Jump to content

Texarkana Pleasant Grove 41 West Orange-Stark 21/FINAL


WOSgrad

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, HawkNation said:

I don't know how many graduate, but with that QB, Bruce at RB, and that beast #40 Freshman, I can hope.

You know there will still be some major competition about 90 miles southwest. But congrats to you guys. You have a really good team and your defense was especially fun to watch. I hope we can learn from it!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, XX Man said:

It's hard to win, win , win. WOS had a great year, and I thank them for the excitement. Yes, we lost, but they never gave up. PG had more answers this year, but, it was their first year, and WOS is there every year. Thanks to the team and Cornel for a great year!

That's the most sane thing I have seen you say in the last 2 days. Your buddies must have been shaming you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats to both teams! Congrats to WOS for another great season, and Pleasant Grove for taking their first ever football state championship! I knew when I saw this team in district, that they were the real deal, and those front 7 were monsters. The biggest ones play both ways, and seem to never wear down. Truly an awesome team to watch play.

The difference here was, obviously, the passing game. The truth is, whether PG fans care to admit it or not, I don't think anyone, including themselves, knew exactly how good the PG passing game was. I knew that it was there, and it was effect. I knew it could keep a defense honest, but they've only had 1 really close game (Gilmer), and an entire season to build off of that. Needless to say, it was pretty good, and could have been better. Harmon missed a couple of wide open receivers.

Another difference, was PG's ability to get to the QB. I see a lot of shade thrown towards the coaching staff for not running more pass plays, but Chaka was not on at all after taking some of the licks he took, and with the QB off like that, you cannot hope to wear a defense down at all. I mean think about it. PG's strength is their defensive front, your QB has taken some shots and missed on passes, his confidence in his throwing ability is not there because of this. You have to try and get something going to give your QB and team some momentum, while attempting to wear down the PG defensive front. While doing that, you have to take into account that the PG defensive front is getting good penetration, and getting to the QB quickly. So now you're limited to short, quick passes, with inconsistency at the QB position, into the PG secondary. 

 

It's easy to stand and criticize when something doesn't work. Deep down, we all know Coach T did exactly what he thought was needed to put his team in the best position to win. I think he had a good game plan, personally. But, PG was prepared in every aspect of the game. They were the better team, and their coach had them ready. Gibson called a heck of a game, from the very first play call (as you call could tell). I think he's a very good up and coming coach, and has a bright future, whether at PG or wherever he decides to go.

Again, congrats to both teams! I won't be following you WOS bunch as much next year, as we're bumping down to 3A. Good luck to you guys nonetheless!

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

    • 3 yrs ago LCM and Vidor played in Vidor for a play in game.  Game was on a Saturday and started around 1 or 2p.
    • It would shock me beyond belief if he tried to. Now, I hope and pray he appoints people that will investigate, charge, and imprison anyone found guilty of the crimes against him...including treason. I would be all for a special task force charged solely with the task of investigating crimes against Trump. Of course the Democrats will be screaming bloody murder that Trump is weaponizing the government against them. We all know the story. From a cursory standpoint, there seems to be a plethora of evidence to lock up many Democrats for a long time. Unless this is done, I see no end to destruction of our political system...and this country.
    • 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.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...