Commenter has beef with Upland touchdown

I thought I would share this anonymous comment from a person who claims to be a local college coach. He had a beef with Upland’s win over Rancho Cucamonga, and there’s a video he says prove’s his point…Does he have a legitimate beef? I’ll let you decide…

Fred
I am a local college coach in the area and wish to remain anonymous because i recruit many of the schools in the sgv and i.e. A lot of people in your area comment on Charter Oak and there loss to Rancho and have commented on Rancho’s loss to Upland this past weekend. A lot of people don’t know that Upland flat out cheated! Below is a link to a play that Upland ran with 10 min to go in the 4th quarter against Rancho. THEY FLAT OUT CHEATED!! They put there TE in between the Center and Left Tackle and he released to catch the deciding score against Rancho. I really don’t care wins as long as I can get their kids to go my school (haha), but I felt that I had to comment on this because anyone who has ever laced up cleats knows this is as bad as it gets. For those that don’t know the rules as well as others there is not reporting of ineligible players in hs football. You are either eligible or you are not. You have to have an eligible number and you have to line up in an eligiible position. Your TE doesn’t line up accidently as the guard. The play was obviously planned and executed and it disgusted me to see it on the fox feed. I hope you and following take a look at this!

Facebook Twitter Plusone Digg Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Email
  • http://www.insidesocal.com/tribpreps/2011/10/commenter-has-b.html#comments A Coach huh?

    A real live College football coach huh?

    They shifted pre-snap.

    The tightend was the last man on the line of scrimmage.

    Learn the most basic rules of football before you start talking crap.

    Man ,I hope your’re not a Mountie or from ULV.
    Sac’s on a roll and the LEO’s don’t need any more bad years.

  • Wrong

    They did shift presnap to double tight ends on the right. #85 who caught the touchdown was lined up NEXT TO the center. The is no situation that makes him an eligible reciever.officials blewnit

  • SGV Athlete

    @A Coach huh,

    I think he is right. Go back and look at the tape again, especially the slow motion replay. After the shift, the TE is lined up INSIDE the tackle and does a quick pull around as the tackle down blocks on the defensive lineman. Great play call at the high school level since there isn’t instant replay (if you aren’t cheating, you aren’t trying), but yes, its still cheating.

  • cheater

    Look at it closer. They shift pre-snap and that leaves a T & G . at the snap T blocks down and G scoops around T and into the zone. Absolutely illegal! College coach is right.

  • http://www.insidesocal.com/tribpreps/2011/10/commenter-has-b.html My Bad

    My bad. Once I went full screen and saw it in slow-motion,they did have 85 covered up. My bad again,Sorry coach. I hope you are @ ULV,we need the help . Pure Busch League. And I live in Upland.

  • Yea, but

    Wasn’t the player to the left of #85 lined up in the backfield, albeit slightly? And wouldn’t that make #85 eligible?

    Just askin’

  • no-step

    A Coach Huh?

    You are absolutely wrong. Commenter is correct, the left guard was covered. Ineligible receiver.

    The manner in which the play evolved makes it difficult to believe that it was an inadvertent misalignment by #85.

  • Prep Fan

    You have to have 7 on the LOS, 85 is covered as there are already 4 guys in the backfield. If the tackle left him uncovered they would have a penalty for not enough men on the LOS, a penalty the refs are less likely to miss then the ineligible man downfield they should have called on this play.

  • Questions

    Okay football afficianados -is there ANY scenario whe this COULD have been an inadvertant mis-alignment – or is it OBVIOUS attempt at getting away with an illegal play? TRYING to give the coach the benefit of the doubt, but it looks difficult to do so. Can anyone give a potential explanation?

  • Could Care Less

    Could Care Less said:

    I think I have to change my name to I care a lot! I was at the Rancho/Upland game on Friday and it was a good one. I thought it was two great teams playing a great game but Rancho basically made a few mistakes and Upland made none; until I saw this. I was at the game and that play happened so fast that nobody noticed anything. I sat on the Rancho side (no I am not a Rancho fan or do I have any kids playing) and nobody over there saw it. The referees didnt see it.

    I am disgusted to see that play executed in such a great game. I think Upland would have won the game regardless, but it was a 3rd and goal play from the 6 yard line. If they dont score there they probably attempt an easy field goal and probably make it. But maybe they dont make it. If it is a 7 point game with 10+ min to go in the 4th quarter the game changes; seriously changes. On the next drive rancho moves the ball past midfield on Upland and has to go for it on 4th down because they are down 2 scores and don’t get it. With Upland only up by 7 maybe Rancho punts the ball and Upland has to go a long way. Instead they go for it and dont get it. Some may say that it didnt matter. I think Upland would have won the game anyway if they make the field goal or scored the td legitimately, but they didnt. They decided to deliberately run a deceptive play that is against the rules.

    And it was a great play. I had to rewind the play three times just to see what anonymous was talking about. But it was illegal. All the shifting and motioning on that play was not intended to fool Rancho, it was intended to fool the referees, and it did. Even the commentators on fox didn’t see when they talked about the play on the replay.

    For all the followers of SGV football, imagine if that play was ran against Charter Oak, Amat, or West Covina. I think a few of you would drive to Upland right now and the others would be at the CIF office.

    Fred, I would really like your and Arams take on this. I am shocked and I think anonymous is correct when he says the play was designed that way. What do you think?

  • FredJ

    I just read and watched this replay this morning, and my first thought is, in sports, coaches and teams get away with what you can get away with. But I’m not sure how football coaches feel about this. Is it a deliberate attempt to fool the refs? I don’t know, I’d like to get some coaches or a refs perspective before I comment too much.

  • WHY ARE YOU SURPRISED?

    C’MON…It’s UPLAND…Please don’t be surprised.

  • Viking Fan

    All this fuss over nothing. The play is perfectly legal. This is simply an overload formation. or for some of you old enough to know, tackle over or guard over. Hence, unbalanced formation. As long as the wr. lined up to the left of #85 is off the line of scrimmage, then #85 is uncovered and completly elgible.Many teams run this formation. Shame on RC for not recognizing it. Don’t blame Coach Salter for out coaching the RC Staff.

  • Brilliant

    Awesome play
    No High School Ref. crew is going to pick that up. I think the play would have been successful even if they had run it legally with the #85 in the uncovered tackle spot, but no way it’s going to be stopped being run the way it was run. Great gamble by the coaches, if they get caught it simply costs them a 5 yard penalty for an ineligible man touching the football in which case they try to throw the ball in from 5 yards further back which opens the field up more. If they fail on that then they attempt the field goal from 5 yards back which gives the kicker a better angle to make the field goal.

  • Eric Davis – BHS’80

    No question in my mind that this is a planned and practiced play. And a darn hard one to stop too!

    1- The receiver (#85) is lined up (in the guard position) where he can see the ball. ***No mistake***
    2- #85 does not go forward on the snap. He actually hesitates then runs his route. This is not a pulling technique that a lineman would use. ***Practiced***
    3- The motion creates the illusion that the TK (not the G) is now an eligible receiver. ***Planned***
    4- TK blocks down, giving the defensive a run read.

    Even with a penalty, Upland is clearly in field goal range and able to get points on the board.

  • Viking fan wrong

    Viking fan

    This is my problem with blogs. Any person can present there opinion as idiotic as it may be. The TE lined up at Left Guard with an ineligible number to the left of him. Thats means he is covered. Read the postings below yours before you comment and watch the video closer. I too would like to hear the opinions of coaches or referees. The college coach who started this post seems to think that is was planned.

  • Eric Davis – BHS’80

    Thanks for this “You make the call” morning.

    5. The backfield receiver runs a post taking the DB with him and clearing the left side of the end zone.

    One nice thing about this thread, whether planned or unplanned, everyone is aware of this play before playoffs!

  • coach

    As a coach, this looks planned to me. The way the Tackle down blocks and 85 releases, this has been practiced by Upland. Yes they got away with it, but the coaching staff should be ashamed of themselves.

  • There is no debate

    There is not debate the play is illegal. The Guard is coverd you have 4 guys in the backfield. End of that story.
    The real story is wheather or not you belive it was designed and practiced that way.
    I for one belive it was a mistake

  • http://www.insidesocal.com/tribpreps/2011/10/commenter-has-b.html Agree w/ E.D.

    I agree w/ Eric Davis and a few others. Look @ it in slow-mo and full screen. The way the tackle blocks down and the TE pulls looks waaay to planed.I guess it’s worth the gamble if you look @ it that way. I think it’s a B.S. play and call.

  • No Way

    What could possibly have made this a “mistake”? The tight end (#85) who knew he was running a pattern ACCIDENTLY line up inside the tackle and next to the center? Is that even a possibility that a HS varsity player on a well-coached team could make THAT mistake?

  • no-step

    I figure Coach Salter is a stand-up guy. But…Luuucy! You got some ‘splainin’ to do!

  • Coach Mo

    As a coach I think this is complete bull#$%&. This game had league championship implications, cif seeding implications, bracket placement implications. This wasn’t a JV game on Thursday with two sub 500 teams playing. Running this play is like hitting someone below the belt!

    As coaches we are required to take responsibility for the actions of our players. I learned a long time ago that “you are coaching it or you are letting it happen”. If a kid gets a penalty he poorly coached. If a fight breaks out, the coach runs an undisciplined program. If kids are ineligible he doesn’t preach academics. If we are to teach our kids valuable life lessons which this great game can do, Upland should be ashamed of themselves. We are not playing for money and those people who posted comments about winning at all cost and if you not cheating your not trying don’t understand what the game at this level is about.

    Sometimes people misalign but a TE aligning between the Center and Tackle is 100% coached! Upland who was coached by Salter years ago should understand how this feels because if you remember they were victimized by a 5th down play vs. Diamond Bar in a championship game in which they lost.

    RIDICULOUS!!!!

  • FredJ

    This is a great debate. If we all agree this is an illegal play, the question becomes was it a “planned” illegal play, and if so, is there anything wrong with that? I wonder how much this goes on week to week.

  • Guest

    Has anyone tried contacting Salter directly about this play? Seems like people are already throwing stones.

  • Raider Football

    Announcer….”there’s a reason their ranked number 4 in the state!”

    Yeah, and now we know what that reason is….

    THEY CHEAT!

    I would very, VERY surprised if coach said, yeah, we’ve been practicing that play forever but never got a chance to use it. More like…the kid just lined up wrong and the ref’s missed it, shiat happens.

  • prude or a coach rat?

    Its only illegal if you get caught and no ref caught it so leave it as that. If your not cheating your not trying. The next time you deliberately run a red light that could have killed somebody because you were in a hurry make sure you mail in $200.00 bucks to the city lets be honest right. Can’t believe someone would post this, but what makes it even worse is that it came from a so called coach? leave it a lone Fred not a good subject a little whinney if you ask me.

  • Anonymous

    Great message Prude….Is that the kind of life lessons you teach your kids? And remember kids….it’s only cheating if you get caught. Do you follow that up with a…And if they do catch you, find out who the RAT was because snitches get stitches. Now go kiss your grandma goodnight.
    This is pertinent because what if it does get used again, during a crucial game at a crucial time? At least all of Uplands future opponents are on the Look out for this and possibly other illegal plays!

  • The U

    For what it’s worth…We have run that play (the correct way with TE not next to Center) for the last 4 years (2008 Against Rancho in CIF Champ, 2008 against Colony, 2009 against Los Osos in CIF Champ, 2010 against Centennial) and it has worked every time. The TE in question has never ran that play in a game setting and was counseled as soon as he came off of the field for lining up wrong. S**T happens, what are you going to do about it…Big deal it was 3rd down, wow back it up 5 yards and whose to say we dont score again or at worst we get a field goal..We won 31-17 and ran out the clock for the last 8 mins of the game, so I hardly doubt this had an impact on the game other more so than any other missed call…..Deal with it and to those who say it was planned, look at the games I mentioned above and look for yourselves..

  • The U

    NOTICE THE SCORE AND TIME LEFT IN 4TH QUARTER…Rancho never scored again and Upland had the ball for most of the remaining time in the game…And the clown who sent in the anonymous message claiming to be a coach is a Rancho Homer who can be found on the california preps and cal hi sports message boards

  • Eric Davis – BHS’80

    I’ll accept it as a mistake.

    As “The U” points out the play is well designed to work with the TE in the TK spot.

    Given the fact that the motion uncovers the TK, it is possible that the TE lined up incorrectly, perhaps thinking the player to his left with was going to shift to the right side of the line.

    The TE didn’t panic (perhaps unknowingly mis-aligned), and figured out a way to get to the outside. The linebacker read run and let the “lineman” (TE) go by.

    BTW- While it looks like the TK blocking down frees up the space needed for the TE to release, it also supports the play’s “run look” that’s also created with the motion and overload to the wide side of the field.

    It’d be nice to see a clip of it run correctly.

  • OldMan in Chino

    To: prude or coach rat:
    I would like to comment on your statement that it is only illegal if you get caught. I do not know enough about the intricaties of football rules to judge if the play was legal or not. So whether the play was illegal or not is not what caught my eye, it was rather the mindset that any play is allowable as long as you do not get caught. Are you advocating that coaches purposely practice plays that are blantantly illegal in the hopes that they will go unnoticed? I understand that blocking in the back is illegal as is blocking below the knees or a helmet to helmet tackle,yet you seem to be of the opinion that the reason that a flag is thrown is due to it being seen and not that it is an illegal block or a dangerous way of tackling a player. Your analogy of running a red light seems to imply that there is knowledge of it being wrong but it is allowable due to no one being killed or the driver not being held accountable for breaking the law. So are the rules governing football mere suggestions (guidelines) on how the game should be played or are they rules that need to be adhered to?

  • PB

    I am a HS coach. I do not believe we will ever know the truth about this play. It is entirely possible the TE lined up incorrectly or that the Tackle was also supposed to shift to the other side to create an unbalanced line. I have not scouted Upland, so I don’t know their tendancies or history of play calling. It is common for teams at the goaline to shift into unbalanced formations. This may have been a mistake.
    However, many on here have pointed out that the Tackle blocked down and the TE pulled around, while the WR ran a clearing route for that zone. This is an indication that it was a planned deceptive play. If that was the case, Upland and their coaches should be ashamed of themselves for unsportsman like play. The only people that really know if it was planned or not wear green.

  • Trojan Man

    GAME OVER …

    Upland WON & Rancho Cucamonga LOST.

    Fight On
    TM

  • thankscoach

    Coach makes a good point, watching this it looks more like upland ran their assignments to perfection rather than someone missing an assignment. Like coach said, the tight end moved right and the tackle made a great block shifting to his right, allowing 85 to curl behind and run for the endzone. Even the receiver, as coach said, ran a clearing route…..whatever the case, it was run to perfection

  • SGV for 30 Years

    Here is my take. This is a legal play. Trickeration, but legal. The tackle is lined up slightly in the backfield. The receiver is also in the backfield. Making the player who caught the pass the last man on the line of scrimmage. Upland had a veteran coaching staff. They would never make that kind of mistake. Rancho should have identified the kid who has played TE all night. They don’t show anymore of Uplands offensive plays. So I don’t know if the tackle lined up different on that play. But he looks like he if off the line on that play.

    SGV430 Ouutt!!!

  • Joe Amat

    Trojan Man,

    Nice to see you come back and visit once in a while.

    it’s not really a question of who won or lost, whether they would have scored anyway, or even the point spread. It’s a question of ethics. The rules and officials are there as guideline to safety and fairness – not as obstacles to manipulate.

    Now I’m as big a Salter fan as there is, but if a team is being “coached” to do something illegal in the hopes of not getting caught – that is WAY different than a kid inadvertantly, holding, blocking in the back, or lining up in the wrong place.

    It’s all in the presentation. If a coach says, “we’re going to hold everytime until they get tired of calling it” is way different than ” protect the QB at all costs” or “foul every time – they can’t call all of them” and softball coaches teaching girls to “crow hop” and illegally pitch to gain an advantage because most umpire don’t call it.

    If a coach tells a kid in practice to do something illegal in hopes of not getting caught or to decieve the official so they get away with it – what is that kid going to do tommorrow in class when they don’t know an answer on a test. Probably the most influential person in most kids life told him it’s ok – why not then?

    I’m hoping it was some sort of mistake, but hard to believe an experienced kid playing his position could inadvertantly line up next to the center when he knew he was in the intended target.

  • Coach Mo

    As to the comment that the play was ran correctly from the tackle position in previous years, I don’t know if that is correct or not. But watching the video I see the tackle on the LOS, he blocks down, LG slides around him, and RB replaces the tackle down blocking. No way does he release like that unless taught. Also, I see the Safety from Rancho looking at the end man on the LOS. If the TE lines up there he is covered.

    ILLEGAL PLAY, RAN ON PURPOSE, PRACTICED AND EXECUTED. CHEATING DOGS!

    As to the comments by The U Said, you are obviously a coach or parent for Upland and you are trying to defend undefendable actions. Rancho has beaten Upland four straight times when the game was played straight up, even in one of the games you mentioned, The 2008 Championship Game. I agree with the comments made by Could Care Less below: Upland could have an probably would have won by running a legal play or kick the FG, but they didn’t. It had an effect on the game. Period end of story.

  • coltfan97

    Everybody is talking he is lining up at the tackle spot and he is clearly is not!!!!! He lines up as a guard as there is a tackle next to him! The tackle blocks down (clearly seen on the video) and the guard/tight end goes out for the pass!!!! I don’t have an interest in this game and dont care on who won!!!!! But this play is clearly illegal by football rules!!!!

  • Trojan Man

    Joe Amat,

    YOU’RE RIGHT.

    I’m a Salter fan as well, TOTAL CLASS ACT. Always has been,ALWAYS will be.

    YOU SNOOZE YOU LOSE!!!

    My cousin plays @ Upland , so I am partial to them .
    Rancho Cucamonga just needs to WIN OUT & HOPE they get a crack @ Upland again come CIF.

    Fight On
    TM

  • coltfan97

    To SGV for 30 years,

    If the tackle is not on the line then its an illegal formation because only 6 men would be on the line of scrimmage ( you need 7)! The 2 wide receivers, the qb, the rb, and the tackle would in the backfield according to you thats an illegal formation! The play is clear its illegal!!!!!

  • U High Dad

    I do not think that this play was designed to run this way. I know that the kid was questioned by the coach as to if he knew why he was an ineligible receiver on that play. Therefore, I cannot believe that the play was designed to fool the officials as someone else had said. I have been around the program for a while, and have never known or heard of Salter coaching on how to cheat and get away with it. The fact is that a mistake was made and was not caught by the officials, had it been I do not that it would have changed the final score. Upland was able to move the ball at will last Friday night.

  • reality

    Cheating is as ingrained in football as it is in all the other areas in our lives. Punching and kicking out of sight of refs. Holding in a fashion hard to detect. DB’s and receivers flailing their arms pretending PI to get the call. Kickers falling down though not hit, players faking injury to stop clock,RB’s crawling under the pile for a first, coaches baiting refs for a call on the sideline etc. etc. Where do you draw the line? Is it up to the coach or should the player be responsible? It’s the nature of all sports even golf to cheat or call it gamesmanship if you want, and it ain’t going to change. You can holler about this one but there were a million other ones last week that were not on tape.

  • prude or coach rat?

    Seriously (Anonymous I mean Rat)you sound like an old women this is a game played by young men hence the word Men and coached by Men. The marcus and queensberry rules do not apply if we were playing golf this is a different story as you can call a penalty on yourself. I go back to my previous post the next time you break the speed limit laws, please feel free to send in your check for the appropriate amount.

    Old man in chino
    If it is a designed play there are penalties for breaking the rules. As in any game or life in general one must way the consequences of being caught for breaking a law or rule. In this case the play out ways the risk of getting caught a mere five yard penalty. This is a play of deception where a penalty can be enforced if found to be illegal, it isn’t rather a designed play to cause harm. If a ref. makes a bad call the opposing team doesn’t call time out and tell the ref. that was bad call you need to give them the ball back.

    Is this any different from Grandma lying about how bad her eye sight is in order to get SSI or my neighbor lying on her financial aid app saying little Susie lives with grandpa so she qualifies for financial aid. Or better yet (fact) cif coach rules test done once a year and all the coaches taking the test in the same room cheating off each other laughing as it’s done. PRUDE like I said when your all ready to start telling the truth and living life as Abe licoln did please be my guest to come on this board and proclaim yourself the saint of football as simply put pathetic. In the words of Jack Nicholson “my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way”

  • 12th man

    Alot of comments on how this play didn’t matter & how Upland would have won anyways…Heres my take..At the point when this play occured Upland was only leading by seven..If the refs catch this play then they replay the down..Who’s to say RC doesn’t come up with a stop or even better a turnover (fumble,interception)even then if they fail to convert on 3rd down..A field goal isn’t always automatic in High School Football..I have seen alot of missed or blocked field goals at this level when the game is on the line..My point is..If the play is caught by the refs & Upland fails to score it changes everything a team chasing 7 instead of 14 in the 4th quarter has a different mind set..they can stick to there original game plan going into the 4th instead of going into a panic mode or a no huddle offense where they mite not feel as comfortable executing there plays..Anyways we will never know what if??? & we will never know the truth about if the play was intentional or not!! Either way…Brush it off & move on to next week & hope that they meet in the playoffs for a rematch..Thats all you can do~

  • Lt. Daniel Kaffee

    prude or coach rat? – nice analogies. And what happened to Nicholson at the end of that movie?

    Case closed!

  • anonymous

    Prude Rat – All that just to remove all doubt that your an idiot?

  • prude or coach rat?

    Anonymous,
    A man of your education has to resort to name calling NICE. I don’t want to be a product of my environment. I want my environment to be a product of me

  • fdic

    After talking to three different sgv coaches today about this very subject and might I ad all three have cif championship rings. I found it very interesting that they all said the same thing

  • anonymous

    Prude Rat-I guess you ARE a product of your environment…..I believe you lobbed the first name bomb, “Old Woman”? NICE, a man of your education resorting to name calling……

  • Joe Amat

    To put things in perspective among the whole “if you’re not cheating, you;re not trying” and “it’s only cheating if you get caught” line of thinking – let me give you this.

    http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051128/news_1s28gallery.html

    Now was he just “trying”? And would it have been ok if he didn’t get caught?

    Apparently, CIF didn’t think so when they said, “”They felt that it was a premeditated decision, at that time…And that act, in and of itself, was serious enough to warrant that penalty.”

    http://articles.latimes.com/2005/dec/15/sports/sp-hssanpedro15

    So if it just “happens” that’s one thing – ‘a premeditated decision’ is something altogether different.

  • let em play

    A lot of talk on this and some discussion on the penalty. To clarify once an inelgible receiver catches a pass it is 15 yards AND loss of down….not just 5 yards as discussed. For what’s it worth being on the local HS scene for a very long time this play was inadvertent.

  • Joe Amat

    let ‘em play – how does a varsity player, who gets a lot of playing time, and is playing his regular position, “inadvertently” line up next to the center? and then proceed to run the pattern anyway when he knows he’s ineligible? ‘ya learn that in flag football at St Joseph Upland, dontcha?

  • Joe Amat

    now let’s not get confused and think I’m comparing this play to the San Pedro coach or suggesting any disciplinary action at all. Was not commenting on the play as much as the “if you;re not cheating …” attitude.

    But let’s also be clear and not try to fool anyone – this was designed and practiced. Without question….and great execution

  • let em play

    Joe –

    I know that you’re the smartest guy on the board but I don’t have a dog in this fight. It sure looks like the receiver and tackle carry out the same assignment as if they were in the proper position…tackle blocks down, receiver drifts on same route. I gotta think a 16-17 year old kid lined up wrong on a play they haven’t run all year

  • Let me get this straight…

    Let me get this straight …

    Either the coach deliberately taught an illegal play and ran it on 3rd down in an important league contest, counting on the defense not to cover a guard and counting on the refs to miss the illegal receiver,

    OR:

    10 offensive players on the field didn’t realize that the TE was lined up at guard, the QB didn’t check to make sure his primary receiver was even on the field, and the TE had an assignment to fake a down block but instead took a step back at the snap…

    The choices are between a coach that intentionally taught and called a play that’s against the rules vs. a wild comedy of incompetence and unawareness, and you all still feel the need to try to argue which of the two horrible possibilities is true?

  • let em play

    Joe –

    Those are your choices. The glass is half empty or half full. I try to give the benefit of the doubt to a kid….but once again I’m not as smart as you so I’ll defer to your always positive outlook. for me I’d like to think stuff like this isn’t coached. some of the best plays ever run (legal or illegal) weren’t planned.

  • Witness

    Upland, Upland, Upland. I was pulling for you guys and was happy to see all your success on the field and in the rankings, but for this long time SoCal high school football fan I will never look at Upland them same way. I would be upset if I was a Upland parent, but I guess I’ll just be disgusted.

  • http://uplanfan@yahoo.com upland fan

    My son attends Upland High and during film the coaches corrected the problem. The player lined up in the wrong spot and thats that..

    This one play did not make the game, in fact Salter put on the breaks at the end of the game or the score would have been ALOT WORSE…

    As for the alleged college coach.. THose of you that beleive that you are crazy. Thats a Rancho dad who saw his team get destroyed…

  • Joe Amat

    Let ‘em play,

    I obviously don’t have a dog in the fight either, and if I”m rooting for anything it’s really that fellow Lancer Coach Salter was coaching on the straight and narrow. i also know that Tim is a great coach and his kids are well prepared.

    That play just looked too precise, with NO real confusion, to be happenstance. In fact, if it was run with the tight end on the outside, it’s not such a good play – maybe even a horribly designed play, as the outside LB (who ends up blitzing unblocked because there are no more eligible recievers to account for) defends #85 without a problem – no play action no ball fake – nothing.

    Like I said rooting for it to be on the up and up, but…

  • 12th man

    Upland fan….How does a “Senior” playing Tight End not know that he is uneligible lining up next to the center???..These are things they show you in flag football or pop warner…Either the Coaches missed it..Or the player lined up wrong & still went along with the play knowing it was illegal..

  • Colt74

    You guys need to watch that play over again. It’s a tackle eligible. Number85 when number 55 pulled to the strong side becomes a tackle. 7 men on the line. Count again before snap. That is a legal play.

  • Colt74

    Here’s the same play..only difference is the tackle stays back instead of going out 8 yards…..

    Same spread…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNQyhy0ZTgw

  • Joe Amat

    Colt74,

    Nope. Go full screen. HD. 85 is lined up as a guard next to the center. Not eligible.

  • Colt74

    Joe,
    Respectfully have to disagree. He is two players away from center. There is a guard right next to him. I can see it at small screen or at full screen.

  • http://doubter doubter

    For those of you who feel this play was not planned or run intentionally, I have a question for you. Where do you think Upland’s star running back came from? He came from a neighboring school and was actually filmed lifting in the Upland weight room while still attending the neighboring school…and worse. I guess if nothing is done about it, it didn’t happen. I am just glad the majority of coaches don’t operate that way. You Upland supporters may want to start cold calling the elderly saying you are from Libya and can’t cash your check from Gadhafi on your own. I heard you can pick a bit of cash that way….and grandma is usually too embarrassed to call the police after getting scammed.

  • Colt74

    Joe,
    You are right. Had to look at the kids socks to see tackle block down and guard go out. The tackle has white socks and the guard has black. You are right and I am….needing glasses….lol

  • coach mo

    Colt 74

    You are too ignorant in the game of football to discuss this matter. He is lined up at the guard position. I have been to Upland games. They always where green jerseys with black pants. Why did they where black on black, to disguise this type of movement. Its an old trick but this conversation is too much for you. All the old double tight dbl wing teams used to do this in order to disguise who has the ball. It obviously works on you with the aid of instant replay.

    FOR ALL OF YOU COMMENTING ON THIS… PAY ATTENTION…. THE TE ALIGNED AT LEFT GUARD WITH A TACKLE COVERING HIM… ITS FRICKEN ILLEGAL AND NOT AN ACCIDENT!!!!!!!!!

  • Colt74

    Ok…

    Here’s what I see. 4 guys to right of center. Center. then left guard and left tackle( who is lined up a half step back )

    With the left “tackle ” lined up a half step back does that not now make 85 an eligible tackle?

  • Colt74

    Coach Mo,

    4 players right of center…yes or no?
    Then center
    then our player in question
    then player a half step back off the line..yes or no…

    That is a tackle eligible.

    I guess you too are too ignorant in the game of football to discuss this matter.

    Nice to know you have been to Upland games and that qualifies you as an expert.

    Now smart one..answer my question…with the left tackle lined up a half step back does that not make our player in question an eligible tackle?

    Can you answer the question without being a smart ass?

  • Colt74

    Next question I have for anyone…back in the day if we were going to run a tackle eligible the tackle had to inform the ref that he was going to be eligible. They do or don’t have to do that anymore?

  • Coach Mo

    I don’t have time to teach you this but I will give it one more shot. Look at the feet of the wing and the outside wr. there toes are on the 9. The LT and TE/LG are basically even. The TE/LG is COVERED!!!!!! ILLEGAL!!!! In order to te be in the backfield all of your body and feet have to be in the backfield.

  • Colt74

    Coach mo,
    “In order to te be in the backfield all of your body and feet have to be in the backfield.”

    Ok…will accept that. TY. But years ago I know we had our TE line up just a half length off the line for our tackle eligible plays plays.

  • coltfan97

    Sorry Colt 74 I disagree with you on this! This play is illegal. The video is clear the tackle blocks down, and the Guard/Tight End goes out for the pass. There should have been a flag!!! Even an Upland Parent said he lined up wrong!!!!!! If anyone says that tackle was not on the line of scrimmage then its a flag for having an illegal formation ( you need 7 on the line of scrimmage).

  • Coach Mo

    Trust me on this one. I am going to have to charge you for further lessons.

  • Colt74

    Coach mo,
    I agree with you TOTALLY that if the player on the outside of the weak side is on the line the player in question is covered and ineligible. And if he was not on the line it would be only 6. I concede anal cranial inversion. No excuse, 100% brain fart. Thank-You!

  • RCFOOTBALL

    That play was just one of many that was not called a penalty. There were 2 other huge plays that had penalties that could of swung the momentum of the game. Bottom line they won and we did not, I am not saying we would of won, if these calls went our way, but it sure would of made the game a lot more interesting. The Upland fan saying putting the brakes on what a joke. We threw a pick at the end and you ran the clock out. You must not of been at the same game I was at. They ran about 6 running plays to run out the clock and we had no timeouts.

    Upland is a very good team and should do very well in the playoffs. I dont know about winning it all, but they are definately one of the favorites. I just hope we get in the playoffs and have another chance at them. They game would be very interesting playing it without Salters Ref Crew.

  • SGV for 30 Years

    Colt97,

    See if you can follow along. First this is not an illegal play or formation. You just have to know what to look for. First, the real TE is lined up at left guard. The left guard shifts to the other side of the formation and lines up at TE. The WR comes down and covers him up. So here is what you have now. TE/C/G/G/T/TE/WR. The other tackle is lined up on the wing just off the line of scrimmage. He blocks down, TE releases, TD end of story. So like I said before, Trickeration yes, illegal play or formation, no. So, can anyone do better than that.

    I think it’s great, I love trick plays. Coaches should have at least one on their play chart per week.

    SGV430 Ouuttt!!!

  • are you sure?

    SGV for 30 Years – lets do this in the reverse. what I see -in the backfield- is #6 at QB, #22 at RB, #3 at Flanker on the left (lined up at the 9 yd line), and #1 going in motion. That means the 7 other players MUST be on the line of scrimmage for it to be a legal formation. If all 7 other players are on the LOS – that means that #85 was covered and NOT eligible – Correct?

  • coltfan97

    SGV FOR YEARS,

    You have to have 7 guys on the line of scrimmage!!!!! If the tackle is on the wing (like you said) that makes only 6 on the line of scrimmage count!!!!!! Thats an illegal formation!!!! Look at video again you see the 2 wr, the rb, the qb, and according to you the tackle is on the wing which make 5 in the backfield!!!! 5 in the backfield equals illegal formation!!!! I love the play, but he line up wrong! Like I said earlier even an Upland fan said he lined up wrong!!!!!

  • 7Rock

    Here`s the same play with the player in the right spot……….and notice how WIDE OPEN he is.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uHx8KluAHo

  • CDawg

    Mr.Rob Wigod…….ARE YOU PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS THREAD???

  • Smack Down

    Excuse me…Coach mo is it? Where do you get off calling people ignorant when you yourself are too ignorant to know the difference between “where” and “wear” ?
    Next time before you open your mouth how about taking your foot out of it first?
    And if I have to teach you how to spell I’m going to charge you.
    Chill out.

  • An Actual Coach

    I don’t understand what everybody keeps debating about? The play is illegal, the formation is not. On the line of scrimmage you must have 7. In the backfield you must have 4. The 4 guys in the backfield are the easiest to identify so we will start with them. #3, #6, #21, #1. Fine. Now, from the Upland left to right on the line of scrimmage the positions are as follows:

    T, TE, C, G, G, T, TE and their corresponding numbers:

    50, 85, 54, 71, 78, 55, 88.

    In 11 man high school football the last two players on the line of scrimmage are considered eligible. However, the last two players on this play are 50 and 88. In high school football eligible numbers are 1-49 and 80-99, which means 50-79 are not eligible to receive the football on plays from scrimmage. Certain kicks do change the rule, but here it’s irrelevant. In the NFL, any player can be deemed eligible if they do not wear an eligible number by simply reporting his eligibility to an official. Not the case here. So the only eligible person on the line of scrimmage on this play to receive the football is #88.

    To the guy who said that #50 was slightly lined up off the ball therefore making #85 eligible, the play still would be illegal, because the formation would be illegal. You can have as many guys on the line of scrimmage as you want, but the minimum is 7. You can put all but the QB on the line, but the only eligible people to receive the football would be the last two guys on the line of scrimmage, so as long as they are wearing eligible numbers.

    So, on the play, if #50 the left tackle was lined up in the backfield, as you say he was, then there would have only been 6 men on the line of scrimmage and therefore an illegal formation. Either way you want to look at it the play is illegal. #50 lines up outside of #85 on the line of scrimmage, blocks down, then #85 releases outside of him and into the corner of the endzone. It is not tackle eligible because #85 was lined up at guard not tackle. Nor was he the last man on the line of scrimmage, because #50 covered him up. The play is illegal, it is not a trick play because trick plays are legal. It is just flat out illegal. If you doubt me please feel free to look up the rules in the NFHSS rule book or visit their website.

    For those of you who want to know how the penalty should have been assessed, it is actually not an ineligible receiver downfield, which is a 5yd penalty and replay the down. In fact, it is illegal touching of a forward pass, which is 5 yds and loss of down.

    In my many years as a high school football coach I have seen kids line up in the wrong spot on several occasions, however, this play is not only used by Upland. I’ve seen it ran on two other occasions, the last time in the late 1990′s. It was illegal then, and it’s illegal now. I only pray that this was an accident, because if it was not, then we must all revaluate the types of people who we want coaching these young men.

  • COChargerfan

    Nice post by An Actual Coach…let’s see how many still want to argue.

    Come on, this play is so blatantly illegal that anyone with half a brain about the rules can spot it in a second. So it is hilarious that so many of the self-proclaimed blog experts are saying otherwise…hey Colt74 aka brain fart boy, you’re wrong again…

    And I agree with Joe Amat that it looked planned…come on, are we really to believe that a 17 year old TE doesn’t know where to line up…on a play designed to go to him? What about the center, tackle and QB…don’t you think they also knew 85 was in the wrong spot when they lined up? These high school kids aren’t that stupid and would have corrected the mistake…if it was a mistake.

  • wow

    Its funny to sit here and read all the comments and opinions. I am not a coach nor do I have a kid playing but love the HS games so I cant say I know this was an illegal play but mistakes do happen, and why do you all comment like mistakes do not and can not happen shows how closed minded people can be! If you were all smart, you would have done true investigation and contacted the Head Coach with the big deal you are all making this to be(but then again you must all be perfect and make no mistakes) I know this staff and kids, and actually know the kid #85. Before throwing stones you need to slow down and realize these are kids; and kids and ADULTS (as we have read through all the comments)make mistakes. The kid honestly lined up wrong and realized he did but it was too late, the play was in action. The Coaches did talk to him after seeing the film and evaluated it like we all did! The kid is an honest kid and would never cheat and do some shady crap and it was not taught or practiced at any practice this year or any year,regardless what you want to believe. And before people start talking crap get your facts straight before slamming away on your keyboards, the kids is actually a Junior I beleive he is 16 not 17(and why that is relevant, I guess it makes your comments seem more valid). And to go back to previous comments, if you watched the same game I did regardless if this play was done Rancho still would have lost. Sorry Rancho folks commenting, i know it sucks to lose but you truly had no chance either way you look at it. Upland defense wasnt letting your offense even play football. Denial is a way of handling things, but bashing a mistake that was made then talking crap without knowing what really happened? There are actually honest people still out here and if you knew this kid you would know he did not intentionally line up wrong for an illegal play. With all said and done nothing more you can do or say will change things, life happens mistake happens and then you all come to the message board to argue what you think is right and wrong and the team who wins no matter what city someone always says they cheated. Upland vs Rancho. Upland- W… Rancho- L

  • Highlander

    Hey dumbasses. Look at the film closer. #85 is lined up in the backfield behind the tackle. Look closer, he cuts in and throws himself into the blocking and then breaks out, again set in the backfield behind the tackle. Count the #of players in the backfield. My son plays on the team and that is by design, look at it again. Closer and slower and you’ll see it is comletely legal.

    BTW, coach, I will never send my kid to play for you, if you cant see that he is in the backfield and releases from behind the tackle after he jumps in the group to block, you must really suck as a coach.

  • 7Rock

    I have one question for all the fools that think this was a planned play.

    Watch the video again.
    Look what happens when #85 comes off the field.

    He gets his ass chewed by the coaches for lining up wrong.
    Is that a normal response after a kid scores a TD.

    The play works perfectly with the player linedupin the tackle spot.
    No need to make it harder and risk a flag by putting him in the guard spot.

    Watch this videoand see how WIDE OPEN the player is when it`s run correctly.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uHx8KluAHo

  • UHS Fan

    Typical crying when you get spanked. What ever happened to taking a loss like a sport. Rancho lost, Upland won, get over yourselves. Like Rancho never pulled crap like this to win a game. Oh, but get this, take away that 7 and you get a final of 24-17, Upland still wins. Get over it, you lost and move on!
    Douchebags!

  • 12th man

    If the coaches knew he was lined up wrong or even the Center & the QB must have known he was lined up wrong why wasn’t there a “Time Out” called?…(No Time Out Was Called Because Everyone Knew Where The Ball Was Going)…Football 101 when your inside the red zone & its 3rd & goal & something doesn’t look rite you call “Time Out” you dont even have to be a coach to figure that one out~

  • 7Rock

    Hey COCharger fan and Joe Amat,

    Watch this video then answer my question:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uHx8KluAHo

    Do you honestly think the Upland coaches are going to take a perfectly legal play that has worked everytime, and make it harder by moving the TE into the guard spot…….plus risk having it called back for being illegal?

    That makes no sense at all.

    You obviously haven`t thought this one through before you opened your foolish pie holes.

    All of you that thought the play was designed that way are just as foolish.

    Players line up in the wrong spot all the time.
    I`ve seen plenty of NFL QB`s line up behind the guard.
    The difference is they can move to the right spot once they`ve realized.

    #85 realized he was in the wrong spot too, but he was already down and set and it was too late to move.

    Shame on you guys.

  • 7Rock

    12th man,

    The coaches didn`t realize he was in the wrong spot till after the play.
    Watching the video, you can`t see the number of the players in the LG and LT spots when they are down and set.

    I`m sure their focus was on all the shifts and motion being correct…….not looking at the LG and LT`s a$$`s trying to figure out if they were in the right spot.

    Coaches don`t always catch everything.
    Against Norco a few weeks ago Upland`s D only had 10 men on the field, without the MLB, and gerhart ran it up the middle for a 70 yard TD.

    Don`t you think they would have called a timeout if they realized it soon enough?

  • 12th man

    7rock,
    Ok i’ll give you that! (coaches didn’t know thats why no time out was called) But it still doesnt explain why the Tight End continued on with the play like is was planned…Does he not know he’s not supposed to line up next to the center? Was this the 1st time the kid played tight end? Does the center know the play? Does anyone whos lined up next to the tight end know the play? Too many people staying quiet for a play that looked like it was run to perfection & practiced regularly~….The only way this kid goes for a pass & thinks it legal lined up next to the center is if he has no prior football or pop warner experience..

  • 12th man

    Bottom line is..This play is “Illegal” we will never know if it was intentional..Coaches & players would never admit to a play that has so much controversy & could have ramifications to it~…but judging with the naked eye it sure seemed planned with everyone executing there assignments…& this is coming from a fan who has no connections from either school~

  • wow

    Ok 12th man- again who stands in the line looking to see whos face is in the helmet next to them. They are all staring down the defensive players throat. Like it was said before mistakes happen but apparently you are perfect and make no mistakes. Previous ball experience doesnt mean crap, who knows what position he played or any of them played if any in the past. You make statements with no facts to back them up. And yes you know what was going through the kids head at the time so you can say “The only way this kid goes for a pass & thinks it legal lined up next to the center is if he has no prior football or pop warner experience.” C’mon be real shit happens the kid got chewed out he wasnt thinking who knows. Get over it move on.

  • pb

    Highlander. If the tackle or the TE were lined up in the backfield as you suggest. IT WOULD STILL BE AN ILLEGAL PLAY! Rules require 7 at L.O.S. If the TE or tackle were in backfield with the other 4 players already in the backfield, it is illegal. Again I am not affiliated to either team. The truth will never be known. It all comes down to referees not being able to see or catch every mistake or cheating action.

  • What Else Are They Cheating At?

    What else are the coaches teaching them to cheat at?

    Grades?

    Addresses for Eligibility?

    Performance Enhancing Drugs?

    And the list goes on….

    Where do you draw the line on what you will do to win?

    A little integrity in the game and with the coaches would be a good start.

    This play was illegal and clearly designed and practiced that way….end of story!

  • wow

    To: “what else are they cheating at? Your comment was just another crack at a team that you know and hate the fact that they are good and would have one regardless. They must have beat your team. A mistake made whether you believe it or not. GET OVER IT they didnt cheat end of story. your comment is now directed not only to the coaching staff but the entire school and district and its practices. shame on you for that comment, you need to stay of the message boards! i guarantee the play can be ran again with players in the right spots and guess what ANOTHER TD.

  • Highlander

    Again, I say, look again closer. He is the 4th in the backfield. That camera angle is no good to see or say that someone is cheating. They ran this same play and scored against, San Bernardino, Norco and Loyola and now Rancho. Do you mean to tell everyone that all of those referee teams all missed that? He is the 4th in the backfield, lined up behind the tackle and tight end, the end goes in motion and exposes him, regardless he is in the backfield, he stunts in to block in the middle, the defense bites on the “run” look and he breaks to the corner of the endzone. Defense got fooled, all of you looking at the film are still fooled and a touchdown is scored. The run this everytime they are within the 5 and it has worked several times.
    I personally know one of the referee team leaders form the SG group and he even told me that this play is one of the ones they discuss before every upland game to watch for. If you are not watching closely, you may say this is an illegal formation but its not. Check it again and look closely. A different camera angle would help clear things up.

  • little bitch%%s

    I can’t believe this thread is still going you haters sound like a bunch of little BITCHES…. surrounding a scorned women. Upland run that play all night if you can if its illegal a flag will be thrown untill then more power to you.

  • 12th man

    Highlander,
    The question is no longer weather there was 7 down on the line or 4 in the backfield~ Instead its where #85 is lined up..He’s next to the center which makes him covered & no longer eligible~ Maybe this will help..I did some research about the play & heres what CIF had to say about it….

    Pass eligibilty rules apply to who is eligible to CATCH a legal forward pass. The receiver must be eligible by position AND by number. There are up to 6 eligible positions at the snap:

    The 2 players legally on the “END” of their line
    A player legally in his backfield–up to 4 including the QB
    Also, these receivers must be wearing a number other than 50 thru 79 to catch the pass.
    Your “COVERED” tight end is ineligible by position and your tackle on the end of the line is ineligible by number since he’s probably wearing a number from 50-79. My suggestion would be to keep your TE on the end and move your guard or tackle over to where you moved your TE. That way you still have the same unbalanced formation but your TEs can now catch a pass.

  • FBFan

    He is not even close to being off the ball. Clearly, the qb, rb, slot that goes in motion and the X are the elgible men who are off the line of scrimmage.

  • http://www.insidesocal.com/tribpreps/2011/10/commenter-has-b.html GOD

    Coach,
    With all do respect— In fact as a loyal Upland Highlander fan I totally respect your take about it being an illegal play. But with that being said the referees actually didn’t throw a flag hence is is just a regular old play that Foothill Citrus referees missed. In fact they miss calls in all sports….. in fact try getting every ball and strike call or banger at first in baseball correct.
    So hard to make judgement of the officials– the man in the arena trying to make it fair.
    Than to bring out the stuff about kid #85– a “JUNIOR” that he did this intentional just boggles my mind. You call yourself a college coach— try putting yourself in that boys place— he catches a TD— see films Saturday and his reprimanded by his coaches than to listen to all you San Gabriel crybabies whine like little biatches blows me away. Call a spade a spade– Bishop Amat, West Covina & Covina are the only quality organizations in that little pocket you call SGV. Maybe if the parents of most these boys could get real jobs and get off these blogs– Probably most these guys the write in are wantabees– former frustrated athletes that couldn’t get in the arena — maybe never played past minors in little league.
    To insinuate that the coach from Upland planned it out is a crock of your “college” teams crapola. Without question if I had a kid playing he wouldn’t be playing for your arm chair QB– Mr Hind sight 20/20 reporter know it all butt.
    You sir are whats wrong with sports….. Oh yeah — the Rancho coach and the Upland coach I hear are really good friends too. LOL– Maybe they did it on purpose ? Maybe you should call TMZ and have it on TV.
    Now go back to your fantasy football team and get ready for Sundays match ups.

  • http://www.insidesocal.com/tribpreps/2011/10/commenter-has-b.html Jesus

    Forgive my Charter Oak fan because he is just jelous that Upland beat Rancho and Rancho beat Charter Oak so it makes his team look like a bunch of losers LOL

  • 12th man

    We could go on for days debating weather it was legal or illegal weather the coach knew or the refs missed the call & as another blogger stated that this play was called many times before…The only question i have is why did the Tight End continue on with the play & think he was eligible??? Did he line up wrong & just say to himself (oh well~! Im lined up wrong but who cares..maybe the refs wont catch it)…

  • Coach Mo

    12th man, there is no debate on whether the play is legal or illegal, IT IS ILLEGAL. Its not about the referees missing the call, they missed it. The debate is about whether it was intentional or not.

    The play was designed to fool the officials. The shifts, motions, blocking, etc. All this is to get the TE the ball from the Guard position because the RULES say that he can’t catch it from there. No coach in the world is going to teach his kids to defend the LG on a throwback route and the Refs probably arent even looking at it. That is what makes it unethical.

    To the upland fans commenting on this subject, you have said that your team has ran the play before from legal formations. That just proves to me that it was coached illegally for the rancho game. If it is a play that they have, that they practiced many times, why did he line up there? Because he was coached to be there, thats why. As a coach I can tell you we all have our goaline passing routes that we practice every week but rarely use because you only use 2 to 4 goaline plays per game on average throughout the season and most team will try to run it in from there first. This play was probably practiced this way since fall camp. If you believe otherwise I have some ocean front property just outside of Las Vegas to sell you.

    Your coach didnt think he could beat Rancho straight up and he screwed up. Because the only thing you and I will agree on is that Upland could have beat Rancho straight up. All they had to do is run a legitimate play to one of there many scholarship players or kick the field goal if not successful. BUT HE DIDNT. The play was coached that way throughout the week because he didnt think he beat them straight up. Take off your little green hat and realize it was coached. Every coach who has posted about this has been politically correct but has also stated that it is pretty hard to believe that it was an accident.

    Please do not expect us to believe that this great team, with tons of talent, and a veteran coaching staff didnt practice the play that way all week or season long.

  • http://www.insidesocal.com/tribpreps/2011/10/commenter-has-b.html#comments Cain & Abel

    Coach Mo–
    You are simply dumb as a door nail. Do you need me to splain to you? I will try to slooooow down for you—— the kid linnneeeed upppp in wrong spot pal. Do you coach flag football and can’t understand that? Go back to Northview roughriders pee wee team pal and catch a clue.
    I have never seen so many dumb – stupid idiotic inbreds on one blog. Whoops I ma on here I better get off this site before the cooties rubs off. Go Rancho Go Upland— Glendora– enjoy your a ++ whooping tomorrow night. Wilson enjoy your whooping too. Covina rules !!!

  • http://www.insidesocal.com/tribpreps/2011/10/commenter-has-b.html#comments Cain & Abel

    Coach Mo–
    You are simply dumb as a door nail. Do you need me to splain to you? I will try to slooooow down for you—— the kid linnneeeed upppp in wrong spot pal. Do you coach flag football and can’t understand that? Go back to Northview roughriders pee wee team pal and catch a clue.
    I have never seen so many dumb – stupid idiotic inbreds on one blog. Whoops I ma on here I better get off this site before the cooties rubs off. Go Rancho Go Upland— Glendora– enjoy your a ++ whooping tomorrow night. Wilson enjoy your whooping too. Covina rules !!!

  • http://www.insidesocal.com/tribpreps/2011/10/commenter-has-b.html#comments Cain & Abel

    Coach Mo–
    You are simply dumb as a door nail. Do you need me to splain to you? I will try to slooooow down for you—— the kid linnneeeed upppp in wrong spot pal. Do you coach flag football and can’t understand that? Go back to Northview roughriders pee wee team pal and catch a clue.
    I have never seen so many dumb – stupid idiotic inbreds on one blog. Whoops I ma on here I better get off this site before the cooties rubs off. Go Rancho Go Upland— Glendora– enjoy your a ++ whooping tomorrow night. Wilson enjoy your whooping too. Covina rules !!!

  • Cheating Bastard

    Salter is a cheating bastard. That is the bottom line.

  • I know something you don’t know!

    Hahahaha. Upland fooled everyone here. I do feel a little bad for the Rancho coaches and players, because I bet they busted their humps preparing and they got hosed here. They have a great program, but someone took advantage of their good character on this play. Kudos for pulling one over them. I would love to see them play again in the playoffs. I bet the game would be much different.

    Anywho, the play in question here is planned, because it has a name and there are two versions of it. It’s called Cub and Cub Switch. Cub is legal and has the TE outside the guard. Cub switch is illegal and has the TE inside the guard. It comes from the old Loyola playbook, and I haven’t seen Cub Switch pulled out in a long while. For those who doubt me, just do a little research. I didn’t think this stuff was going on any more, but it made a comeback in this game. And #5 from Rancho, the safety: He shouldn’t feel bad for not picking up the TE/G kid, because I’m sure his coach didn’t teach him to cover ineligible guards on pass plays.

    I still can’t believe I just saw Cub Switch again. Especially from a team like Upland. I thought they were more legit than that. It worked though.

  • Anonymous

    Wow, Look at the fire storm I created. This last post prior to mine is pretty interesting.

    Fred and Aram: you have heard comments from coaches and itiots. I would like to hear your opinion before this thread disappears.