Survey: What type of team would you rather have?

[TarponFanInNorthTexas]

Which of these two types of teams would you rather have?

A) A team with GREAT SIZE and AVERAGE SPEED?

or

B) A team with GREAT SPEED and AVERAGE SIZE?

Give me your answer, and your reason why you chose that answer. Thanks!

<small>[ November 14, 2002, 12:53 AM: Message edited by: TarponFanInNorthTexas ]</small>

[Bulldog92]

Speed can kill you. Look at a team like Newton. They don't have that much size, but they can run. There are a few teams that have a combination of both, but I'll take speed every time....

[sinton66]

Count me in on the speed side also. Speed will get you more yards than size every time on offense. And, you will win if speedy on defense too. It's kinda like comparing a dogfight between a 747 and an F15 Tomcat. Speed and maneuverability will win.

[Rabbit'93]

Speed over size.

[duckbutter]

Well since all we ever have is speed, we seem to do ok with it, I will go with speed over size any day.

[sintonpop]

A speedy team with average size that plays good technique will usually prevail.

Speed can help a defense keep an above average offense in between the 20's and out of the red zone. And when you keep the other team from scoring, you usually get the W.

[PPHSfan]

I will take average speed, average size, great coaching and huge hearts.

Well it works for Celina.....who can argue with that?

LOL :D :D :D

[RiverRat19]

Speed on defense and smart players who execute on offense (regardless of speed.) A D that swarms and keeps the other team from scoring can produce wins even if the O is not as fast/talented but can execute consistently.

[whtfbplaya]

Speed kills, but I dont care if your whole team runs a 4.0 flat you wont win if they cant play smart.

[exbccards76'smom]

A team of average size, lots of speed and lots of heart. :cool:

http://www.trianglefootball.net/brickwall/fightcard.gif

[2001GiddingsLB]

I would take a team with big size and average size seemed to work for La Grange in 2000. If you are huge on offense and have average speed you can run over the little guys on offense, control between the tackles on defense, just blitz outside to contain the outside game, and with your size just play ball control offense. This leads to wearing the opposing defense down which later in the game plays to your advantage and allows your average speed guys to break the occasional long run.

[2001GiddingsLB]

that would be big size and average speed.
sorry bout that

[Old Dog]

If it's down one trait, it's SPEED..........

after that I like smarts and aggressiveness!

[big daddy russ]

I'm going to have to agree with 2001GiddingsLB. We've had some very fast teams here in Ingleside, but our size has always hurt us. My junior year every kid in our offensive backfield, along with another player or two, ran 4.5's or better, with one running a 4.3... Oh, and all of those times are legit, not some junk someone is making up to make his team look good. Unfortunately, when your line only averages maybe 190 pounds across and has trouble with bigger d-lines, it can really hurt a team. What good does 4.3 speed do for you if you're caught ten yards deep with a slew of defenders everywhere you look? Doesn't help a whole lot on defense, either. Either way, we didn't even make the playoffs that year in a mediocre district.

<small>[ November 15, 2002, 12:15 AM: Message edited by: big daddy russ ]</small>

[Old Green]

I'll go with a team that is above average size, speed, and quickness.
A team with this combination has the option of out finessing or using a power game to it's advantage. Out run them or pound them.

[Big Tarp 74]

I will take speed any day. Most teams that win the state title, have more speed than size. [IMG] eek!

<small>[ November 15, 2002, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: Big Tarp 74 ]</small>