Efficient Avonworth tops Riverview
Riverview couldn't get its offense in motion Friday in a 44-6 Eastern Conference loss to Avonworth.
The No. 9 Antelopes held the Raiders (0-2, 0-2) to just 98 yards.
“Avonworth is a great football team and they did a lot of great things,” Raiders coach Todd Massack said. “I told our guys not to be proud of the scoreboard but to be proud of the way they played. We battled the whole time; we just couldn't overcome the field position.”
The Antelopes (2-0, 1-0) started on the Riverview side of the field on four of their five touchdown drives.
The scoring began when Antelopes kicker Cole Pappas booted a 28-yard field goal. On the next play from scrimmage, Riverview fumbled. It only took the Antelopes three plays to find the end zone.
Quarterback Matt Donovan eluded two defenders in the backfield and fired a pass to a wide-open Brad Mankey for a 27-yard score to make the game 10-0.
Riverview went three-and-out, giving the Antelopes the ball back at the Raiders' 49. Luke Bauer capped a seven-play drive, scoring from 1 yard out to make it 17-0.
Bauer led all rushers with 69 yards on 17 carries.
No one scored in the second quarter, as both defenses were stellar. Riverview only gave up 136 yards in the half.
“We gave them too many short fields,” Massack said. “You can't do that against a good team.”
Riverview fumbled on the opening play of the second half and, again, the Antelopes capitalized. Donovan ended a seven-play drive by hitting Dalton Day for a 1-yard score.
Donovan, who was 7 of 17 for 100 yards, hit Jamal Hughley for a 40-yard score on the Antelopes' next play from scrimmage.
Riverview's lone score came on a Tyler Nigro quarterback keeper from 25 yards out.
“Riverview played us tough up front,” Avonworth coach Duke Johncour said. “We were just able to capitalize on their turnovers and play good, hard defense.”
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.