Did you get your money's worth?

This may have been the BEST Hart-Canyon gave ever. Why? There have been a lot of close games. In fact, the preceding four games, all Canyon victories, were not decided until the last minute. The difference here is that the game was decided literally on the last play. In my recollection -- which goes back only to 1985 -- it is the only game in which a score decided the outcome as opposed to a fumble or some other goof (think about the 2005 Hart loss and the 1991 Canyon loss, both decided by the loser's fumble near the goal line as time ran out).

The important words: Running Downhill, Ducks, The Price of Error, The Quick Whistle, Teflon, Spearing and Fish Wrap.

Running Downhill:

Delano Howell's rushing performance was about the most impressive I can recall by a Hart back against a tough opponent. There have been many games where the RB had more yards but usually against a middlin' to weak opponent. The most telling stat here was the median (yeah, I know I get caught up in numbers but they do tell a story). Delano's median run was 6 yards a carry. That's huge! Against the other good defensive teams Hart has played -- Moorpark, Westlake and Loyola -- it was around 3 to 3.5. In this game, Howell was always headed up the field with virtually no sideways movement -- looking for the hole, "running downhill." He headed for the hole full blast and either ran through it or made it himself. He also got a lot of great blocking both at the line and downfield by the receivers. Then there were the kickoff returns. Wow.

Ducks:

I loved the new variation in the Hart offense, running out of the shotgun with Howell and Diamond on either side of Holbrook. It looked like a set out of the Oregon Ducks offense. It certainly raised havoc with the Canyon defense with Hart gaining 130 yards on 8 carries running from that formation (6 by Howell, 2 by Diamond). While it still doesn't have the power up the middle as running from under center, the confusion to the defense more than makes up for that shortcoming. I'm anxiously awaiting the next variant from that formation -- passing, particularly to one of the two backs. It's going to create huge problems for opponents's linebackers, creating a lot of one-on-one matchups that will favor Hart.

The Price of Error:

Hart continues to make opponents pay for mistakes. Canyon threw two interceptions, one being a stupid play by Hart, an interception on 4th down. The other one led to the Hart game-winning field goal. Last week, Hart's first two TDs followed Loyola turnovers. The Indians had 4 TDs following Westlake miscues, 2 TDs after Amat turnovers and one against Moorpark (plus one that was called back). Conversely, Hart has, I think, 4 turnovers this season, 2 fumbles and 2 interceptions. None has resulted in an opponent's score. It's just what you want -- a high price for opponent's errors and a low price for your own.

The Quick Whistle:

The number of critical goofs by refs in the last few Hart-Canyon games has been, shall we say, interesting. In 2005, the Hart QB faked a handoff and took off running, gaining at least 20 yards. The refs called the play dead, thinking the RB had the ball (it was indeed a great fake). The same thing happened in the championship game that season and, to make matters worse, the Canyon RB had a pretty obvious fumble which was called dead. This week, the Canyon RB got stripped well before he went down but the referee, standing right over the play, called it down -- the dreaded quick whistle. Canyon scored immediately thereafter. Darn near changed the outcome of the game.

Teflon:

I noted last week that the Hart defense tackled with alacrity (a number of folks seemed not to have heard that word before). It's been a very noticeable improvement over last season, very sure hits between the hips and the knees, wrapping up the ball carrier. However in this game, there was a lot of shoulder high, arm tackling. Gavin in particular looked as if his uniform was coated with teflon, easily slipping through tackles which should have been losses and turning them into gains. But for his own unforced slip near the goal line in the second quarter, the outcome might have been different.

Spearing:

There is a rule against this, modified to an even stricter standard to seasons ago. Basically if a tackler leads with his helmet, it's a penalty. If it looks like he's deliberately trying to injure, its an ejection. The interpretation has been that any time the first contact is with anything above the facemask, its spearing. I watched the replay of the Canyon DB hit on a Hart receiver several times. That was an easy call. And it MUST be made. It's an incredibly dangerous play. Most football injuries resulting in paralysis have been to the DEFENDER who has his head down leading with his helmet. If anyone is teaching this, they ought to fired and flogged.

Fishwrap:

Look, I do not hide the fact that I'm a Hart fan and certainly most of the things I post are from a Hart point of view. But I should think the Signal would be a little more unbiased. Am I the only one that thinks editor bleeds Canyon gold and green (I think he's Canyon grad)? To read the coverage not only for this game but for the whole season, one would think Canyon is completely dominating everything and everybody. And EVERY article harks back to last season. Even more offensive to the Hart guys like me is that the articles always seem to indicate that Hart has been completely dominated and outclassed for years by Canyon. The truth of the matter is that Canyon has won 4 straight over the last three years but every game was decided in the last minute. Before that, it was all Hart by huge margins for 13 seasons. Most importantly -- News Bulletin: it ain't 2006 any more. The 'Boys are 2-4 at the moment.

Admittedly, last week, the big game was Hart-Canyon, clearly "above the fold" material. And Hart won and NEVER trailed. The coverage didn't reflect that with headlines of "Prayers Answered" and "Hart's Bad Dream is Over" and phrases like "Canyon has owned Hart for the last three seasons." You get the drift. I also object to the way other games have been covered. Week 1: the team deserving "above the fold coverage" was in my view, clearly, Golden Valley with its first win after 11 straight losses. Canyon got all the big coverage in an EXPECTED loss to Notre Dame. It's been pretty much the same thing every week with Canyon getting the lion's share of the coverage (absolutely deserved vs. Crespi but that was on a Thursday so there was a lot of space to fill on Friday). Saugus' games against Westlake and Notre Dame deserved far better. I think the Valencia-OL game deserved better as well. What'll happen with Canyon-GV this week versus Saugus-Valencia?

Great game. Especially if you're a Hart fan.