ShareThis Page
Bearcats get rematch |

Bearcats get rematch

| Tuesday, October 25, 2005 12:00 a.m

GREEN TREE – Of the four area high school football coaches who attended Monday’s WPIAL playoff pairings meeting at the Radisson Hotel, only one returned home surprised.

He was Bentworth’s Ron Skiles.

Skiles had good reason

The Bearcats (5-4) will be playing their first post-season game since 1998 at Tri-County South Conference champion Mapletown (8-1) Friday.

It was Bentworth which handed the Maples their only loss of the season in the opening game.

The Bearcats pulled out a thrilling 28-27 victory at home when quarterback Travis Harff went over from one yard out with 30 seconds following Lincoln Gibson’s 75-yard kick return to the Mapletown one with Nick Workmaster kicking the decisive extra point.

The Maples had gone ahead 27-21 with only 48 seconds left on Jon Caldwell’s 19-yard touchdown pass to Brandon Geisel.

“I thought we’d get Duquesne,” said Skiles, whose Bearcats finished tied for third with Chartiers-Houston in the Black Hills Conference.

Despite owning a victory over the Maples, Skiles admits the Bearcats will be in the underdog role for the rematch.

“We were lucky to win, ” he said. “Mapletown has a very good football team. They have a real good offensive line and a great runner in Ryan Geisel.”

Geisel, the leading rusher and scorer in WPIAL’s Class A with over 1,300 yards and 142 points, had 139 yards and a pair of touchdowns in the loss to the Bearcats.

While Mapletown is riding an eight-game winning streak, Bentworth closed with lopsided defeats to the Black Hills’ top two teams – Canevin (41-20) and Beth-Center (41-0).

“We slid way back on defense after our win over Charleroi,” added Skiles.

Meanwhile, Keystone Conference champion Yough (8-1) and Tri-County South Conference runnerup California (6-3) didn’t get much respect as home teams with eighth seeds in Class AAA and A,

Yough drew perennial power Blackhawk (5-4) from the rugged Parkway Conference with California landing Western Beaver (7-2), the third place team from th Big Seven Conference.

“I thought we’d get Blackhawk or Chartiers Valley,” said Wehner, whose club closed with seven straight victories.

“We finished strong,” he added. “We did our job in the Keystone and have to keep it going.”

Blackhawk posted a 48-34 win at New Castle, a week after the Cougars suffered a 13-6 defeat on the same field.

The Trojans are facing the Golden Beavers in the post-season for the second time in three years.

In 2003, California was a 35-13 loser at Western Beaver.

“This time they’re going to have to make the hour and half trip,” said California coach Joe Kuhns. “That should make a difference and we’re a better team this year.”

The Golden Beavers started out 6-0 before getting blanked at top-seed Rochester (34-0) and sixth-seed South Side Beaver (19-0) in two of their last three games.

“I was expecting Riverview or Western Beaver,” admitted Kuhns.

Elizabeth Forward (4-5), which made the playoffs with a last-minute win at Ringgold, goes to Parkway co-champ West Allegheny (8-1), the third seed.

“I figured either West Allegheny or Hampton,” said Elizabeth coach Pete Rostosky.

LEFTOVERS: Besides Rochester, the other top seeds are Central Catholic (AAAA), West Mifflin (AAA) and South Park (AA). The Tri-County South’s Jefferson-Morgan and Carmichaels were the last two seeds in Class A. The Keystone’s highest seed after Yough was Mt. Pleasant at tenth.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.