Jump to content

H-F vs Buna


BelichikYoSelf

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, illburhcklbry said:

I hear a lot of chatter about what is wrong and what needs to be fixed. What I am not reading is how to fix it. I am assuming with all the experts on here, someone must have some advice on how to fix the problem. 

I'm just and HF fan on here rooting for my team and talking a little noise. I am not discrediting the other teams I am just stating that I believe my team is better. 

It's been 2 games and they have given up 72 points and now all of a sudden everything is bad.

Get with me in 4 weeks if they continue to get worse and don't win another game, until then just sit back relax, and enjoy the show, be a fan, and root the HORNS on to victory. 


 

 

3rd week 99 points given up  and we are 1-2 . as an alumni i can speak on what i read ,see and know!! You tell me val kilmer when was the last time hamshire had a stingy defense or just a decent defense? you have to go back to 2003 and back even further than that . When hamshire was winning district titles and going 3 deep in the playoffs they had solid qb play , very good o line , always had good running backs and a stingy defense . So since 2004 till now where has hamshire defense ranked in their district ? Defense is no longer stressed , which is why there was a 10 year absence from the playoffs . So talk all you want the tape, stats and final score tells me all i need to know . So even with  the ridiculous 4 teams out one district playoff system if you cant play defense you will be exposed . Coaches need to take a page from WOS about defense . They stress defense there cause you know the saying defense wins championships .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, dawgnpurple said:

Pay attention smarty pants.  I'm not an everything football guy like yourself, but I am observant enough to see that Spacek, Paine and Morris are all 2 way players.  East Chambers had to resort to trick plays like the hook and ladder and hail marrys to get their offense going.   I saw it several times.  East Chambers could not run the ball on the horns at all.  Horns will be fine moving forward.         

EC had 437 yards of offense, 260 passing 177 rushing. And I don't know what your definition of 'Hail Mary' is, but I don't believe EC ran one the entire game. They did  throw a lot of passes deep. EC beat themselves. HF's defense needs to improve for them to compete. Tonight proved it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, About a week ago said:

EC had 437 yards of offense, 260 passing 177 rushing. And I don't know what your definition of 'Hail Mary' is, but I don't believe EC ran one the entire game. They did  throw a lot of passes deep. EC beat themselves. HF's defense needs to improve for them to compete. Tonight proved it. 

THANK YOU !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Zoneblock said:

2005ish thru 2008ish and I think maybe the 2015 and 2016 seasons when they made the playoffs

zoneblock i will use the years you posted in 2005 hamshire scored 140 points to 231 , 2008 146-287 (losing records ) the years they went to the playoffs in 2014 they scored 349-374 (losing record) now in 2015 they scored 430-309 2015 was better but it wasnt that much better at all . you can score and have a bend but dont break defense , but right now its broke !!! . if they want to win more than 2 games this year they better learn to stop people .zoneblock go to hamshirefannettalumnifootballplayers.com and you will see their history of when they had good teams that made pretty good playoff runs they had good defenses .  the last decent defense they had was in 2003 they gave up 179 points and scored 339 points and lost a heart breaker to barbers hills 13-10 in bi-district play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,935
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined


  • Posts

    • Actually I wasn’t responding to your comment. It was funny. I was using your comment to take issue with baddog’s comparison. 😎
    • I mean the baseball kids aren’t even doing football after school, they go to baseball… baseball kids get about a hour during the period. 
    • That is yet to be determined in trial. ”Taking” in the Fifth Amendment doesn’t mean ownership, title changing hands, etc. A government can “take” your property without “taking” your properties.  That has been true.  This issue is, did Texas take the property under the Fifth Amendment and subsequent Supreme Court rulings and not the dictionary definition of “taking”. As always in the law, definitions matter. 
    • Wrong again. This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up   The day that Trump took office, our nation debt stood at 19.9 Trillion dollars (End of Q4, 2016).  After his tax cuts (without corresponding cuts in spending), the national debt stood at 23.2 Trillion dollars at the end of Q1 of 2020 that was the Start of COVID, FYI... Or a total increase in debt of almost 17% during Trump's first three years (and one quarter) in office.  At the end of his reign (with COVID spending for which Trump himself signed off on) was at 27.7 Trillion Dollars.  That's a 39% increase in the National Debt while Trump was in office.  For further reference, Biden inherited a 27.7 Trillion dollar debt to start.  At the end of Q4 2023, the debt stands at 34 Trillion.  That's an increase of 19% over the first three years. I know that math and facts hurt your feelings, but Trump was horrible for the country before he allowed "them Dirty Democrats to shut down the economy."  Anybody that says "Trump was good for the country" doesn't know the first thing about micro/macro economics or the effects of deficit spending.  Trump hurt us like no other president, period.  Anybody that says "Trump was good for the economy" is actually stating for the rest of us with some sense "I don't know what I'm talking about."
    • But of course you wouldn’t understand the saying. You’re so clever. Your education precedes you. 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...