Jump to content

La Marque 42 Coldspring-Oakhurst 20/FINAL


WOSgrad

Recommended Posts

For me it isn't as much about the type of offense or defense they choose to run. Everyone has their ideas of what works and what doesn't. 

It is things like clock management. The first game against Huntsville that you referenced we had the ball with very little time to go in the first half. We were on our side of the field. We could easily have run out the clock, but instead threw 3 incomplete passes, then went for it on 4th down and turned the ball over with time for Huntsville to take 3 shots at the end zone. This has continued to happen for several years now. Several games I have watched is with a less than one touchdown lead snap the ball with 12 or 15 seconds on the play clock for the entire series,and then give the other team 1 or 2 minutes on offense to try and come back on us. In Kountze this year, we called all of our timeouts in the 4th quarter to try to score another touchdown with a huge lead. Why? Because the coaches had a bet going on how many passes they could throw in a game! The coaching staff does not know how to win!! They waste talent and are losing players because of it. Our best player last year who had several offers from D1 colleges almost didn't play his senior year, because of the coaching issues that plague this team.Community members had to talk the young man into playing and he had to get his schedule changed to get back into athletics for his senior year because he was seriously done with them. By the way, he has 2 brothers who play in college, so he knows a little something about how it works and had legitimate offers to go play. Instead he is in welding school because he doesn't want to play football anymore.  They killed his love for the game and made him not want to be around it.   But as I have said before, the only reason Coldspring isn't as good anymore is because the talent just isn't there, or so they tell me.  But as our AD and head coach says, he cares as much about 7th grade volleyball as he does about Varsity football! I guess that is why he hired a 7th grade volleyball coach to be the varsity volleyball coach! If all of the teams lose then people can't complain about you favoring one sport over the others!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

When you have the kind of success that Coldspring had and then roll the coach, well...... you get what you get and don't throw a fit.  

 

Only a handful of people wanted to change coaches. Main one was a sorry excuse for a superintendent, who didn't care because he had no intention of staying long enough to see the damage happen. Unfortunately we had a group of spineless school board members who went along with it! I voiced my opinion then with the school board and remind them all the time that this manure show is their doing! Doesn't help the kids much though! Their high school years are being taken up by this losing program! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

When you have the kind of success that Coldspring had and then roll the coach, well...... you get what you get and don't throw a fit.  

 

I definitely know how CS fans feel. Kinda funny how their old coach seems to be doing pretty good. Maybe when a town finds a great coach they should appreciate it. Same teams are good year end and year out for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both guys in Shepherd are great coaches. But there are a few more there that do just great of a job. Shepherd has put together a very, very good coaching staff. Trust me those guys know what's going on in Coldspring and Cleveland both.

I had a whole bunch wrote up for both schools but it's not worth getting into, just say sometimes you get what you deserve.  Don't blame a Supt. and School board when you as the community voted them in.

We will do everything we can to keep both coaches in Shepherd. The community is very happy with them both. 

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...