With 2 prospects in backfield, Washington has look of contender
Washington has a running attack that most Division I universities would be glad to have.
Shai McKenzie and Jaylin Kelly are being recruited by a number of major programs, including Pitt and West Virginia.
“At 6-foot-1, 226 pounds, Jaylin is a big physical kid,” Washington coach Mike Bosnic said. “He's gotten a lot of offers, and he'll get a lot more before the end of the season. Shai (McKenzie) is only a junior, but he continues to get some nice Division I offers. He's already becoming a big-time BCS recruit.”
While the visor and clipboard clad crowd of Division I scouts continue to salivate over what could be, the Prexies intend to make good on the present.
“Every year is a different year, we always try to fit our system into what type of personnel we have,” Bosnic said. “We have two great running backs, and we have every intention of running a two-back system that will take advantage of having Shai and Jaylin in the backfield.”
Like most small schools, depth is a big concern. Washington lost 14 players to graduation after the 2011 campaign, including Eric Ellis who had a school record 18 sacks.
“The strength of our offensive and defensive line play is really going to be a big factor, and that's one place depth is really going to matter,” Bosnic said. “If we can stay healthy, we have an opportunity to make a nice run.”
Opposing defenses will certainly have their hands full defending the run, as the Prexies try to improve on an 8-3 season that ended in a quarterfinal playoff loss to WPIAL champion Aliquippa.
“We feel like we can compete with anybody in Class AA,” Bosnic said. “We won a playoff game last year, and then we ran into Aliquippa, and we weren't quite ready for that. This year, we are a different, more mature team.”
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.