a loss in the state final in the last minute, the Bulldogs completed one pass.

Now a senior wide receiver, Thompson is a necessity. No. 7 Stone Bridge can lean on the ­6-foot, 215-pound target to lead its offense regardless of the production of its ball carriers. In a 35-10 win over No. 12 Madison in Ashburn on Friday night, Thompson outran and outjumped whoever the Warhawks had defending him. He caught nine passes for 237 yards and three touchdowns.

“In the offseason I worked hard every day, lifting and running routes with my quarterback. Nothing fancy, just working,” Thompson said. “Now I’m able to do more for our offense. We have a couple nice weapons to get points on the board. We’re hard to stop.”

In place of senior John Cothran, who injured his knee in a win over West Potomac last week, Patrick Berry started at quarterback for Madison. The junior had the visiting student section chanting his name after he completed his first three passes. On their first drive, the Warhawks converted two fourth downs, ran 16 plays and drove 75 yards to take a 3-0 lead.

But that opening drive was not a sign of things to come. After rushing for 176 yards on 37 carries last week, senior running back Casey Koshuta had only 59 yards on 17 carries Friday. Stone Bridge (3-0) made Madison (3-1) one-dimensional, and the Warhawks could not consistently get first downs through the air.

“They were strong up front. We definitely had to air the ball out a little bit, but that didn’t work for us until the end of the game,” said Madison senior wide receiver John Finney, who caught six passes for 128 yards. “We come up short sometimes, but we’re going to be all right moving forward.”

Stone Bridge returned nine starters on defense this season, and that experience stood out against Madison. After the Warhawks scored again on their opening drive of the second half, the Bulldogs adjusted to shut them out the rest of the way.

“Stopping the run is our game plan. That’s what we do every week. If you can’t run, most offenses aren’t going to be able to do anything,” senior defensive lineman Jack Kosko said.

Stone Bridge junior quarterback Mason Tatum completed 12 of 21 passes for 301 yards and four touchdowns. Thompson caught touchdowns of 80, 31, and 78 yards.

Over the past two seasons, the Bulldogs lost six games combined in September and October before peaking in November to reach the state final. This year they’re hot from the start. Seven straight weeks of games against Loudoun County competition begin with a visit to Champe next week.

“We’re really comfortable right now,” Kosko said. “We think we can do really great things.”

With many good games on the NOVA schedule I finally settled on checking out the Madison Warhawks (3-0) @ Stone Bridge Bulldogs (2-0) matchup. Stone Bridge is no stranger to success with 13 District Championships, 10 Regional Championships, 1 State Championship and 7 State Runner-ups in the 17 seasons since the school opened in 2000. Madison has seen a resurgence in their program – going 19-4 the last two seasons and defeated Stone Bridge last year in a 19-15 upset.

Stone Bridge won the coin toss and put together a nice drive into Madison territory highlighted by a couple of big receptions by #2 TE Mark Williams and #9 WR Daniel Thompson. A fumble at the Madison 26 yard line however ended the drive.

Madison opened their offensive game with a 16 play, 60 yard drive that finally stalled at the Stone Bridge 14 yard line. The Warhawks picked up four first downs with a mix of 8 runs and 7 passes. Madison #13 WR John Finney caught 3 passes on this drive. Madison’s field goal try was successful giving them a 3-0 lead.

The lead was short-lived. After a touchback, Stone Bridge’s first play was an 80-yard touchdown pass from #12 QB Mason Tatum to #9 Thompson. Stone Bridge 7 – Madison 3.

The Bulldog defense stopped Madison’s next drive, forcing a punt after two short runs and an incomplete pass.

With 1 minute remaining in the first quarter, Stone Bridge began their next drive on their 33-yard line. After two pass completions for first downs and a short run, the first quarter came to end. The first play of the second quarter resulted in an interception by Warhawk defender #1 Alex Jalloh. Jalloh had a decent return but a personal foul penalty pushed Madison back to their own 11-yard line.

Madison ran three times for a first down and a late hit out of bounds gave them another 15 yards. But an interception by the Bulldogs #31 Cole Gordon turned the ball back over to Stone Bridge.

Two plays after starting at the Madison 16-yard line, QB Tatum found #2 Williams in the end zone for a 12-yard TD. Stone Bridge 14 – Madison 3.

Madison found it difficult to solve the Bulldog defense as their next drive which started at the 29-yard line was another 3 and out.

Stone Bridge took over at their 46-yard line now with 8:09 remaining in the first half. After a first down incompletion, Tatum quickly found his rhythm, completing three consecutive passes – the last one being 31-yard touchdown to #9 Thompson. Stone Bridge 21 – Madison 3.

The Warhawk offense had some success on their next possession – helped by a 15-yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on the Stone Bridge sideline. The 10 play drive – fueled by 6 runs – was stalled by 3 incomplete passes and an illegal procedure penalty. Madison was forced to punt again.

With about two minutes left in the half Stone Bridge passed their way into Madison territory but an incomplete pass left Madison with the ball on their own 29-yard line with 5 seconds left in the half. And so it ended.

The Warhawk offense got the ball first after intermission and immediately proceeded to put together an impressive 7 play, 70 yard drive – scoring on a 2-yard touchdown run by backup QB #2 Patrick Berry (Madison’s starting QB was injured last week and did not play). #13 Finney caught two long passes for first downs on this drive. Stone Bridge 21 – Madison 10.

Stone Bridge’s first possession of the second half was equally successful. It was an 8 play, 68 yard drive. After throwing the ball a very un-Stone-Bridge-like 21 times in the first half, the Bulldogs put the ball on the ground running their more familiar single-wing offense. #32 RB Tommy Williams ran it in from 9 yards. Stone Bridge 28 – Madison 10.

Madison got the ball back and feeling the need to score quickly put the ball in the air with QB Berry completing three passes – including a long gainer to #15 WR Johnny Hecht. Madison ultimately turned the ball over on downs when a QB sack on a fourth-and-five play from the Stone Bridge 10-yard line ended the drive.

The Tatum to Thompson lightening then struck for a third time as the big and speedy TE overpowered the Warhawk defense and scored a 78-yard touchdown on a catch-and-run. Stone Bridge 35 – Madison 10.

Much to my surprise this ended the scoring. Madison’s next three drives were 3-and-out, interception (#31 Gordon again), 5 plays and punt. Stone Bridge’s next three possessions were 3-and-out, 8 plays and turnover on downs, 3-and-out.

Madison did get to the Stone Bridge goal line on their last drive of the game but an interception in the end zone left Stone Bridge with the ball on their 20-yard line with 12 seconds remaining in the game.

Final score: Stone Bridge 35 – Madison 10.

I thought Madison held their own in the trenches with Stone Bridge pretty well. But the Bulldogs speed and size in the skill positions was decisively superior. Was very impressed with the play of SB’s QB Mason Tatum. Stone Bridge #7 WR Tyrese Johnson + Williams and Thompson make a formidable receiving corps. Stone Bridge has no real weaknesses that I observed – honestly, this team compares favorably with the Centreville Wildcat team of 2013. I could easily see them going 15-0.

Madison has a very good football team. Their special teams were quite solid – excellent night of punting by #15 Hecht. They are going to win a lot of games this year and I would not be surprised to see them win the Concorde District. They just were outmatched by a dominant team this outing.

Anyone know how what happened at the Hayfield game? Why did they only beat fairfax by 6?

Wha Happ? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Anyone know how what happened at the Hayfield
> game? Why did they only beat fairfax by 6?


Overhyped

It would've been 35-24, but Hayfield can't kick an XP to save their lives. Might turn out to be a season ended come playoff time.

falcettik Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> nat4lee Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > - Westfield (2-0) at Stonewall Jackson (1-2)
> > --- WESTFIELD WINS, 21-0.
>
> The first half of this game saw a grand total of
> five possessions between the two teams, and the
> pace was also moderately quick in the second half.
> With just a handful of penalties and both teams
> preferring to run the ball more than throw, there
> wasn't a whole lot of time for scoring.
>
> Stonewall opened the game on their own 29 yard
> line and moved all the way to the WF 14, but then
> SJ's Boxley was intercepted by Steinhilber on the
> WF 4 yard line to stop the drive. WF ran a few
> plays but was forced to punt and SJ took over on
> their own 37 yard line. After a few SJ plays, the
> first quarter ended scoreless. After the second
> quarter started SJ did move downfield to the WF 37
> yard line but their drive stalled and they were
> forced to punt, pinning WF on their own 12 yard
> line. This time, primarily behind the running of
> Asante, WF marched 88 yards and got the game's
> first score. WF scored when Kim hit Cirillo with a
> short pass and Cirillo broke three tackles on the
> way to a 22 yard score. 7-0, 3:24 to go in the
> half (Steinhilber XP). SJ then managed a short
> drive before giving the ball back to WF with just
> enough time for one unsuccessful play and the half
> ended with WF ahead 7-0. In the first half WF used
> the running game almost exclusively, with the few
> passes they attempted often ending up with a QB
> sack by the SJ defense or just a short gain on a
> scramble. SJ relied heavily on Boxley's running
> ability with a few runs mixed in from Royster, and
> also tried a few passes to their main target,
> Howard, but many were off the mark. This same
> pattern held in the second half for SJ, with
> Boxley probably taking on 75% of the SJ offense
> himself.
>
> The second half saw WF with the ball first and
> they came out throwing, getting to the SJ 44 yard
> line where they faced a 4th and 10. WF's Kim lined
> up as the punter and attempted to run for the
> first down but was stopped well short and SJ took
> over on their own 40 yard line. SJ went three and
> out, giving WF the ball on the WF 33 yard line.
> This time WF put together a 67 yard drive, scoring
> for the second time in the game when Kim hit Morin
> on a 22 yard pass to extend the lead to 14-0
> (Steinhilber XP) with 4:24 to play in the third
> quarter. After getting the ball back SJ again went
> three and out, and WF wasted no time, with Kim
> hitting Kiley on a 56 yard, one play drive to
> extend the lead to 21-0 (Steinhilber XP) with 2:03
> to play in the third quarter. The fourth quarter
> was mostly uneventful with both teams putting
> together three short drives each, combining for
> two drives ending in punts and three on failed 4th
> down attempts before WF's last drive reached the
> SJ 15 yard line and the clock ran out.

Good analogy as always falcettik, game was pretty hard to watch, not a great deal of excitement. WF's defense bent but didn't break, their offense was less than impressive in my opinion.

SJ had a few athletes but make no mistake, WF should have handled them easily, they did not. It was only 7-0 at the half, if SJ doesn't turn the ball over on their first drive it might have been 7-7.

WF's offense sputtered primarily due to their O-line play, too many SJ defenders getting into the backfield. I don't remember the exact number but it seemed Kim was sacked several times. There also were numerous times Asante was hit before getting to the line of scrimmage.

Defensively WF played okay, but no consistent push from the D-line. SJ's QB had more time than WF's when he dropped back to pass. WF did do a good job of everyone hustling to the ball but gave up too many yards considering their opponent.

Hopefully the play of WF in this game was due to their opponent and being off last week. Bottom line, if they play the way they did last night against Madison or Centreville, it's not going to be pretty. I know a few might respond that "WF always gets better as the season progresses", but last night was just plain ugly in my opinion.

Wha Happ? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Anyone know how what happened at the Hayfield
> game? Why did they only beat fairfax by 6?

I wasn't at the game, but judging by Hayfield's Twitter feed, the game wasn't as close as the final score indicates. Hayfield scored a TD early in the fourth to go up 30-10. The next reported score was 30-17 with about a minute and a half to play. It would seem as if Fairfax recovered an on side kick and scored, possibly against Hayfield's second team d as time expired ( can't be certain this is what happened though).

As otherwise pointed out, Hayfield needs to work on extra points. Their inability to make them could cost them a game in the future.

How dare you question us perfect (in every way) Westfield Bulldogs, we are beyond questioning by mere mortals like you sucker.

Trouble Brewing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Hopefully the play of WF in this game was due to
> their opponent and being off last week. Bottom
> line, if they play the way they did last night
> against Madison or Centreville, it's not going to
> be pretty. I know a few might respond that "WF
> always gets better as the season progresses", but
> last night was just plain ugly in my opinion.

Deja vu. Third game of season last year also. Westfield 21 TC Williams 14. Everyone was saying how badly Westfield sucks. Who knows, maybe one day they will be right.

Doesn't matter... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> who is playing quarterback for Madison. They have
> no shot of going into Ashburn and winning this
> year. And for those that think the outcome will
> have more to do with the injury, remember that
> Stone Bridge's best player is out for the year
> already.

Actually, Block played on that bum knee and he hurt it again. If he wasn't done before I'm sure he is now.

Doesn't matter... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> who is playing quarterback for Madison. They have
> no shot of going into Ashburn and winning this
> year. And for those that think the outcome will
> have more to do with the injury, remember that
> Stone Bridge's best player is out for the year
> already.

e3y7p... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Actually, Block played on that bum knee and he hurt it again. If he wasn't done before I'm sure he is now.


Was at the game...if Madison's starting QB was playing, maybe a couple more touchdowns, because of better arm strength and accuracy...would not have mattered though, Madison still would have lost. Stone Bridge had to much speed w/ Thompson vs. the back of the Madison defense; they could have throw 2 or 3 more bombs to jack up the score if they wanted to.

For those who still can't get enough football, there's one more game on the slate today as Robinson travels to Alexandria to take on T.C. Williams at 1:00 p.m. today. Enjoy!

TC 13 Robinson 0 End 1st.

TC 19 Robinson 10 HALF.

T.C. Williams wins a close one over Robinson 27-26. Rams missed a PAT you know they want that back.

Now that the weekend games have all concluded, here follows the district standings for Fairfax County teams through Week 4, as well as current playoff standings and some other random statistics. Enjoy.

Concorde District Standings: (as of week 4 / Sept. 16)

1. Westfield (3-0)
2. James Madison (3-1)
3. Centreville (3-1)
4. Oakton (0-3)
5. Chantilly (0-4)

Gunston District Standings: (as of week 4 / Sept. 16)

1. Mount Vernon (4-0)
2. Hayfield (3-0)
3. West Potomac (3-1)
4. T.C. Williams (3-1)
5. Annandale (2-1)

Liberty District Standings: (as of week 4 / Sept. 16)

1. South Lakes (4-0)
2. Yorktown (3-0)
3. Herndon (2-1)
4. McLean (0-3)
5. Washington-Lee (0-3)
6. Langley (0-4)

National District Standings: (as of week 4 / Sept. 16)

1. George C. Marshall (2-1)
2. Wakefield (2-1)
3. Falls Church (2-2)
4. Thomas A. Edison (1-2)
5. J.E.B. Stuart (1-2)
6. Robert E. Lee (1-3)
7. Thomas Jefferson (0-3)

Patriot District Standings: (as of week 4 / Sept. 16)

1. West Springfield (3-0)
2. James Robinson (2-2)
3. Fairfax (2-2)
4. South County (1-2)
5. W.T. Woodson (1-3)
6. Lake Braddock (0-3)

NORTHERN REGION TOP OFFENSES (as of week 4 / Sept. 16)

1. Freedom-Woodbridge (63 points per game)
2. Mount Vernon (55 points per game)
3. Hayfield (47 points per game)
4. South Lakes (44 points per game)
5. John Champe (41 points per game)
6. J.E.B. Stuart (40 points per game)
7. Stone Bridge (40 points per game)
8. T.C. Williams (38 points per game)
9. C.D. Hylton (37 points per game)
10. James Robinson (36 points per game)

NORTHERN REGION TOP DEFENSES (as of week 4 / Sept. 16)

1. South Lakes (6.0 points per game)
2. Woodbridge (6.3 points per game)
3. West Springfield (8.7 points per game)
4. Freedom-Woodbridge (9.3 points per game)
5. Westfield (12.3 points per game)
6. Battlefield (15.5 points per game)
7. Hayfield (15.7 points per game)
8. Yorktown (16.0 points per game)
9. T.C. Williams (16.0 points per game)
10. Broad Run (16.0 points per game)

CLASS SIX, REGION C PLAYOFF STANDINGS:

1. Woodbridge H.S. (Woodbridge) [3-0 W-L, 28.67 PP]
2. Freedom H.S. (Woodbridge) [3-0 W-L, 28.00 PP]
3. Hayfield S.S. (Alexandria) [3-0 W-L, 28.00 PP]
4. Mount Vernon H.S. (Alexandria) [4-0 W-L, 27.50 PP]
5. West Springfield H.S. (Springfield) [3-0 W-L, 26.67 PP]
6. C.D. Hylton H.S. (Woodbridge) [2-1 W-L, 25.33 PP]
7. T.C. Williams H.S. (Alexandria) [3-1 W-L, 24.75 PP]
8. Annandale H.S. (Annandale) [2-1 W-L, 24.00 PP]

^ ^ ^ TOP 8 TEAMS ADVANCE TO REGIONAL PLAYOFF ^ ^ ^

9. West Potomac H.S. (Alexandria) [3-1 W-L, 23.75 PP]
10. James Robinson S.S. (Fairfax) [2-2 W-L, 22.25 PP]
11. Forest Park H.S. (Woodbridge) [2-2 W-L, 22.00 PP]
12. Fairfax H.S. (Fairfax) [2-2 W-L, 22.00 PP]
13. South County H.S. (Lorton) [1-2 W-L, 20.00 PP]
14. W.T. Woodson H.S. (Fairfax) [1-3 W-L, 19.25 PP]
15. J.E.B. Stuart H.S. (Falls Church) [1-2 W-L, 19.00 PP]
16. Charles Colgan H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L, 18.75 PP]
17. Lake Braddock S.S. (Burke) [0-3 W-L, 17.00 PP]
18. Gar-Field H.S. (Woodbridge) [0-3 W-L, 15.67 PP]


CLASS SIX, REGION D PLAYOFF STANDINGS:

1. Yorktown H.S. (Arlington) [3-0 W-L, 28.67 PP]
2. South Lakes H.S. (Reston) [4-0 W-L, 28.50 PP]
3. Westfield H.S. (Chantilly) [3-0 W-L, 27.33 PP]
4. James Madison H.S. (Vienna) [3-1 W-L, 27.25 PP]
5. Centreville H.S. (Clifton) [3-1 W-L, 25.75 PP]
6. Patriot H.S. (Nokesville) [2-1 W-L, 25.33 PP]
7. Battlefield H.S. (Haymarket) [3-1 W-L, 25.25 PP]
8. George Marshall H.S. (Falls Church) [2-1 W-L, 24.33 PP]

^ ^ ^ TOP 8 TEAMS ADVANCE TO REGIONAL PLAYOFF ^ ^ ^

9. Herndon H.S. (Herndon) [2-1 W-L, 23.33 PP]
10. Stonewall Jackson H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L, 19.25 PP]
11. Osbourn H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L, 19.25 PP]
12. Oakton H.S. (Vienna) [0-3 W-L, 17.33 PP]
13. Washington-Lee H.S. (Arlington) [0-3 W-L, 17.00 PP]
14. Chantilly H.S. (Chantilly) [0-4 W-L, 16.50 PP]
15. Osbourn Park H.S. (Manassas) [0-4 W-L, 16.25 PP]
16. Langley H.S. (McLean) [0-4 W-L, 16.00 PP]
17. McLean H.S. (McLean) [0-3 W-L, 15.67 PP]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/16/2017 05:35PM by nat4lee.

Class 5, Region C Playoff Standings: (as of week 4 / Sept. 16)

1. Broad Run H.S. (Ashburn) [4-0 W-L, 29.00 PP] Previous: 1
2. Stone Bridge H.S. (Ashburn) [3-0 W-L, 27.33 PP] Previous: 3
3. John Champe H.S. (Aldie) [3-1 W-L, 25.50 PP] Previous: 2
4. Tuscarora H.S. (Leesburg) [3-1 W-L, 25.00 PP] Previous: 4
5. Falls Church H.S. (Falls Church) [2-2 W-L, 22.50 PP] Previous: 6
6. Wakefield H.S. (Arlington) [2-1 W-L, 22.33 PP] Previous: 5
7. Potomac Falls H.S. (Potomac Falls) [2-2 W-L, 21.50 PP] Previous: 7
8. Thomas Edison H.S. (Alexandria) [1-2 W-L, 20.33 PP] Previous: 8

^ ^ ^ TOP 8 TEAMS ADVANCE TO REGIONAL PLAYOFF ^ ^ ^

9. Rock Ridge H.S. (Ashburn) [1-2 W-L, 19.33 PP] Previous: 10
10. Robert E. Lee H.S. (Springfield) [1-3 W-L, 19.25 PP] Previous: 9
11. Briar Woods H.S. (Ashburn) [0-3 W-L, 16.00 PP] Previous: 11
12. Freedom H.S. (South Riding) [0-3 W-L, 14.67 PP] Previous: 12
13. Thomas Jefferson S&T (Alexandria) [0-3 W-L, 9.33 PP] Previous: 13



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/16/2017 06:02PM by nat4lee.

Wins this week against quality opponents caused Woodbridge and Hayfield to leap the furthest up the playoff standings, while Prince William teams Battlefield and C.D. Hylton took hard losses and plunged way down.

nat4lee,

Where are you getting your power points from? I am calculating them and I have several differences, starting with #2, which I have as South Lakes with: 98 game pts, 16 bonus pts for (98+16)/4 = 28.50

Also Regions C and D are conducting separate 8 game playoffs.


nat4lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Class 6, Regions C & D Playoff Standings: (as of
> week 4 / Sept. 16)
>
> 1. Woodbridge H.S. (Woodbridge) [3-0 W-L, 28.67
> PP] Previous: 7
> 2. Westfield H.S. (Chantilly) [3-0 W-L, 27.33 PP]
> Previous: 4
> 3. Yorktown H.S. (Arlington) [3-0 W-L, 27.33 PP]
> Previous: 8
> 4. Hayfield S.S. (Alexandria) [3-0 W-L, 27.33 PP]
> Previous: 11
> 5. South Lakes H.S. (Reston) [4-0 W-L, 27.00 PP]
> Previous: 5
> 6. James Madison H.S. (Vienna) [3-1 W-L, 26.75 PP]
> Previous: 1
> 7. Freedom H.S. (Woodbridge) [3-0 W-L, 26.67 PP]
> Previous: 6
> 8. Mount Vernon H.S. (Alexandria) [4-0 W-L, 26.50
> PP] Previous: 9
> 9. West Springfield H.S. (Springfield) [3-0 W-L,
> 26.00 PP] Previous: 10
> 10. C.D. Hylton H.S. (Woodbridge) [2-1 W-L, 25.33
> PP] Previous: 2
> 11. Battlefield H.S. (Haymarket) [3-1 W-L, 25.25
> PP] Previous: 3
> 12. Centreville H.S. (Clifton) [3-1 W-L, 25.25 PP]
> Previous: 15
> 13. Patriot H.S. (Nokesville) [2-1 W-L, 24.67 PP]
> Previous: 17
> 14. George Marshall H.S. (Falls Church) [2-1 W-L,
> 24.33 PP] Previous: 20
> 15. Annandale H.S. (Annandale) [2-1 W-L, 24.00 PP]
> Previous: 13
> 16. West Potomac H.S. (Alexandria) [3-1 W-L, 23.25
> PP] Previous: 18
>
> ^ ^ ^ TOP 16 TEAMS ADVANCE TO NORTHERN REGION
> PLAYOFF ^ ^ ^
>
> 17. T.C. Williams H.S. (Alexandria) [3-1 W-L,
> 23.25 PP] Previous: 21
> 18. Herndon H.S. (Herndon) [2-1 W-L, 22.67 PP]
> Previous: 12
> 19. James Robinson S.S. (Fairfax) [2-2 W-L, 22.25
> PP] Previous: 14
> 20. Forest Park H.S. (Woodbridge) [2-2 W-L, 22.00
> PP] Previous: 16
> 21. Fairfax H.S. (Fairfax) [2-2 W-L, 21.50 PP]
> Previous: 19
> 22. South County H.S. (Lorton) [1-2 W-L, 20.00 PP]
> Previous: 24
> 23. W.T. Woodson H.S. (Fairfax) [1-3 W-L, 19.25
> PP] Previous: 22
> 24. Stonewall Jackson H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L,
> 19.25 PP] Previous: 23
> 25. Charles Colgan H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L, 18.75
> PP] Previous: 27
> 26. Osbourn H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L, 18.75 PP]
> Previous: 30
> 27. Oakton H.S. (Vienna) [0-3 W-L, 17.33 PP]
> Previous: 26
> 28. J.E.B. Stuart H.S. (Falls Church) [1-2 W-L,
> 17.00 PP] Previous: 25
> 29. Chantilly H.S. (Chantilly) [0-4 W-L, 16.50 PP]
> Previous: 29
> 30. Lake Braddock S.S. (Burke) [0-3 W-L, 16.33 PP]
> Previous: 34
> 31. Washington-Lee H.S. (Arlington) [0-3 W-L,
> 16.33 PP] Previous: 35
> 32. Osbourn Park H.S. (Manassas) [0-4 W-L, 16.25
> PP] Previous: 28
> 33. Gar-Field H.S. (Woodbridge) [0-3 W-L, 15.67
> PP] Previous: 32
> 34. Langley H.S. (McLean) [0-4 W-L, 15.50 PP]
> Previous: 31
> 35. McLean H.S. (McLean) [0-3 W-L, 15.00 PP]
> Previous: 33

That was an incorrect source. Original post has been edited to show correct standings.

Re: 8 team tournament, even though that is standard in the past, that has not been officially announced by the VHSL northern region committee. I will wait for an official announcement.

CLASS SIX, REGION C PLAYOFF STANDINGS: (as of Week 4/Sept 16)

1. Woodbridge H.S. (Woodbridge) [3-0 W-L, 28.67 PP]
2. Freedom H.S. (Woodbridge) [3-0 W-L, 28.00 PP]
3. Hayfield S.S. (Alexandria) [3-0 W-L, 28.00 PP]
4. Mount Vernon H.S. (Alexandria) [4-0 W-L, 27.50 PP]
5. West Springfield H.S. (Springfield) [3-0 W-L, 26.67 PP]
6. C.D. Hylton H.S. (Woodbridge) [2-1 W-L, 25.33 PP]
7. T.C. Williams H.S. (Alexandria) [3-1 W-L, 24.75 PP]
8. Annandale H.S. (Annandale) [2-1 W-L, 24.00 PP]

^ ^ ^ TOP 8 TEAMS ADVANCE TO REGIONAL PLAYOFF ^ ^ ^

9. West Potomac H.S. (Alexandria) [3-1 W-L, 23.75 PP]
10. James Robinson S.S. (Fairfax) [2-2 W-L, 22.25 PP]
11. Forest Park H.S. (Woodbridge) [2-2 W-L, 22.00 PP]
12. Fairfax H.S. (Fairfax) [2-2 W-L, 22.00 PP]
13. South County H.S. (Lorton) [1-2 W-L, 20.00 PP]
14. W.T. Woodson H.S. (Fairfax) [1-3 W-L, 19.25 PP]
15. J.E.B. Stuart H.S. (Falls Church) [1-2 W-L, 19.00 PP]
16. Charles Colgan H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L, 18.75 PP]
17. Lake Braddock S.S. (Burke) [0-3 W-L, 17.00 PP]
18. Gar-Field H.S. (Woodbridge) [0-3 W-L, 15.67 PP]

CLASS SIX, REGION D PLAYOFF STANDINGS: (as of Week 4/Sept 16)

1. Yorktown H.S. (Arlington) [3-0 W-L, 28.67 PP]
2. South Lakes H.S. (Reston) [4-0 W-L, 28.50 PP]
3. Westfield H.S. (Chantilly) [3-0 W-L, 27.33 PP]
4. James Madison H.S. (Vienna) [3-1 W-L, 27.25 PP]
5. Centreville H.S. (Clifton) [3-1 W-L, 25.75 PP]
6. Patriot H.S. (Nokesville) [2-1 W-L, 25.33 PP]
7. Battlefield H.S. (Haymarket) [3-1 W-L, 25.25 PP]
8. George Marshall H.S. (Falls Church) [2-1 W-L, 24.33 PP]

^ ^ ^ TOP 8 TEAMS ADVANCE TO REGIONAL PLAYOFF ^ ^ ^

9. Herndon H.S. (Herndon) [2-1 W-L, 23.33 PP]
10. Stonewall Jackson H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L, 19.25 PP]
11. Osbourn H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L, 19.25 PP]
12. Oakton H.S. (Vienna) [0-3 W-L, 17.33 PP]
13. Washington-Lee H.S. (Arlington) [0-3 W-L, 17.00 PP]
14. Chantilly H.S. (Chantilly) [0-4 W-L, 16.50 PP]
15. Osbourn Park H.S. (Manassas) [0-4 W-L, 16.25 PP]
16. Langley H.S. (McLean) [0-4 W-L, 16.00 PP]
17. McLean H.S. (McLean) [0-3 W-L, 15.67 PP]

Sorry, Fairfax fans, Loudoun County football is much better than Fairfax.

As for those making fun of Stone Bridge losing in the 5A finals all the time, they were head and shoulders above Westfield last year, and were not state champs because they had to play Highland Springs instead of Oscar Smith. Same as the year before.

And the reason why they lost in their other final appearances was because they kept getting matched up against Phoebus when they won like 60 in a row.

Stone Bridge would beat Westfield by 20 or more again this year, just like last year. I also think Westfield would lose to Tuscarora, Broad Run, and maybe even Champe if they played this year.

Stone Bridge wanted to keep playing Westfield out of conference, but Simmons bailed.

Biggest NOVA game of the year will take place last week of the season when Broad Run and Stone Bridge match up, with both coming in with 9-0 records.

Futile to Resist... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry, Fairfax fans, Loudoun County football is
> much better than Fairfax.

A gross over-generalization. Sure, some years the top teams are better than in Fairfax. And it sure seems that way this year. But not every season. And you have some bottom of the barrel crap teams in Loudoun so go away.


> As for those making fun of Stone Bridge losing in
> the 5A finals all the time, they were head and
> shoulders above Westfield last year, and were not
> state champs because they had to play Highland
> Springs instead of Oscar Smith. Same as the year
> before.

Let's see - both games Westfield's defense made a stop in crunch-time. Against a D1 recruit QB - who holds a bunch of VHSL passing records. What did Stone Bridge do? Got spanked once and then didn't make the defensive stand when they had the chance the second time. It is not obvious that Highland Springs was a tougher draw than Oscar Smith. Debatable sure, but not obvious.


> And the reason why they lost in their other final
> appearances was because they kept getting matched
> up against Phoebus when they won like 60 in a
> row.

Guess that doesn't count then.


> Stone Bridge would beat Westfield by 20 or more
> again this year, just like last year. I also think
> Westfield would lose to Tuscarora, Broad Run, and
> maybe even Champe if they played this year.

Right now maybe. Stone Bridge has built a super team this season. But you are a fool - a deluded fool - if you think Stone Bridge would have beat Westfield by 20 in a playoff re-match last year. Would have rated that game a toss-up. Actually, they probably would have won because Westfield has better coaching.

However, sure looks like Stone Bridge will have a hard time botching things this year. They have a heck of team - a lot better than last year for sure. But geez, when Westfield beat Stone Bridge three years in a row it was quiet out there wasn't it. One win and the chest-thumping begins.
Attachments:

You know how you know you are the best? When everyone points to you as the team they are better than to prove that THEY are the best. Westfield. #BOOM

nat4lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CLASS SIX, REGION D PLAYOFF STANDINGS: (as of
> Week 4/Sept 16)
>
> 1. Yorktown H.S. (Arlington) [3-0 W-L, 28.67 PP]
> 2. South Lakes H.S. (Reston) [4-0 W-L, 28.50 PP]
> 3. Westfield H.S. (Chantilly) [3-0 W-L, 27.33 PP]
> 4. James Madison H.S. (Vienna) [3-1 W-L, 27.25
> PP]
> 5. Centreville H.S. (Clifton) [3-1 W-L, 25.75 PP]
> 6. Patriot H.S. (Nokesville) [2-1 W-L, 25.33 PP]
> 7. Battlefield H.S. (Haymarket) [3-1 W-L, 25.25
> PP]
> 8. George Marshall H.S. (Falls Church) [2-1 W-L,
> 24.33 PP]
>
> ^ ^ ^ TOP 8 TEAMS ADVANCE TO REGIONAL PLAYOFF ^ ^
> ^
>
> 9. Herndon H.S. (Herndon) [2-1 W-L, 23.33 PP]
> 10. Stonewall Jackson H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L,
> 19.25 PP]
> 11. Osbourn H.S. (Manassas) [1-3 W-L, 19.25 PP]
> 12. Oakton H.S. (Vienna) [0-3 W-L, 17.33 PP]
> 13. Washington-Lee H.S. (Arlington) [0-3 W-L,
> 17.00 PP]
> 14. Chantilly H.S. (Chantilly) [0-4 W-L, 16.50
> PP]
> 15. Osbourn Park H.S. (Manassas) [0-4 W-L, 16.25
> PP]
> 16. Langley H.S. (McLean) [0-4 W-L, 16.00 PP]
> 17. McLean H.S. (McLean) [0-3 W-L, 15.67 PP]

Some people are saying the playoffs are the top 16 of both region c and d combined.

Correct. Combined.

You know you're the best when you're just the best because you're the best and God has made you the best and everybody should bow down to you and acclaim you're best because you're the best. Westfield is simply best

Bulldog booster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You know you're the best when you're just the best
> because you're the best and God has made you the
> best and everybody should bow down to you and
> acclaim you're best because you're the best.
> Westfield is simply best


Damn You!!!!!! If only I could argue this. But it's just so damn true, I can't.

So how does that work again...

1. Yorktown H.S. (Arlington) [3-0 W-L, 28.67 PP] >

2. South Lakes H.S. (Reston) [4-0 W-L, 28.50 PP] >

3. Westfield H.S. (Chantilly) [3-0 W-L, 27.33 PP]

That sure looks like you're 3rd "best"...

God has already proclaimed Westfield best of all time - competition is over.

Futile to Resist... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> and were not state champs because they had to play Highland
> Springs instead of Oscar Smith. Same as the year
> before.
>
> And the reason why they lost in their other final
> appearances was because they kept getting matched
> up against Phoebus when they won like 60 in a
> row.

Oops. Don't forget about Lake Taylor also.

#BESTCOACHESINSTATE #EVERYONEISAWINNER #NOTABOUTWIN&LOSS #MAKINGLBGREATAGAIN
#WINTHECOINTOSS #PEPTOISTHENEWGATORADE #BESTHALFTIMESNACKS #NEWDIRECTION #COOLYOUTHHELMETDECALS #IJUSTWANTAHAVFUN
Attachments:

Is Stonebridge TE/WR Thompson any relation to their head coach?

Combination of factors honestly. Starting QB suspended. Fairfax emotional surge to win on Homecoming. Mistakes by Hawks to keep Fairfax in the game. Three dropped INTs including what would have been a pick six and another that fell into a receiver's arms for a TD.

>Stone Bridge wanted to keep playing Westfield out of conference, but Simmons >bailed.

You realize that Simmons doesn't make the schedule, right? Also, since they've moved to the new format there is no advantage, actually a hindrance, to play teams not in your classification. The only advantage is to play teams out of state, those games don't count at all to the point system. So playing Stone Bridge has no benefit moving forward for Westfield.

Stone Bridge loses the big game because of coaching, not who the opponent is. If Thompson had to field his team year in and year out, with the students that are supposed to be in his school he'd have a mediocre program. It's no secret that Thompson and company have actively recruited players during his tenure. Simmons coaches who he's got, bottom line, that's what good coaches do.

But keep telling yourself how great Stone Bridge is. In the meantime Westfield will just smile as they pass their trophy case with MULTIPLE state championship trophies....

TE Thompson is NOT related to the coach. TE is bi-racial. Mickey not involved.

Really - I was going to stay out of this, but 97% of the people who go to this site are so sick and tired of the dopey Westfield suck ups. And I know some just post to yank a chain, but many believe their own drivel. Um, Simmons absolutely controls who he plays out of conference. Are you a moron? Listen, I think he is a great coach. I also think that Thompson chokes in the big games. And I also know that he absolutely recruits, but so do all of the bigger programs. You don't think Westfield gets kids from the Chantilly mess of a program? Simple fact of the matter is Stone Bridge ran roughshod over Westfield last year, and would do so again this year if they played. Westfield isn't going to get out of the region this year. Mark it down.

Don't be so opportunistic. Everyone knows that nutcase is a troll - so stop pretending it is a real Westfield fan. Hell bucko - very likely is you.

As an aside, it is a FACT - I just double-checked to make sure: EVERY player that took the field for Westfield in the state championship game last year played FRESHMAN football for Westfield. No exceptions.

Not saying they don't ever get transfers or that kids don't move before high school but it's definitely not like Stone Bridge.

So Stone Bridge beat Westfield last year, soundly. Didn't Westfield do that to Stone Bridge the year before? It was the first time Thompson beat Simmons in what, 4 seasons. Simmons is 3-1 against Thompson if I'm not mistaken.

The previous poster did make a valid point. Westfield has no desire, as do most 6A schools, to play 5A teams. The power points for a victory do not equate to beating a team in your own class. It's not worth having anyone on your schedule that's not in the same classification.

Remember a few years ago when Westfield beat Centreville in the regular season. Had a 9-1 record to Centreville's 8-2, but the 6A North championship was at Centreville, not Westfield. Westfield beat Stone Bridge, a 5A school that season, Centreville lost to Gonzaga, out of state team. In essence Westfield was penalized for playing a 5A school and Centreville's points were divided by 9, not 10 games. The Gonzaga game didn't factor in since it wasn't a VHSL opponent.

With power points being so important to standings/seeding's, you'll be hard pressed moving forward to have any school play someone out of there classification. You can thank the VHSL for that!

Let me drop some knowledge on you.
Stone Bridge series is tied 4-4. Not sure how long Simmons has been at WF, but they actually played each other twice in 2000. That was the first year for both schools.


Now, to your point about 6A not wanting to play 5A? You are correct, but only when 6A is afraid of losing to 5A school.

You get 2 more points for defeating a 6A school as compared to defeating a 5A.

HOWEVER, you also receive TWO bonus points for every win that a vanquished opponent has, no matter what classification.

So, if Westfield beat Stone Bridge, they would receive 24 points for defeating a 5A school, PLUS two points for every Stone Bridge victory. Let's say SB goes 8-2.

So, defeating Stone Bridge would give Westfield 24 points for the win, plus 16 bonus points for Stone Bridge's wins. That is 40 points for the win.

WF would earn 26 for defeating Lake Braddock, and then say 10 bonus points (5-5 record for illustrative purposes here) for Braddock's wins (I know, I know - being generous with Braddock wins) for total of 36 points.

You want more bonus points? OK, now each team receives two bonus points for playing a team out of their classification.

There is NO advantage to playing a 6A team over a 5A team.... unless you lose.

Which is why Simmons declined to pick up the SB game this year and moving forward.

Your VHSL information is outdated, but nice try.

Sorry, Charlie.... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let me drop some knowledge on you.
> Stone Bridge series is tied 4-4. Not sure how
> long Simmons has been at WF, but they actually
> played each other twice in 2000. That was the
> first year for both schools.
>
>
> Now, to your point about 6A not wanting to play
> 5A? You are correct, but only when 6A is afraid of
> losing to 5A school.
>
> You get 2 more points for defeating a 6A school as
> compared to defeating a 5A.
>
> HOWEVER, you also receive TWO bonus points for
> every win that a vanquished opponent has, no
> matter what classification.
>
> So, if Westfield beat Stone Bridge, they would
> receive 24 points for defeating a 5A school, PLUS
> two points for every Stone Bridge victory. Let's
> say SB goes 8-2.
>
> So, defeating Stone Bridge would give Westfield 24
> points for the win, plus 16 bonus points for Stone
> Bridge's wins. That is 40 points for the win.
>
> WF would earn 26 for defeating Lake Braddock, and
> then say 10 bonus points (5-5 record for
> illustrative purposes here) for Braddock's wins (I
> know, I know - being generous with Braddock wins)
> for total of 36 points.
>
> You want more bonus points? OK, now each team
> receives two bonus points for playing a team out
> of their classification.
>
> There is NO advantage to playing a 6A team over a
> 5A team.... unless you lose.
>
> Which is why Simmons declined to pick up the SB
> game this year and moving forward.
>
> Your VHSL information is outdated, but nice try.


Simmons has been head coach since 2011 .Simmons is 3-1 against Thompson. During Simmons tenure Westfield has beaten Stone Bridge 30-6, 15-9, and 28-7, his lone loss was 16-34. Not sure what your point is, I'm pretty sure Simmons has never shied away from anyone.

During Simmons tenure he is 74-10 overall, has 5 conference, 2 region, and 2 state championships. Thompson is 65-17 over the same period, not sure how many conference or region championships he has but he has ZERO state titles.

What is a known fact is Simmons builds teams, Thompson recruits them. Kind of funny, Block was Stone Bridge's best player last year, strange that he played for Briar Woods the year before.

Awesome comment about EVERY kid on the WF state championship team from last season played freshman ball at Westfield. So, keep thumping your chest on the one regular season victory from last season.

Sorry, Charlie.... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

I don't see why you are getting so bent out of shape about it. Westfield has no obligation to play Stone Bridge or any other non-conference team. I would not be surprised to see Stone Bridge or another Loudoun team on the Westfield schedule in 2019. I don't where you are getting your information that it will never happen again.

Truth is, I don't even like Stone Bridge. I just think that Loudoun is more competitive. And you are the one who claimed to be a Westfield historian, yet didn't know the series results or anything about the scoring for power points, yet tried to tell me that you did. No harm, no foul. No big deal. I happen to think that Simmons and his crew are the best coaching staff in the state, bar none. I just don't think their teams are all that talented, and was mad when Simmons, (Yes, Simmons!) wanted not part of Stone Bridge any more. By the way, Tuscarora also wanted to play them but were turned down. Instead, he turned south and scheduled Stonewall and Patriot, neither of which pose a threat. More importantly, they might not help his kids get ready for the physical playffs like they have in the past. Might be a tactical error. Oh, and I agree completely that Stone Bridge recruits better than most college programs. Think Jonathan Allen played youth football in Ashburn? :)

NOT GETTING BENT... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> .. And you
> are the one who claimed to be a Westfield
> historian, yet didn't know the series results or
> anything about the scoring for power points, yet
> tried to tell me that you did.

Apparently you don't know anything about the power points. When a team plays down a classification they get 2 bonus points PER classification for doing so to make up for the two game points lost, e.g. when a 6a team beats a 4a team they get 22 for the win PLUS 4 bonus points for playing down two classifications, thus getting the equivalent of 26 win points they would gotten for beating another 6A school. The points they get for the other teams wins are the same regardless of classification. So whether a 6A team beat a 5 win 6A school or a 5 win 1A school, they get 36 total points.

NOT GETTING BENT... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Truth is, I don't even like Stone Bridge. I just
> think that Loudoun is more competitive.

I agree the Potomac District has likely surpassed the Concorde District. But the Concorde is not the only District in Fairfax with good teams. I agree with you that Westfield is not likely to win the region this year. At least not the way they are playing right now.

> And you are the one who claimed to be a Westfield
> historian, yet didn't know the series results or
> anything about the scoring for power points, yet
> tried to tell me that you did. No harm, no foul.
> No big deal.

Sorry, but you are attributing posts made by other people to myself.

> I happen to think that Simmons and
> his crew are the best coaching staff in the state,
> bar none. I just don't think their teams are all
> that talented, and was mad when Simmons, (Yes,
> Simmons!) wanted not part of Stone Bridge any
> more. By the way, Tuscarora also wanted to play
> them but were turned down. Instead, he turned
> south and scheduled Stonewall and Patriot, neither
> of which pose a threat. More importantly, they
> might not help his kids get ready for the physical
> playffs like they have in the past. Might be a
> tactical error. O

So we agree on this also. I'd prefer Westfield played a tougher schedule and I think you make the exact concerning point.

westfieldfootballhistorian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't be so opportunistic. Everyone knows that
> nutcase is a troll - so stop pretending it is a
> real Westfield fan. Hell bucko - very likely is
> you.
>
> As an aside, it is a FACT - I just double-checked
> to make sure: EVERY player that took the field
> for Westfield in the state championship game last
> year played FRESHMAN football for Westfield. No
> exceptions.
>
> Not saying they don't ever get transfers or that
> kids don't move before high school but it's
> definitely not like Stone Bridge.

WHS could def use some transfers this year and upcoming seasons. Looks like their time at the top is quickly coming to an end which is surprising a school that size and how little talent they are fielding this year. You would think back to back titles kids would be knocking down the door to get in but they all seem to go a few miles up the road to Centreville instead. Can't ignore WHS numbers are way down and team they are putting out there, just above avg at best.

Shocked at the number of people who have literally no idea how scheduling works for football and other sports in FCPS.

The Northern Region Football Council, led by the AD at Yorktown, does all of the football scheduling for the region. Schools that want to play games outside the region (like a DC or PW school) have to apply to do so before the schedule begins to be made. The 5A Loudoun schools have been a part of this scheduling body only for the last couple of years, which is why all of a sudden you started seeing WF/SB, CV/Champe, etc.

Each school then submits a "preference list" where they list from top to bottom the schools that are out of district that they'd like to play. The only way the council guarantees that two schools play each other is if they both list each other #1. A lot of schools end up fairly unhappy with the schedule they get, because they'll get their #1 (most schools link up with someone) but also their #8, #13, and #17, for example.

Perhaps WF and SB listed each other #1 for the last cycle - I don't know. Even if they did, and they decided not to this time around, there is no way of knowing who backed out. There will be rumors going both ways, and the preference lists are kept under wraps.

Breaking NEWS from Chris Cuomo - Inside look @ LB Coaches office
Attachments:

Short handed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> WHS could def use some transfers this year and
> upcoming seasons. Looks like their time at the top
> is quickly coming to an end which is surprising a
> school that size and how little talent they are
> fielding this year. You would think back to back
> titles kids would be knocking down the door to get
> in but they all seem to go a few miles up the road
> to Centreville instead. Can't ignore WHS numbers
> are way down and team they are putting out there,
> just above avg at best.

I can see why it would look that way – Westfield lost 9 seniors that are playing some level of college football as freshman this fall. Not to mention 3 additional athletes that could be playing football at the next level if they chose to. That’s hard to replace. So time for the rest of the region to take advantage. Stonewall JV tied Westfield JV last week. That doesn't bode well.

Don't worry Westfield is the best and will always be the best - can anyone pass the vaseline (or a dixie cup)?

I will take a stab at some lines for this weeks games. I am not Steve2K. Let's see some predictions.


Annandale (-5) at Fairfax

Centreville at South Lakes (-8)

Chantilly at Battlefield (-25)

Herndon (-10) at Osbourn Park

Jefferson TJ at Edison (-28)

Lake Braddock (-12) at Yorktown

Lee at WT Woodson (-23)

Marshall at Falls Church (-3)

McLean at Stuart (-9)

Oakton at Langley (-3)

South County (-4) at Hayfield

TC Williams at Patriot (-6)

Wakefield at Mount Vernon (-21)

Washington Lee at Madison (-25)

West Springfield at Westfield (-28.5)

Forget spreads. Pick winners.

Annandale
Centreville
Battlefield
Osbourn Park
Edison
Lake Braddock
Woodson
Falls Church
Stuart
Oakton
South County
TC Williams
Mount Vernon
Madison
Westfield

Not Steve2K Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I will take a stab at some lines for this weeks
> games. I am not Steve2K. Let's see some
> predictions.
>
>
> Annandale (-5) at Fairfax

Fairfax wins outright. I'll definitely take five points.
>
> Centreville at South Lakes (-8)

South Lakes wins and covers.
>
> Chantilly at Battlefield (-25)

Battefield wins, but doesn't cover. Spread is too high.
>
> Herndon (-10) at Osbourn Park

Herndon wins and covers.
>
> Jefferson TJ at Edison (-28)

It's not the right thing to do to pick TJ games.
>
> Lake Braddock (-12) at Yorktown

Lake Braddock wins, doesn't cover.
>
> Lee at WT Woodson (-23)

Woodson wins and covers.
>
> Marshall at Falls Church (-3

Falls Church wins and covers.
>
> McLean at Stuart (-9)

Stuart wins and covers. I may start taking the same position with McLean that I take with Tj.
>
> Oakton at Langley (-3)

Oakton wins outright.
>
> South County (-4) at Hayfield

South county wins and covers.
>
> TC Williams at Patriot (-6)
>
Patriot wins and covers.

> Wakefield at Mount Vernon (-21)

Mt Vernon wins and covers. Easily.
>
> Washington Lee at Madison (-25)
>
> West Springfield at Westfield (-28.5)

Westfield wins, but doesn't cover.

Forgot one

Madison wins and covers the 25 point spread aga Washington-Lee.

Hayfield's going to crush South County and good tonight!

Forget Hayfield. Tonight Centreville gets revenge and stops the SoCo O.

End of first. Sc 12, Hayfield 7

The Hayfield score must be back wards? It's hard to believe they have 7 since they haven't kicked an XP in two years.

Hayfield 21 South County 18 3rdQ
TC Williams 0 Patriot 21 3rdQ
Fairfax 21 Annandale 14 3rdQ
Jefferson 0 Edison 34 Halftime

Hayfield 21 - South County 24....

As an alumni from Hayfield during the "great schism" I can honestly say that I don't like soco...

Regardless both teams are definitely not up to par as they were in the 2016 season.

Great game nonetheless. I wouldn't expect much from either this year though.

UUUUUUUGH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hayfield 21 - South County 24....
>
> As an alumni from Hayfield during the "great
> schism" I can honestly say that I don't like
> soco...
>
> Regardless both teams are definitely not up to par
> as they were in the 2016 season.
>
> Great game nonetheless. I wouldn't expect much
> from either this year though.

Wrong, the game isn't over yet

The Wildcats bitch slapped Southlakes tonight 30–14

Centreville baby Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Wildcats bitch slapped Southlakes tonight
> 30–14
That's what happens when you lack an Oline

Centreville, South Lakes, Madison, whatever who cares

It only matters about Westfield. They will clean up again against all this inferior competition again this year because we are special.

bulldog booster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Centreville, South Lakes, Madison, whatever who
> cares
>
> It only matters about Westfield. They will clean
> up again against all this inferior competition
> again this year because we are special.


Just stop. You make it too easy to agree with you. At least post that WF might lose so I can argue. Damn you! Damn you all to hell!

What do you guys think the conference will result in now that we're just about halfway through the regular season?

D1: Westfield> Centreville>Madison>Oakton>Chantilly
-Could see Madison take control of their game against Centreville, would certainly decide the finalist to take on Westfield for the district title.

D2:South Lakes>Yorktown>Washington & Lee>Langley=Herndon>McLean
-No question about this one, however you could probably take a guess for the last three

D3:West Potomac=Hayfield>Mt.Vernon>TC Williams>Annadale
-I'm fairly certain Hayfield can end MV's streak, and West Po ending MV's hype. The week 10 game between the two will probably overtake LB and SoCo's as far as the season finale.

D4:South County> Lake Braddock>Robinson>Fairfax>West Springfield>Woodson
Unless Lake Braddock can pull a Westfield, it seems like they're stuck under the Stallions for good.

What Now? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What do you guys think the conference will result
> in now that we're just about halfway through the
> regular season?
>
> D1: Westfield>
> Centreville>Madison>Oakton>Chantilly
> -Could see Madison take control of their game
> against Centreville, would certainly decide the
> finalist to take on Westfield for the district
> title.

Seen all of these teams play. I rank Westfield behind Madison and Centreville right now. Madison wins the district. Then Centreville. Then Westfield. Oakton and Chantilly are both just awful.



> D2:South Lakes>Yorktown>Washington &
> Lee>Langley=Herndon>McLean
> -No question about this one, however you could
> probably take a guess for the last three

South Lakes.


> D3:West Potomac=Hayfield>Mt.Vernon>TC
> Williams>Annadale
> -I'm fairly certain Hayfield can end MV's streak,
> and West Po ending MV's hype. The week 10 game
> between the two will probably overtake LB and
> SoCo's as far as the season finale.

Hayfield. West Potomac. Mount Vernon. in hat order.


>
> D4:South County> Lake
> Braddock>Robinson>Fairfax>West
> Springfield>Woodson
> Unless Lake Braddock can pull a Westfield, it
> seems like they're stuck under the Stallions for
> good.

Lake Braddock wins out. Then South County.

Why are so many varsity games scheduled for this Thurs night?