Anyone Who Expected A Drop In Dreadnaught Country. Sorry.

N

naughty

New member
Lakeland exposes Manatee's weaknesses
By ROGER MOONEY
rmooney@bradenton.com

LAKELAND

- Why Lakeland? Why the dreaded Dreadnaughts, winners of three consecutive state titles, 45 straight games and the defending national champions? Why play them in a spring classic?

Because Manatee High football coach Joe Kinnan wanted answers.

How good was his defense? It dominated the offense during spring practice, but then how good is the offense?

How good are the first-year starters along the offensive line?

The new linebackers and defensive backs?

How accurate is the depth chart?

"The better your opponent, the easier it is to make those decisions, because they will expose your weaknesses," Kinnan said Friday morning.

Nearly 12 hours later, he walked off the field at Bryant Stadium in front of a scoreboard that read: Lakeland 47, Manatee 21.

Kinnan and his staff had answers, maybe not the ones they hoped for, but answers nonetheless.

"I didn't expect it to be like that," Kinnan said. "Offensively we couldn't run the ball, and their defense gashed us."

There was talk of next fall being a down year for the Dreadnaughts, who lost six starters from last year's state Class 5A title team to the University of Florida alone.

Ha.

Ben McRoy, who will be a junior next season, rushed for 180 yards and four touchdowns, while Jason Guzman, who will be a senior, ran for 109 yards and a score.

"Their front line just completely dominated our front seven," Kinnan said. "They were into our secondary. They are a heck of a lot better than we are right now."

Lakeland's defense was just as dominant, holding the Hurricanes to just 10 yards of rushing. Ben Axon, who will see time as a tailback and fullback next fall, led the Hurricanes with 16 rushing yards.

Most of the Hurricanes' offense came on big plays - a 42-yard catch and run by Axon for the game's first points on the Hurricanes' first possession, a 6-yard halfback pass from Axon to Ace Sanders for the Hurricanes' second touchdown, and a 69-yard touchdown pass from quarterback Brion Carnes to Sanders late in the fourth quarter.

"I think with time our offense will come around," Kinnan said. "I was a little disappointed we didn't run the ball better."

Graduation wasn't kind to Manatee, either. The team that won its district title and advanced to the 5A state semifinal, one win shy of playing Lakeland for the state title, is breaking in a new offensive line, linebacking unit and defensive backs.

The offense is where the Hurricanes have their most experience, even though they are young. Carnes and Sanders are still freshman, yet they both started in the Hurricanes' state semifinal game last December at Fort Lauderdale St. Thomas Aquinas before playing their first spring game.

Now, Kinnan said, comes the time when he and his coaches study the game tape and decide their next move. Do they move some players to certain positions? Did some backups outplay the guys ahead of them?

"That is what this (game) was about," Kinnan said. "Now we have to find the pieces to the puzzle and put them together."


We got some Coverage things to work on d. And a few other problems here and there. But all we did was reload. And heck call me crazy but with a qb that can move around and throw. We threw for 157 yards. And anyone who knows lakeland knows that it is a big step up. So right now in L-town we are feeling pretty darn good about next year.
 
 
SLCDad said:
Some people thought Lakeland wasn't as good as advertised last year.
Click to expand...

And people will think that about Slc after Northwestern smokes you. Plus lakeland will be fine. Its you haters that thought that. But again no falls here. A 4th title looks very likly.
 
Thats funny

naughty said:
And people will think that about Slc after Northwestern smokes you. Plus lakeland will be fine. Its you haters that thought that. But again no falls here. A 4th title looks very likly.
Click to expand...
If you think that a Florida team is going to do what they barely did to St. X, on what was arguably not there best year, think again. HIGH OCTANE BABY!! We have warned all the pizza shops and drivers though. Like I told ya before, tell your boys and 300 fans to behave while they are here.
 
I believe Naughty expected them to drop off, too.

His posts are tough enough to read once, though, so there is no way I am going to look back through them now for proof.
 
Chicago said:
I believe Naughty expected them to drop off, too.

His posts are tough enough to read once, though, so there is no way I am going to look back through them now for proof.
Click to expand...

Read this. :party: :party: :party:

Party in Dreadnaught Country. To be honest. I did Expect a little drop. But Not that much anymore. Hey Slc dad. How is carroll looking for next year?
 
Let me answer that one

They can either decide to throw for 450 yards or give the ball to Tre newton and let him run for 200. This juggernaut is going to roll you. The Trinity team that scared them last year was loaded with some big, big boys and they overcame it. You guys are going down big.
 
naughty said:
To be honest. I did Expect a little drop. But Not that much anymore. Hey Slc dad. How is carroll looking for next year?
Click to expand...

SLC is in the middle of spring football right now. The offense looks very good. They could start the season now. (What do you expect with 9 returning starters?) The defense is still working. Many of the defensive starters have not been decided. There are some terrific young athletes on the team. The new coaches are fantastic. Since the new head coach had strong ties to SLC already, it's been a very easy transition. He has looked great signalling the plays from the sidelines.

SLC will be #1 in Texas in the preseason polls and will probably be #1 in the USA. The team looks like they are deserving of that status.
 
WoodyHayes said:
They can either decide to throw for 450 yards or give the ball to Tre newton and let him run for 200. This juggernaut is going to roll you. The Trinity team that scared them last year was loaded with some big, big boys and they overcame it. You guys are going down big.
Click to expand...

Now now. Tone it down. Northwestern is not losing to anyone next year. But its good to know what the other team looks like. Let me remind you. this is a team that pitched 7 striaght shut outs. So your offense numbers dont scare this all. Your defense better be ready. Becasue they will be outstanding on both sides of ball. They play there spring game this saturday vs. 2006 Preseason National #5 glades central.
 
naughty said:
Now now. Tone it down. Northwestern is not losing to anyone next year. But its good to know what the other team looks like. Let me remind you. this is a team that pitched 7 striaght shut outs. So your offense numbers dont scare this all. Your defense better be ready. Becasue they will be outstanding on both sides of ball. They play there spring game this saturday vs. 2006 Preseason National #5 glades central.
Click to expand...

Tone it down? I like rankings as much as anybody (and more than most) but quoting 2006 preseason rankings is a bit much don't you think? Glades Central is a good team but not even close to national #5. They might make the top 200 (but just barely).

Regarding the shutouts, you need to look at WHO MNW played. The average ranking of the 7 teams was LOWER than 3,400th in the nation. Not exactly quality competition. (SLC's worst opponent was ranked higher than that.) Also, shutouts are more a reflection of the 2nd and 3rd team NOT the 1st team. I HOPE MNW wasn't leaving their starters in past the 1st or 2nd series of the 3rd quarter. Overall, SLC's strength of schedule was two touchdowns (per game) tougher than MNW's schedule. You may not like the strength of schedule ratings but two touchdowns per game is HUGE. Even if the ratings aren't perfect, that is a lot to make up for.

(Calpreps says SLC's 2006 schedule was 2 TDs tougher than MNW's. Massey says SLC's schedule was 3 TDs tougher per game. Do you want the links?)

If MNW and SLC were to play 10 times, I'd say SLC wins at least 7 of those. We'll see what happens when the game is played.
 
Last edited:
SLCDad said:
It will be fun to see if the Dreadnaughts can play like a national championship team in 2007 which is something they haven't been able to do yet IMO.
Click to expand...


F your darn computer ratings. If they are so good. then how come ohio state did not win national title. And how come Two of the best reg season teams in the nba are out. Keep that crap for your self. And lakeland always played like a national champion. Let me guess hmmm who should we play like carroll. :clap: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: . Funny. Come play in florida buddy. And for the record. You never played a team that had the potential to beat you. The only one you played was Trinity. and looked what happened. We played. Winter Haven(state ranked),St.Xaiver( nationally ranked),Mainland(nationally ranked), Lake Gibson(state ranked), Kathleen, Sta(ranked in the super 25 last two years). So take on teams that have a chance to beat you then talk bout lakeland. I dont know why you think computer rankings mean anything. :clap: but nice try.
 
naughty said:
F your darn computer ratings. If they are so good. then how come ohio state did not win national title. And how come Two of the best reg season teams in the nba are out. Keep that crap for your self. And lakeland always played like a national champion. Let me guess hmmm who should we play like carroll. :clap: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: . Funny. Come play in florida buddy. And for the record. You never played a team that had the potential to beat you. The only one you played was Trinity. and looked what happened. We played. Winter Haven(state ranked),St.Xaiver( nationally ranked),Mainland(nationally ranked), Lake Gibson(state ranked), Kathleen, Sta(ranked in the super 25 last two years). So take on teams that have a chance to beat you then talk bout lakeland. I dont know why you think computer rankings mean anything. :clap: but nice try.
Click to expand...

Naughty, you have got to be joking. Right?

I think everybody should look HONESTLY at Lakeland's performance in 2006. If the rankings were done at the end of the year (without regard for who started the year ranked higher) nobody could seriously make the case that Lakeland was #1. Let's be honest.

Lakeland struggled against 3-4 above average good teams. Lakeland's schedule was much, much weaker than SLC's schedule. It was two TDs PER GAME weaker. SLC played 5 games against teams in the national top 200. Lakeland played 1 team in the national top 200. That's the facts.

While Lakeland was struggling to beat above average teams, SLC was destroying nationally ranked teams. (SLC beat the national top 200 ranked teams by an average of 26 points.) That's the facts.

Let's look at the bottom of the schedule. Lakeland played FIVE teams that were ranked LOWER than 5,000th. Lakeland played SIX teams that were ranked LOWER than ANYBODY on SLC's schedule. Sheesh.

One ranking put two teams above Lakeland in the Florida state rankings.

Lakeland did NOT have a national championship season. Let's be honest.
 
Last edited:
Of course it looks like Lakeland played more teams that had the potential to beat them.

They had far more close games.

So you're supposed to get more credit for barely winning and less credit for the game not being close? Yeah, that makes sense. What about a team that goes 0-10? They obviously played 10 teams that had the potential to beat them. Maybe they should be #1.

And no team that won five playoff games in Florida's second-largest classification should take a shot at the schedule of any team that won six playoff games in Texas's largest classification.

What is more likely -- that Lakeland would have lost if put in the Texas 5A Division I playoff bracket (highest in the state), or that SLC would have lost if put in the Florida 5A playoff bracket (Florida's highest minor league, essentially)?
 
SLCDad said:
Naughty, you have got to be joking. Right?

I think everybody should look HONESTLY at Lakeland's performance in 2006. If the rankings were done at the end of the year (without regard for who started the year ranked higher) nobody could seriously make the case that Lakeland was #1. Let's be honest.

Lakeland struggled against 3-4 above average good teams. Lakeland's schedule was much, much weaker than SLC's schedule. It was two TDs PER GAME weaker. SLC played 6 games against teams in the national top 200. Lakeland played 1 team in the national top 200. That's the facts.

While Lakeland was struggling to beat above average teams, SLC was destroying nationally ranked teams. That's the facts.

Let's look at the bottom of the schedule. Lakeland played FIVE teams that were ranked LOWER than 5,000th. Lakeland played SIX teams that were ranked LOWER than ANYBODY on SLC's schedule. Sheesh.

One ranking put two teams above Lakeland in the Florida state rankings.

Lakeland did NOT have a national championship season. Let's be honest.
Click to expand...

I'll be honest - I agree with you SLCDad. Funny how SLC played a tougher schedule and Naughty admits that slc only played one team with the potential to beat them. Yet he names many lesser teams that had potential to beat Lakeland. I think he proved your point.
 
Few teams in the the history of HS football had the top notch talent of the '06 Lakeland team. Many may have had the overall numbers, but the schools these players went to in the numbers they did was incredible.

Taking that, they should have wiped the floor with every team on their schedule and they didn't. Every team, even the best will have an off game where a team unexpectedly makes them work harder. Lakeland had more than what should have been expected by their team.

I have seen it many times, all the talent does not make a team great, even in great programs. Sometimes they just don't "click". I think last year's squad was very good, but can also see where this year's team might play better.

No big deal. My '98 Vikes are an example. Probably the most overall and top talent for a Lamar squad and they lost one regular season game and got bounced by in the first round. As far as team play, they probably don't rank in the top three maybe five of all time Lamar teams.
 
pied said:
Few teams in the the history of HS football had the top notch talent of the '06 Lakeland team. Many may have had the overall numbers, but the schools these players went to in the numbers they did was incredible.

Taking that, they should have wiped the floor with every team on their schedule and they didn't. Every team, even the best will have an off game where a team unexpectedly makes them work harder. Lakeland had more than what should have been expected by their team.
Click to expand...

I think you nailed it.

The level of talent was probably one of the main reasons Lakeland was ranked so high in the pre-season and early-season polls (combined with their record over the last couple of years). The problem is that the human polls have a "don't drop unless you lose" mentality. So . . . while Lakeland struggled most of the human polls didn't take that into account.

That is why I said . . . . "If the rankings were done at the end of the year nobody could seriously make the case that Lakeland was #1."

The computer polls don't have that bias. The Freeman/Calpreps model had Lakeland #17 in the nation. The Massey model had Lakeland ranked #3 in Florida behind Northwestern and Pahokee.

This is a classic case of the bias that is inherent in the human polls.
 
You might be right. polls are wha they are. Lakeland, in my opinion has every right to claim their title. They started out #1, with a big target on their backs, sacked up and travelled to play one of the best teams in the nation. That was impressive. Now St. X did not end up being as good as originally thought, but you can't fault Lakeland as everyone thought St. X would be great.

Seemed as if Lakelandtrailed off later in the season and I think I could make a stronger argument for the Bulls being ranked higher at the end of the season than Lakeland.
 
pied said:
You might be right. polls are wha they are. Lakeland, in my opinion has every right to claim their title. They started out #1, with a big target on their backs, sacked up and travelled to play one of the best teams in the nation. That was impressive. Now St. X did not end up being as good as originally thought, but you can't fault Lakeland as everyone thought St. X would be great.

Seemed as if Lakelandtrailed off later in the season and I think I could make a stronger argument for the Bulls being ranked higher at the end of the season than Lakeland.
Click to expand...

Yes, you can't fault Lakeland for the fact that St.X wasn't as good as everybody thought. However, at the same time, the narrow Lakeland win lost much of it's luster. The truth about both St.X and Lakeland became clear as the season progressed. Neither team was quite as good as everybody first thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top