Jump to content

Newton looking for 2018 games


hattie

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jag Insider said:

How are they already looking for games for next year when they don't know where they will fall in the new alignment, who will be in district with them and whether it will be a 6 or 8 team district?

I am pretty sure that teams that don't get a tentative schedule in place before realignment end up scrambling to get opponents to play them in the slots they need filled. That's how you get teams traveling an absurd distance to play one another or not having a full schedule. I bet there won't be a ton of 5A or 4A teams lining up to get their butt kicked by a 3A team. Doesn't really do wonders for the prospect of keeping your job as a coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Kegger said:

I am pretty sure that teams that don't get a tentative schedule in place before realignment end up scrambling to get opponents to play them in the slots they need filled. That's how you get teams traveling an absurd distance to play one another or not having a full schedule. I bet there won't be a ton of 5A or 4A teams lining up to get their butt kicked by a 3A team. Doesn't really do wonders for the prospect of keeping your job as a coach.

We end up traveling an absurd distance to play "district rivals" like Navasota.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kegger said:

I am pretty sure that teams that don't get a tentative schedule in place before realignment end up scrambling to get opponents to play them in the slots they need filled. That's how you get teams traveling an absurd distance to play one another or not having a full schedule. I bet there won't be a ton of 5A or 4A teams lining up to get their butt kicked by a 3A team. Doesn't really do wonders for the prospect of keeping your job as a coach.

There is one 4A team that is ready to give it a go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2017 at 4:42 PM, WOSgrad said:

There is one 4A team that is ready to give it a go.

As sad as it sounds.. Newton vs WOS would be more beneficial to each other (as far as game preparation) than most of the other schools the 2 of them usually play pre-season.

And I mean sad that WOS may have to play a 3A school to get a competitive game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, oldschool2 said:

As sad as it sounds.. Newton vs WOS would be more beneficial to each other (as far as game preparation) than most of the other schools the 2 of them usually play pre-season.

And I mean sad that WOS may have to play a 3A school to get a competitive game.

It's all fun and games until you lose a key player or two for the year in what would later be called a "meaningless" pre-season game against a tough school. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

It's all fun and games until you lose a key player or two for the year in what would later be called a "meaningless" pre-season game against a tough school. 

so you schedule a bunch of easy games????  I guess so if you are content with being average and not getting any better!!!!!!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hattie said:

so you schedule a bunch of easy games????  I guess so if you are content with being average and not getting any better!!!!!!  

I'm just saying... Everybody is gung-ho about playing tough competition in non-district and getting better right up until the point at which they lose a couple of key players to injury before district.  Then everybody is like "we would be going to state but the stupid  coach keeps scheduling teams that we have no chance of beating, and now we're missing __________, ____________, and ____________.... those kids will probably not even get to play college ball now.  And for what?  So that the coach beats a few good schools and can move on to a better job?" 

I've seen it all before. 

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

    45,937
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined


  • Posts

    • There is a difference, but I wouldn't at all put it past Trump to do so if he had the infrastructure in place to get away with it like the Dems currently do.  With the amount of effort he's invested in ruining those republicans who've opposed him, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
    • I think it will be an interesting case and could potentially come up for appeal on a different constitutional point.  The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the government doesn’t have to take possession of property in order to take it under the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.  If they take away the enjoyment or use of the property, it is no different than physically seizing it to build a highway for example. In a lawsuit as opposed to a criminal trial, a person/plaintiff doesn’t have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt but rather by a preponderance of evidence or “more likely” to have happened. Maybe it could be described as more likely yes than no or 51%-49%.  ”IF” it can be shown at a trial by a preponderance of evidence that Texas more likely yes than no caused the flooding with its engineering of the project, the people suing might have a case. But…. Does that alone win the case under the Fifth Amendment taking clause? I am not so sure. In US v Causby the Supreme Court ruled that the US government took a man’s property by flying airplanes over it. It was a public airport lawfully leased by the US in WWII and used to fly heavy bombers from it. Causby had an egg farm and the extremely loud noise of some airplanes under full power and sometimes at night with a landing lights being so close, it bothered and scared the family and damaged his egg farm production. Some chickens died and some quit laying eggs due to the extreme disturbances and lights at night. The Supreme Court ruled in Causby’s favor saying that the US had taken away the enjoyment and use of his land even though they didn’t physically seize it. The use of the land was hampered and that was enough for the taking clause under the Fifth Amendment. So in the IH-10 case, did Texas take away the use or enjoyment of the property?  A point of Causby was that the military bombers at a public airport was certainly for “public use”. The planes were public/taxpayers’ and the airport and lease were taxpayers’ property so the “public” definitely used it   My question in this lawsuit against Texas, even in they can prove the damage, was the damage (like in Causby) for “public use”? If not would it then not be a Fifth Amendment case but rather a state law case?  If Texas law denies such a lawsuit under state sovereignty and the families can’t prove a Fifth Amendment case of “public use”, could they prove the damages but still lose the case under state law? I haven’t read that anywhere and just thinking out loud. I could be way off base. But I think it could be interesting…..
    • Both sides...that is, everyone tries to get their people elected. Trump has not weaponized the government to bankrupt and imprison his political opponents. Night and day difference for me.
    • Surely you're aware of the great lengths Trump has gone to disrupt the elections and destroy the careers of republican politicians who haven't supported some of his most outlandish claims, or dared to question him or disagree with him about January 6.  You and I actually agree on this issue, although it must only go one way for you, because Trump's actions against republicans who didn't fall into lockstep with him is one of my biggest concerns about reelecting him.  The fact that he took action to affect literally hundreds of republican primaries from national elections down to municipal levels across the country, is concerning. It would've been one thing had he done it in an effort to help republicans win. Instead his purpose was to push out his perceived detractors and install MAGA politicians at every level of government in as many places as possible, and has resulted in a fractured republican party.
    • Lmao. No doubt. With a name like that, he would've gotten made fun of even if he was home-schooled.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...