#PACtion™ 2024

thePITman said:
Baseball is one of the few sports with strict substitution rules and limitations. We always need to re-educate our younger players that, if Little Johnny is on the bench then pinch hits for Little Bobby, and Little Bobby goes back into the game, Little Johnny is done for the game and cannot reenter. It's not like football or basketball where you can sub every dead ball if you wanted to. It is because of this that playing time always becomes an more of an issue in baseball than other sports, IMO.
Click to expand...
I was talking more about Johnny plays middle infield. Billy starts at SS and Johnny at 2b. Billy plays for Coach XYZ's summer team. Johnny's parents think he's a better SS. Billy and Johnny are both pretty equal. Billy has a better arm so SS makes more sense for him and 2b makes more sense for Johnny. Johnny's parents don't think Billy's arm is any better. Billy is only at SS b/c he plays for Coach XYZ's summer team in their opinion. Johnny transfers bc he and his parents think he should be SS even though he's starting at 2b. Johnny has been a SS his whole life. Johnny's dad has also coached him his whole life. There's a perceived slight b/c parent goggles wont let you admit someone else is better than your kid.
 
Stark Sports said:
Yeah I mean definitely nothing personal against you, I appreciate your opinion on the subject and I agree this is all just good conversation.

I would say there have been a good number of the stand out baseball players since he has been there that were 2-3 sport athletes. Are you saying he is discriminating against just wrestlers in particular? I am relatively familiar with who has come through both baseball and the wrestling programs (at least at the varsity level) over the past decade plus and I am not sure who really even fits the bill of what you are describing. Not saying it hasn't happened, but not sure why it would benefit Burkett (a coach with well over 300 career wins) to pin (no pun attended) someone to the bench just because they are a wrestler.

I don't know the kid you are referring to who is choosing not to play this year. But I will say if he can't handle playing for Burkett for 2.5 months a year, then I think he's going to have a tough time making it at the next level if that is his goal and a tough time in the real world in general. And that's just being honest. I am not saying Burkett is holly jolly Santa Claus out there coaching or anything, but to make it seem like the playing conditions are so unbearable that it is justifiable for an all-league kid to walk away from his team is laughable I'm sorry. It feels like there has to be more going on there with either the kid or his parents.
Click to expand...
For sure on the convo, just wanted to make sure, but I should have trusted you being part of this GOATED thread that we don't have anyone in here taking things personally 😁

I obviously do not want to get into naming names on here, especially when they are kids, and maybe I shouldn't have shared what I did about someone not playing this year. Fact is that I know the family & the kid very well. There truly is nothing going on with the parents, kid or household that makes it laughable, it sucks because he is a huge benefit, but I understand at the same time why its' being done. He's played for several high-level teams with no issues. Sometimes you just have to make what decision you feel is best. Other examples of this are the 3-4 kids that have bailed form Tuslaw, that are HUGE contributors at surrounding schools in multiple sports. This influx and outflux happens at all schools of all sizes, not saying I like it, but again comes down to a personal and family decision to do what you feel is best for you and your son or daughter from an athletics perspective and sometimes (and what probably should be the priority) academics or overall school environment evaluation. We could go wayyyy gown a rabbit hole with this conversation, but I already put too many novels on here, so maybe we start a separate PACtion thread for ramblers such as myself LOL

It sounds like we are pretty even steven with our knowledge of kids and Tuslaw in general, I would have to reach back in my memory and talk to the former assistant from Tuslaw (now head man at Louisville) to get some more facts on kids affected by playing vs. not playing. Not backpedaling on my statements, just several years ago and many stories shared. That being said, I'll concede maybe the truth is not always in said conversations in circles, AND I know there have been some bad attitudes for him or any other coach to try and manage, which again that is not on him.
 
Playoffs??? said:
For sure on the convo, just wanted to make sure, but I should have trusted you being part of this GOATED thread that we don't have anyone in here taking things personally 😁

I obviously do not want to get into naming names on here, especially when they are kids, and maybe I shouldn't have shared what I did about someone not playing this year. Fact is that I know the family & the kid very well. There truly is nothing going on with the parents, kid or household that makes it laughable, it sucks because he is a huge benefit, but I understand at the same time why its' being done. He's played for several high-level teams with no issues. Sometimes you just have to make what decision you feel is best. Other examples of this are the 3-4 kids that have bailed form Tuslaw, that are HUGE contributors at surrounding schools in multiple sports. This influx and outflux happens at all schools of all sizes, not saying I like it, but again comes down to a personal and family decision to do what you feel is best for you and your son or daughter from an athletics perspective and sometimes (and what probably should be the priority) academics or overall school environment evaluation. We could go wayyyy gown a rabbit hole with this conversation, but I already put too many novels on here, so maybe we start a separate PACtion thread for ramblers such as myself LOL

It sounds like we are pretty even steven with our knowledge of kids and Tuslaw in general, I would have to reach back in my memory and talk to the former assistant from Tuslaw (now head man at Louisville) to get some more facts on kids affected by playing vs. not playing. Not backpedaling on my statements, just several years ago and many stories shared. That being said, I'll concede maybe the truth is not always in said conversations in circles, AND I know there have been some bad attitudes for him or any other coach to try and manage, which again that is not on him.
Click to expand...
GIA6AFGXsAAbh6x.jpeg
 
Last edited:
CrusaderZip0004 said:
I was talking more about Johnny plays middle infield. Billy starts at SS and Johnny at 2b. Billy plays for Coach XYZ's summer team. Johnny's parents think he's a better SS. Billy and Johnny are both pretty equal. Billy has a better arm so SS makes more sense for him and 2b makes more sense for Johnny. Johnny's parents don't think Billy's arm is any better. Billy is only at SS b/c he plays for Coach XYZ's summer team in their opinion. Johnny transfers bc he and his parents think he should be SS even though he's starting at 2b. Johnny has been a SS his whole life. Johnny's dad has also coached him his whole life. There's a perceived slight b/c parent goggles wont let you admit someone else is better than your kid.
Click to expand...
Sadly, lot of daddy ball does exist and most parents and people in general have a hard time separating blood from reality. There are a few rare instances where dad/coaches are never accused of daddy ball and their kids actually have it the worst playing for them. They bring the hammer down on them more than the other kids if nothing else to avoid being accused of daddy ball.

To be clear, none of my bi*ching about Burkett from a baseball perspective is regarding my kid or friends' kids and playing time, they all play a ton, just overall observations and things from the past. I want what's best for the program, if my kid or any kid doesn't "win" the position, then tip your cap and get better or move positions. Welcome to real life boys, which sadly doesn't always happen that way either..... another rabbit hole LOL
 
Playoffs??? said:
For sure on the convo, just wanted to make sure, but I should have trusted you being part of this GOATED thread that we don't have anyone in here taking things personally 😁

I obviously do not want to get into naming names on here, especially when they are kids, and maybe I shouldn't have shared what I did about someone not playing this year. Fact is that I know the family & the kid very well. There truly is nothing going on with the parents, kid or household that makes it laughable, it sucks because he is a huge benefit, but I understand at the same time why its' being done. He's played for several high-level teams with no issues. Sometimes you just have to make what decision you feel is best. Other examples of this are the 3-4 kids that have bailed form Tuslaw, that are HUGE contributors at surrounding schools in multiple sports. This influx and outflux happens at all schools of all sizes, not saying I like it, but again comes down to a personal and family decision to do what you feel is best for you and your son or daughter from an athletics perspective and sometimes (and what probably should be the priority) academics or overall school environment evaluation. We could go wayyyy gown a rabbit hole with this conversation, but I already put too many novels on here, so maybe we start a separate PACtion thread for ramblers such as myself LOL

It sounds like we are pretty even steven with our knowledge of kids and Tuslaw in general, I would have to reach back in my memory and talk to the former assistant from Tuslaw (now head man at Louisville) to get some more facts on kids affected by playing vs. not playing. Not backpedaling on my statements, just several years ago and many stories shared. That being said, I'll concede maybe the truth is not always in said conversations in circles, AND I know there have been some bad attitudes for him or any other coach to try and manage, which again that is not on him.
Click to expand...
Would love for the parents in this situation to sit their son down, have a discussion with him about how sometimes in life, your authoritative figure is not going to be the most likeable person, and that you still have to find a way to make it work and persevere over that situation. At the end of the day, no one looks back at the sports they played in HS and says "man, I wish I DIDN'T play that sport".....but there are plenty of kids who choose not to play, then later in life wish they would have played. Doesn't instill much "TUFFNESS" in a kid, by the parents just letting him not play because he personally doesn't like the coach. Seems like the root of the competitiveness problems Tuslaw has been facing as of late!

Also - I have no skin in this game whatsoever. But just for some additional perspective - coaches are judged first and foremost on wins and losses. Can they be great people, yes, can they be great with the kids, yes, but if they are a sub-par coach/wins producer - they will not be coaching long. That said, it's in the coaches best interests to play what he sees as the best players and find ways to get the best lineup on the field that he can. In most situations you're describing, there is something going on behind the scenes. Coach said something to the kid that the kid and parents didn't like....they took offense and are now holding a grudge etc....something stupid and petty is usually the root cause. Or, the coach believes someone else is better, or works harder and is more committed. Coaches do absolutely have favorites - their favorite players are usually the best and hardest working....either way, "coach is too tough or mean", isn't usually a reason for a kid to quit playing and if it is a good enough reason, then the team is probably better off without that player anyways....
 
CasualFan24 said:
Would love for the parents in this situation to sit their son down, have a discussion with him about how sometimes in life, your authoritative figure is not going to be the most likeable person, and that you still have to find a way to make it work and persevere over that situation. At the end of the day, no one looks back at the sports they played in HS and says "man, I wish I DIDN'T play that sport".....but there are plenty of kids who choose not to play, then later in life wish they would have played. Doesn't instill much "TUFFNESS" in a kid, by the parents just letting him not play because he personally doesn't like the coach. Seems like the root of the competitiveness problems Tuslaw has been facing as of late!

Also - I have no skin in this game whatsoever. But just for some additional perspective - coaches are judged first and foremost on wins and losses. Can they be great people, yes, can they be great with the kids, yes, but if they are a sub-par coach/wins producer - they will not be coaching long. That said, it's in the coaches best interests to play what he sees as the best players and find ways to get the best lineup on the field that he can. In most situations you're describing, there is something going on behind the scenes. Coach said something to the kid that the kid and parents didn't like....they took offense and are now holding a grudge etc....something stupid and petty is usually the root cause. Or, the coach believes someone else is better, or works harder and is more committed. Coaches do absolutely have favorites - their favorite players are usually the best and hardest working....either way, "coach is too tough or mean", isn't usually a reason for a kid to quit playing and if it is a good enough reason, then the team is probably better off without that player anyways....
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more with all your saying. I gave up football for a year thinking I had to focus on basketball, I was wrong, luckily it was early in my HS career and went back, but I was nothing special, average at best, but regret is a terrible thing, your right about that.

I don't want to hang on this particular situation w/ this kid, I should have left that part out of this thread even though it is still anonymous. But I can assure you this particular case is not a lack of toughness. There are exceptions to every rule, and this is one of them, kind of want to leave this topic at that now if we can.
 
Playoffs??? said:
Couldn't agree more with all your saying. I gave up football for a year thinking I had to focus on basketball, I was wrong, luckily it was early in my HS career and went back, but I was nothing special, average at best, but regret is a terrible thing, your right about that.

I don't want to hang on this particular situation w/ this kid, I should have left that part out of this thread even though it is still anonymous. But I can assure you this particular case is not a lack of toughness. There are exceptions to every rule, and this is one of them, kind of want to leave this topic at that now if we can.
Click to expand...
This is tuffness. Coach Larry Taylor is explaining to this insolent player why he demands potato teezers with every Swenson's order.

Screenshot_20240307-103448-914.png
 
Last edited:
CrusaderZip0004 said:
I was talking more about Johnny plays middle infield. Billy starts at SS and Johnny at 2b. Billy plays for Coach XYZ's summer team. Johnny's parents think he's a better SS. Billy and Johnny are both pretty equal. Billy has a better arm so SS makes more sense for him and 2b makes more sense for Johnny. Johnny's parents don't think Billy's arm is any better. Billy is only at SS b/c he plays for Coach XYZ's summer team in their opinion. Johnny transfers bc he and his parents think he should be SS even though he's starting at 2b. Johnny has been a SS his whole life. Johnny's dad has also coached him his whole life. There's a perceived slight b/c parent goggles wont let you admit someone else is better than your kid.
Click to expand...
Oh believe me, I get it. Haha! I've been as involved in youth/HS/community/travel baseball as much as anyone on this thread. Your post gets two thumbs up from me!
 
Last edited:
Looks like it's Baseball day on PACtion™ . Sounds like a good time to inject this great baseball song from the late Kenny Rodgers, in which the young player has a herculean amount of self awareness. Moreso than some of the characters being talked about above.

 
Playoffs??? said:
Sadly, lot of daddy ball does exist and most parents and people in general have a hard time separating blood from reality. There are a few rare instances where dad/coaches are never accused of daddy ball and their kids actually have it the worst playing for them. They bring the hammer down on them more than the other kids if nothing else to avoid being accused of daddy ball.

To be clear, none of my bi*ching about Burkett from a baseball perspective is regarding my kid or friends' kids and playing time, they all play a ton, just overall observations and things from the past. I want what's best for the program, if my kid or any kid doesn't "win" the position, then tip your cap and get better or move positions. Welcome to real life boys, which sadly doesn't always happen that way either..... another rabbit hole LOL
Click to expand...
Oh I wasn't putting that on you. That's my own BS bc I coach baseball and I get tired of parents lol.
 
2000 PACtion™ Game of the Year (Game of the Century?)

This is the second in a series of PAC GOTY posts - 25 in all - to lead us up to the start of the 2024 season. For a look back at last week's post, where Manchester toppled undefeated Tuslaw in Week 8 of 1999, please click here.

OK ... Game of the Century might be a bit of hyperbole, but given that the year 2000 was the last year of the 20th century ... why not? For the second straight year, it came down to Tuslaw vs. Manchester in Week 8. The conference began play in 1989, and coming into Week 8 of the 2000 season, the Panthers were 67-2 in league games. The only blemishes: a 1993 road loss to Indian Valley and a 1995 loss on the road in Week 10 at Coventry. Losing at home? That just didn't happen. Not in conference games.

But Tuslaw had other ideas. They remembered getting punched in the mouth a year earlier. Coming into the game on Friday, October 13th - yes - Friday the 13th - they had yet to lose. And they had 18 starters back. Coming off back-to-back shutouts of Sandy Valley and Tusky Valley this was the year!

Except of course, it wasn't. Manchester had also recorded back-to-back shutouts of Fairless and Tuskey Valley. And at home? Somehow, someway, the Panthers always find a way. On this night, behind their suffocating defense and a well-timed fourth quarter burst out of the backfield, Manchester continued it's reign over the PAC.

Here is the Akron Beacon Journal story that recounted the events of the evening. Both teams finished 9-1 in the regular season, but it was the Panthers who again reigned supreme and won their 11th PAC title in the first 12 years of the conference.

Were you there? Let us know what you remember about the Game of the Year (Century?) from Y2K.


Manchester-Tuslaw_2000_Story.png
 
Last edited:
thePITman said:
Baseball is one of the few sports with strict substitution rules and limitations. We always need to re-educate our younger players that, if Little Johnny is on the bench then pinch hits for Little Bobby, and Little Bobby goes back into the game, Little Johnny is done for the game and cannot reenter. It's not like football or basketball where you can sub every dead ball if you wanted to. It is because of this that playing time always becomes an more of an issue in baseball than other sports, IMO.
Click to expand...
Are the rules for substitution for high school like the MLB...or is it not as strict?
 
CrusaderZip0004 said:
Oh I wasn't putting that on you. That's my own BS bc I coach baseball and I get tired of parents lol.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter what high school sport you coach....they are all tired of their parents...lol...it maybe worse now because they will text their issue and not talk with the coaches in person unless the coach initiates the phone call or meeting
 
Bluestreakoffice said:
Are the rules for substitution for high school like the MLB...or is it not as strict?
Click to expand...
Yes, the rules are essentially the same. In terms of lineup flexibility, it's basically like the American League with the DH option. But in HS, as of a few years ago, we now have the "player DH" option, as well, which is like a reverse DH that provides additional flexibility. So if I wanted my pitcher (or any player) to both bat AND play in the field to start the game, but then at some point later in the game, I envision subbing someone into that spot in the lineup to play the field, but I want the original player to continue hitting, I would designate that pitcher as the "player DH" when providing my lineup card to the umpire. So when the sub goes into the field (in that spot on the lineup card), the original player becomes the DH. But that's about it when it comes to substitution differences.
 
cuyahogacuse said:
2000 PACtion™ Game of the Year (Game of the Century?)

This is the second in a series of PAC GOTY posts - 25 in all - to lead us up to the start of the 2024 season. For a look back at last week's post, where Manchester toppled undefeated Tuslaw in Week 8 of 1999, please click here.

OK ... Game of the Century might be a bit of hyperbole, but given that the year 2000 was the last year of the 20th century ... why not? For the second straight year, it came down to Tuslaw vs. Manchester in Week 8. The conference began play in 1989, and coming into Week 8 of the 2000 season, the Panthers were 67-2 in league games. The only blemishes: a 1993 road loss to Coventry and a 1995 loss on the road in Week 10 at Coventry. Losing at home? That just didn't happen. Not in conference games.

But Tuslaw had other ideas. They remembered getting punched in the mouth a year earlier. Coming into the game on Friday, October 13th - yes - Friday the 13th - they had yet to lose. And they had 18 starters back. Coming off back-to-back shutouts of Sandy Valley and Tusky Valley this was the year!

Except of course, it wasn't. Manchester had also recorded back-to-back shutouts of Fairless and Tuskey Valley. And at home? Somehow, someway, the Panthers always find a way. On this night, behind their suffocating defense and a well-timed fourth quarter burst out of the backfield, Manchester continued it's reign over the PAC.

Here is the Akron Beacon Journal story that recounted the events of the evening. Both teams finished 9-1 in the regular season, but it was the Panthers who again reigned supreme and won their 11th PAC title in the first 12 years of the conference.

Were you there? Let us know what you remember about the Game of the Year (Century?) from Y2K.


View attachment 55495
Click to expand...
Gosh darn it.....you did it again....lol....I was not at this game, I was at Jackson watching Phil Here Today Gone To Mauro beat us 13 to 3....yes he did stay longer at Jackson then his normal routine...lol This game between Manchester and Tuslaw had to be packed at Manchester....how many people could that stadium hold...and I liked the use and spelling of the word moreso in your previous post...been a very long time since I have seen it spelled that way....
 
Last edited:
thePITman said:
Yes, the rules are essentially the same. In terms of lineup flexibility, it's basically like the American League with the DH option. But in HS, as of a few years ago, we now have the "player DH" option, as well, which is like a reverse DH that provides additional flexibility. So if I wanted my pitcher (or any player) to both bat AND play in the field to start the game, but then at some point later in the game, I envision subbing someone into that spot in the lineup to play the field, but I want the original player to continue hitting, I would designate that pitcher as the "player DH" when providing my lineup card to the umpire. So when the sub goes into the field (in that spot on the lineup card), the original player becomes the DH. But that's about it when it comes to substitution differences.
Click to expand...
Thanks...and I learned something today...well I learned a couple things...the player DH and that there are times Rich is just not right...not right I say...lol. Also thanks for the bold at Lake...am not sure it will help thou...lol
 
Playoffs??? said:
Couldn't agree more with all your saying. I gave up football for a year thinking I had to focus on basketball, I was wrong, luckily it was early in my HS career and went back, but I was nothing special, average at best, but regret is a terrible thing, your right about that.

I don't want to hang on this particular situation w/ this kid, I should have left that part out of this thread even though it is still anonymous. But I can assure you this particular case is not a lack of toughness. There are exceptions to every rule, and this is one of them, kind of want to leave this topic at that now if we can.
Click to expand...
That is the one thing I say to high school kids that are not playing football....you only get three years and then you are done...it is the largest team sport...what I mean there will be 50 to 80 of your school classmates on the team....only sport that has those type of numbers is track.....20 years after they graduate if teammates get together for an adult beverage the stories are awesome
 
El Lapo keeps adding sponsors to BellStores Stadium with a new beer garden sponsor. El Lapo is the Bill Veeck of AD's.

I also love El Lapo's new $10,000 tariff on all schools from Carroll County wanting to visit BellStores Stadium.

STstroh.jpg
 
Last edited:
CrusaderZip0004 said:
I was talking more about Johnny plays middle infield. Billy starts at SS and Johnny at 2b. Billy plays for Coach XYZ's summer team. Johnny's parents think he's a better SS. Billy and Johnny are both pretty equal. Billy has a better arm so SS makes more sense for him and 2b makes more sense for Johnny. Johnny's parents don't think Billy's arm is any better. Billy is only at SS b/c he plays for Coach XYZ's summer team in their opinion. Johnny transfers bc he and his parents think he should be SS even though he's starting at 2b. Johnny has been a SS his whole life. Johnny's dad has also coached him his whole life. There's a perceived slight b/c parent goggles wont let you admit someone else is better than your kid.
Click to expand...
I know both families. I live down the street from both. Billy dated my youngest daughter for a while and Johnny played travel ball with my middle son. Billy's mom makes a killer martini. I never miss the Christmas party at their house.
 
Bluestreakoffice said:
Here is an interesting article about college football....I have said the power 5 conferences will become the G league and the MAC type schools will be the NCAA version....

www.si.com

REPORT: SEC, Big Ten, Could Dump Football Programs that Don't Contribute to TV Revenue

By now, we all know college football is a business. Big business.
www.si.com www.si.com
Click to expand...
Interesting indeed, I'd also add that there are some great D2 schools and also NAIA that actually develop and focus on 4-year careers. Several studs that went on to accomplished NFL careers at that. Nothing against the Blue Chips, talent is indeed talent, but there is a huge world of opportunities out there for kids to go on to the next level, get school paid for and if the growth and talent is there, you don't have to come from the SEC or Big 16 or (whatever the number is now) to take that next step.
 
cuyahogacuse said:
2000 PACtion™ Game of the Year (Game of the Century?)

This is the second in a series of PAC GOTY posts - 25 in all - to lead us up to the start of the 2024 season. For a look back at last week's post, where Manchester toppled undefeated Tuslaw in Week 8 of 1999, please click here.

OK ... Game of the Century might be a bit of hyperbole, but given that the year 2000 was the last year of the 20th century ... why not? For the second straight year, it came down to Tuslaw vs. Manchester in Week 8. The conference began play in 1989, and coming into Week 8 of the 2000 season, the Panthers were 67-2 in league games. The only blemishes: a 1993 road loss to Coventry and a 1995 loss on the road in Week 10 at Coventry. Losing at home? That just didn't happen. Not in conference games.

But Tuslaw had other ideas. They remembered getting punched in the mouth a year earlier. Coming into the game on Friday, October 13th - yes - Friday the 13th - they had yet to lose. And they had 18 starters back. Coming off back-to-back shutouts of Sandy Valley and Tusky Valley this was the year!

Except of course, it wasn't. Manchester had also recorded back-to-back shutouts of Fairless and Tuskey Valley. And at home? Somehow, someway, the Panthers always find a way. On this night, behind their suffocating defense and a well-timed fourth quarter burst out of the backfield, Manchester continued it's reign over the PAC.

Here is the Akron Beacon Journal story that recounted the events of the evening. Both teams finished 9-1 in the regular season, but it was the Panthers who again reigned supreme and won their 11th PAC title in the first 12 years of the conference.

Were you there? Let us know what you remember about the Game of the Year (Century?) from Y2K.


View attachment 55495
Click to expand...
Thanks, I was having a nice Thursday prior to this. Appreciate the recap and trip down memory lane though in all seriousness. As I stated in my post last week, 2000 was going to be the year. You don't get many chances to bring back 18 starters from a 9-1 team. This was the pinnacle of the greatest 4 year stretch in program history. Arguably the best team in program history. Everything had been building to this game. In terms of disappointing regular season losses, this is in the top 3 for sure and likely takes the top spot given the stakes and Manchester's dominance at that time.
 
cuyahogacuse said:
2000 PACtion™ Game of the Year (Game of the Century?)

This is the second in a series of PAC GOTY posts - 25 in all - to lead us up to the start of the 2024 season. For a look back at last week's post, where Manchester toppled undefeated Tuslaw in Week 8 of 1999, please click here.

OK ... Game of the Century might be a bit of hyperbole, but given that the year 2000 was the last year of the 20th century ... why not? For the second straight year, it came down to Tuslaw vs. Manchester in Week 8. The conference began play in 1989, and coming into Week 8 of the 2000 season, the Panthers were 67-2 in league games. The only blemishes: a 1993 road loss to Coventry and a 1995 loss on the road in Week 10 at Coventry. Losing at home? That just didn't happen. Not in conference games.

But Tuslaw had other ideas. They remembered getting punched in the mouth a year earlier. Coming into the game on Friday, October 13th - yes - Friday the 13th - they had yet to lose. And they had 18 starters back. Coming off back-to-back shutouts of Sandy Valley and Tusky Valley this was the year!

Except of course, it wasn't. Manchester had also recorded back-to-back shutouts of Fairless and Tuskey Valley. And at home? Somehow, someway, the Panthers always find a way. On this night, behind their suffocating defense and a well-timed fourth quarter burst out of the backfield, Manchester continued it's reign over the PAC.

Here is the Akron Beacon Journal story that recounted the events of the evening. Both teams finished 9-1 in the regular season, but it was the Panthers who again reigned supreme and won their 11th PAC title in the first 12 years of the conference.

Were you there? Let us know what you remember about the Game of the Year (Century?) from Y2K.
Click to expand...
"This was their year." Why does that make me think of this clip...


Again, outstanding work, 'Cuse!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top