Consistency has been an issue for the Power.
Added to a season-long carousel of quarterbacks, a head coaching change and the league's labor issues, the squad hasn't been able to string together consecutive victories all season. And it still hasn't.
After earning their first contested victory since April last week against Iowa, the Power returned to Consol Energy Center on Saturday but lost a three-point lead in the final minute and fell, 65-61, to the Tampa Bay Storm.
Storm quarterback Stephen Wasil's 1-yard touchdown run with 39 seconds to play — following an unsuccessful Power onside kick — and Tampa Bay's last-second, goal-line stand sealed the win.
“This loss is going to hurt more than any, because this team has truly, in my opinion, turned the corner to become a pretty competitive team,” Power coach Derek Stingley said.
Power quarterback Andrico Hines found chemistry with receivers Mike Washington and P.J. Berry, finding the former for three touchdowns and the latter for two. But his seven TD passes were overshadowed by a pair of interceptions in the third quarter that saw Tampa Bay erase a 10-point deficit.
Wasil was filling in for starter Nick Hill, who landed on his head during a tackle in the first half. Wasil tossed five touchdowns — three to Joe Hills, who had four overall.
“We had turnovers, stops. We did what a defense in arena football is set out to do in that type of game,” defensive back Christian Wise said. “Unfortunately, it came down to the last offensive play.”
Dan Stefano is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at email@example.com or 412-380-5697.
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.