Springdale's first win will not be remembered as one of the most artistic WPIAL football games played, but after a rough start to the 2013 season, the Dynamos were satisfied with their 6-0 victory over Wilkinsburg (1-2, 1-2) at Veterans Memorial Field on Friday night.
Springdale (1-2, 1-2) came out firing on its first drive, needing five plays to score the game's only touchdown.
The majority of the 58-yard drive was gained on a 43-yard pass from quarterback Daniel Franskousky to running back Austin Kline to the Wilkinsburg 3.
Justin Wilson pounded the ball through the heart of the Tigers' line for a 3-yard touchdown two plays later, giving Springdale an early 6-0 lead.
Both offenses struggled over the final 44 minutes. Wilkinsburg's senior quarterback, Ryan Cox, particularly struggled, completing 2 of 13 passes while throwing two interceptions.
The Dynamos' front seven, most notably defensive end Adam Lock and linebacker Matt Mikus, pressured Cox throughout.
“We got really good pressure from our defensive ends coming off the edge and we have very good senior linebackers,” Springdale coach David Leasure said.
Springdale couldn't take advantage of chances to expand its lead.
But the offense helped neutralize Wilkinsburg by establishing a running game behind Wilson, who had 26 carries for 78 yards.
“Justin's one of our quickest kids and for as big as he is (5-foot-5, 130 pounds), he's tough as nails,” Leasure said. “He was able to give us what we needed tonight and keep our defense off the field.”
The Tigers' offense was anemic against Springdale, committing six turnovers.
Wes Crosby is a freelance writer.
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.