Jump to content

Livingston vs PAM


pakronos

Recommended Posts

Homecoming. Titans win, but at what cost??? IMO Hines,Jones and the wr's should play first half. defense i'll leave in till mid 3rd and start pulling people. it's cupcake time. time to rest up people and get people heeled and ready. Blowing out people that have no chance isn't the business, well if rankings matter to you. district championship situation is possibly on the line come last game vs vidor. we need everyone healthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, NDNation said:

Yall will have Livingston put away by 1st QTR. Seriously.

Right now, IMO nobody is a threat. Vidor needs to be watched VERY closely, but we win this year. last week everything i said i was worried about of how they would lose, came true. i see a low scoring game with vidor 24-14 PAM. In blowout games, teams that are losing start playing dirty. Halftime, the offensive line need to stay in so Ledia can get some work with the starting o-line. 4th qtr leave Ledia in with all back ups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, pakronos said:

Right now, IMO nobody is a threat. Vidor needs to be watched VERY closely, but we win this year. last week everything i said i was worried about of how they would lose, came true. i see a low scoring game with vidor 24-14 PAM. In blowout games, teams that are losing start playing dirty. Halftime, the offensive line need to stay in so Ledia can get some work with the starting o-line. 4th qtr leave Ledia in with all back ups.

We're fixing to give yall a blueprint on how to beat Vidor. We've been doing it for a long time.

And beware of the chop blocking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NDNation said:

We're fixing to give yall a blueprint on how to beat Vidor. We've been doing it for a long time.

no need. last year PAM killed themselves with fumbles and falling for the banana in the tailpipe. in the second half, PAM forced Vidor on a few turnover on downs. and and xbox bad play calling at the end....if i'm not mistaken, Vidor should have beaten PNG last year, but the onside madden monkey was in full effect. i don't think matthews will make the mistake of onside kicking every time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, pakronos said:

no need. last year PAM killed themselves with fumbles and falling for the banana in the tailpipe. in the second half, PAM forced Vidor on a few turnover on downs. and and xbox bad play calling at the end....if i'm not mistaken, Vidor should have beaten PNG last year, but the onside madden monkey was in full effect. i don't think matthews will make the mistake of onside kicking every time.

How is a 41-22 final score Vidor “Should Have” beaten PN-G last year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BMTSoulja1 said:

So Bull made it...  Happy for him.  Looking for Collins and Harris to be there too...

Harris had a shot with the Cowboys and one other, but couldn't (really didn't want to) make it.

Collins pissed (literally) his chance away at Texas then went to Navarro and a JUCO in Arizona and couldn't catch on with anybody after that. Had an offer from UMASS but didn't go for whatever reason. 

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...