High school football roundup: Woodland Hills whips Plum
By Staff Reports
Published: Saturday, Sept. 22, 2012, 12:26 a.m.
Cody McClelland threw for 137 yards and two touchdowns, including a 73-yarder to Harry Randall, as No. 5 Woodland Hills earned a 35-0 decision over Plum (0-4, 0-4) in the Quad Central on Friday night.
Woodland Hills (3-1, 2-1) scored all of its points in the first half.
West Mifflin 46, Albert Gallatin 6 — Diallo Mitchell scored on a 70-yard reception and a 37-yard run to lead No. 8 West Mifflin to win at Albert Gallatin (0-4, 0-3) in the Big 9.
Mitchell caught three passes for 103 yards. Derrick Fulmore completed all five of his passes for 193 yards and three touchdowns. James Wheeler ran 14 times for 110 yards and a touchdown.
South Allegheny 28, South Park 7 — Brandon Murn scored on runs of 16 and 9 yards as South Allegheny (3-1, 2-1) defeated South Park (1-3, 1-2) in the Century Conference.
Dustin Anderson also scored on a 24-yard run, and Stefon Isbell had a 6-yard TD run. Tim Burkholder caught a touchdown pass from Ty Cook.
Carlynton 65, Serra Catholic 8 — Ryan McKissick rushed for 145 yards and touchdowns of 39 and 95 yards on just three carries as Carlynton (1-3, 1-3) won at Serra Catholic (0-4, 0-4) in the Black Hills.
Ryan Williams scored on a 95-yard kick return, and Tyree Johnson added a touchdown on a 54-yard punt return.
Show commenting policy
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 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.