Serra Catholic coach Tony St. Angelo didn't mince words about his squad's 42-0 loss at Carlynton Friday — his team simply got overpowered.
“They were more physical than us,” St. Angelo said. “They were able to run the ball. They probably only threw it twice the entire game. When you can do that and score 42 points, I would do the same thing. And you have to give credit to Carlynton's defense. They came out with a game plan and it worked.”
Carlynton (2-2, 2-2) relied on the legs of tailback Isiah Canton in the Black Hills Conference win. The sophomore scored on runs of 63 and 2 yards in the first quarter to give the Cougars an early lead.
“It all starts with the line,” Canton said. “Everything goes through them. They are the best part of this team.”
Early in the second quarter, Canton ran to the 1-yard line before an Eagles defender knocked the ball free, sending it out of the end zone for a touchback. Serra (0-4, 0-3) used the momentum to drive 74 yards over nearly seven minutes.
But on the last play of the half, a Zac Quattrone pass from the 6-yard line was intercepted by Tyler Bly, who returned it 102 yards for a score to put the Cougars up 21-0.
“The was huge,” Carlynton coach Terry George said. “The was a 14-point swing with no time left. That was seven points they didn't get and seven we did. It was a big momentum swing.”
Canton finished with 237 yards on 12 carries with three touchdowns. Quarterback Freddie McKissick completed only one pass but ran for 70 yards. It was the first shutout for the Cougar defense since the 2011 season.
Quattrone showed play-making ability as he ran for 104 yards on 21 carries while throwing for 77 yards on nine completions. But self-inflicted wounds kept the team from stringing drives together and putting up points.
Nathan Smith is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at email@example.com or via Twitter @NSmith_Trib.
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.