Share This Page

HSFB preview by position: WPIAL is stacked at last line of defense

| Wednesday, Aug. 20, 2014, 9:24 p.m.
Christopher Horner | Trib Total Media
Central Catholic's John Petrishen carries the ball during practice Monday, Aug. 11, 2014 in Oakland.
Submitted
Penn Hills' Te'Shan Campbell
Submitted
Pine-Richland's Brendan Burnham
Submitted
Gateway senior wide receiver/defensive back John Horner recently made a verbal commitment to play football at FCS Indiana State.

The last line of defense has some of the WPIAL's best athletes. Central Catholic's Johnny Petrishen and McKeesport's Khaleke Hudson, the two most highly acclaimed safeties this season, also could be among the most highly recruited players overall.

Petrishen, a senior, has more than two dozen college offers. Hudson, a junior, might rival that number by the time he's a senior.

They both can play offense, Petrishen at wide receiver and Hudson at running back. But for these two stars, their greatest value should be at safety.

Both defenses ranked among the Class AAAA leaders in points allowed. Central Catholic was first at 7.3 points per game. McKeesport ranked fourth at 14.1.

As more offenses adopt passing attacks, defenses must be stronger in the secondary. But these safeties are there for more than just chasing wideouts.

Penn Hills senior Te'Shan Campbell and Pine-Richland senior Brendan Burnham are strong safeties who use their skills during wrestling season.

And Hudson has earned the nickname Hit Man.

Chris Harlan is staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at charlan@tribweb.com or via Twitter @CHarlan_Trib.

1. Johnny Petrishen

Central Catholic, sr., 6-2, 200

Petrishen holds 30 Division 1 offers from BCS and FCS programs, with Pitt, Virginia and Wake Forest among the best. He had an interception in the state championship, but his best junior highlights were on special teams. He returned four kicks for touchdowns, with punt returns of 68 and 67 yards.

2. Khaleke Hudson

McKeesport, jr., 6-0, 205

Hudson, who has scholarship offers from Pitt and West Virginia among others, had two interceptions last season, one he returned 54 yards. A strong safety who also plays tailback, he scored five rushing touchdowns, with a 48-yarder and a 38-yarder included.

3. Art Thompkins

Woodland Hills, sr., 5-9, 170

Thompkins, who committed to Toledo, was a two-way player last season for Woodland Hills, starting as both a safety and a running back or receiver. He's also an outstanding kick returner, with a 94-yard score as proof. All combined, he had 10 touchdowns last year.

4. Te'Shan Campbell

Penn Hills, sr., 5-10, 170

Campbell, who has a scholarship offer from Albany, moved from linebacker to strong safety to better use his skills. He returned an interception 25 yards for a score last season, one of his four touchdowns. He also wrestled for Penn Hills, and placed fourth in Section 1-AAA at 160 pounds.

5. Brendan Burnham

Pine-Richland, sr., 5-11, 170

A first-team all-conference pick in the Quad North, Burnham led Pine-Richland with 87 tackles last year, had two interceptions and blocked a field goal try. He's also an accomplished wrestler and won the Section 3-AAA title last year at 160 pounds with a 30-4 record.

One to watch: John Horner

Gateway, sr., 6-4, 185

Horner spent last season with Renaissance Christian Academy, a non-WPIAL-sanctioned team that played out-of-town opponents. Earlier this summer, he reported college offers from Akron and James Madison.

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.