QB competition could propel Peters Township attack
After an offseason spent fighting for his job amid allegations that he pressured players into playing despite injuries, Rich Piccinini finally can focus on coaching football at Peters Township.
The Indians return 21 lettermen, including a pair of underclassmen at quarterback who are fighting for the starting job.
“We're young, but we've got a lot of guys who saw varsity time last season,” Piccinini said. “There's some big shoes to fill.”
The biggest belonged to tailback Andrew Erenberg, a Fordham recruit who rushed for 1,343 yards and 17 touchdowns on 233 carries last season.
Peters Township could focus more on its passing attack this fall, with a healthy quarterback competition between returning starter junior R.J. Pfeuffer and sophomore Corey Owen.
Pfeuffer passed for 595 yards and five touchdowns last season but injured his left knee playing basketball and has limited mobility.
“R.J. knows the game,” Piccinini said. “He's a good athlete and smart player.”
Owen is a gifted athlete who could dunk a basketball in eighth grade and presents a dynamic dual threat.
“Corey is an all-around great athlete. He looks good for a sophomore,” Piccinini said. “Hopefully, we'll find a spot where both will help us.”
They will have plenty of targets, starting with wide receiver Eric Lewis, a two-year starter who also plays cornerback.
“He's one of our senior leaders,” Piccinini said, “both vocal and by example.”
The Indians also have size at tight end, with 6-foot-2, 225-pound senior Mike Woltz and 6-4, 235-pound junior Max Augenstein. They join 6-3, 215-pound end Cole Kochman in anchoring the defensive line.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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 â 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.