ShareThis Page

Gorman: Why Clairton needs to score

Kevin Gorman
| Monday, Dec. 1, 2014, 10:21 p.m.

Clairton didn't so much celebrate its state record for single-season scoring as it did take aim at another.

The Bears broke the mark of 860 points, set by Terrelle Pryor-led Jeannette in 2007, in a 52-24 PIAA Class A quarterfinal victory over Berlin Brothersvalley.

“It meant a lot,” senior receiver Jamie Hines said. “We get recognition for our offense, but not how we want it to be.”

When the Bears were criticized for putting up 70-plus points in each of their first five games, Clairton coach Wayne Wade called it a “black eye.” They still averaged 63.3 a game.

“That's what we do: We put a lot of pressure on teams,” Wade said. “Once we're up a couple touchdowns, it makes it definitely hard for teams to come back.”

Now that Clairton is 137 points shy of the national record of 1,023, set last year by Aledo, Texas, the Bears need their offense more than ever.

Their defense, which only gave up 43 points through the first 11 games, has allowed 80 in the past three. Of course, the Bears averaged 46 points in those games.

“If our defense gives up the points,” Hines said, “our offense knows we have to answer.”

Clairton's offense proved Friday how spectacular it can be, answering a punt to the 1 with an eight-play, 99-yard scoring drive.

But Berlin Brothersvalley coach Doug Paul, who was impressed by the Bears' balance, put it best: “They need to score.”

Especially given that Eastern semifinalists Bishop Guilfoyle and South Williamsport both put up 60-plus points Friday.

Clairton's no-huddle, no-mercy motto might be necessary to win the next two rounds. Which could mean the national record isn't necessarily out of reach.

Kevin Gorman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at or via Twitter @KGorman_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.