Jump to content

SETX BOYS HIGH SCHOOL BASKETBALL SCHEDULE - WEEK OF 1/15-20/2018


WOSgrad

Recommended Posts

This is the hidden content, please

2017-18 HIGH SCHOOL BOYS

BASKETBALL SCHEDULE

WEEK OF JANUARY 15-20, 2018

 

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

4A Non-District

Leggett at Shepherd, ccl

 

Wednesday, January 17, 2018

21-4A

Huntington 56 Diboll 92

23-3A

Kirbyville 55 Hardin 57 OT

20-2A

Grapeland 55 Latexo 19

Groveton 28 Dallardsville Big Sandy 76

Lovelady 94 Centerville 80

22-2A

Joaquin 39 Tenaha 70

San Augustine 79 Timpson 42

28-1A

Wells 43 Martinsville 57

 

Thursday, January 18, 2018

21-6A

Atascocita 51 Kingwood 30

Baytown Sterling 56 Galena Park North Shore 79

Humble Summer Creek 60 Goose Creek Memorial 66

Sheldon C.E. King 47 Channelview 61

22-6A

Beaumont West Brook 63 Pasadena 51

La Porte 75 Pasadena Dobie 78

Pasadena Memorial 45 Deer Park 74

South Houston 55 Pasadena Rayburn 48

21-5A

Barbers Hill 46 Kingwood Park 34

Crosby 35 Porter 34

Humble 76 Baytown Lee 70

Conroe Caney Creek 54 New Caney 37

Splendora 63 Dayton 70

22-5A

Beaumont Central 74 Lumberton 54

Livingston 35 Nederland 82

Port Neches-Groves 40 Port Arthur Memorial 86

Vidor 48 Beaumont Ozen 50

21-4A

Jasper 59 Lufkin Hudson 68

22-4A

Hamshire-Fannett 19 Silsbee 118

Little Cypress-Mauriceville 56 Orangefield 40

West Orange-Stark 51 Bridge City 38

23-4A

Cleveland 50 Hardin-Jefferson 75

Huffman Hargrave 59 Liberty 73

21-3A

Coldspring-Oakhurst 89 Onalaska 32

Crockett 59 Hempstead 52

Trinity 64 New Waverly 37

22-3A

Corrigan-Camden 31 Garrison 40

Hemphill 56 Woodville 82

Pollok Central 56 Newton 54

23-3A

Buna 61 Warren 43

East Chambers 83 Anahuac 42

Port Arthur Bob Hope 41 Kountze 126

22-2A

Woden 62 Shelbyville 70

23-2A

Lufkin Pineywoods 67 Broaddus 65

Colmesneil 36 West Sabine 48

Zavalla def. Brookeland

24-2A

Evadale 117 Hull-Daisetta 66

West Hardin 41 Deweyville 16

28-1A

Apple Springs 74 Kennard 50

Chester def. Burkeville

29-1A

Goodrich def. Richards

Spurger 60 High Island 57

TAPPS 3-6A

Beaumont Kelly Catholic 58 Houston AWTY International 54

TAPPS 7-3A

Spring Frassati Catholic at Beaumont Legacy Christian, 7:30 pm

 

Friday, January 19, 2018

21-6A

Channelview 45 Atascocita 60

Galena Park North Shore 70 Sheldon C.E. King 28

Humble Summer Creek 62 Baytown Sterling 49

Kingwood 55 Goose Creek Memorial 54

22-6A

Deer Park 39 Beaumont West Brook 58

Pasadena 48 South Houston 54

Pasadena Dobie 39 Pasadena Memorial 41

Pasadena Rayburn 48 La Porte 43

21-5A

Baytown Lee 60 New Caney 47

Conroe Caney Creek 46 Barbers Hill 75

Crosby 57 Dayton 54

Kingwood Park 48 Porter 57

Splendora 65 Humble 77

22-5A

Beaumont Central 76 Beaumont Ozen 54

Lumberton 47 Port Neches-Groves 44

Nederland 50 Vidor 40

Port Arthur Memorial 87 Livingston 23

21-4A

Lufkin Hudson 56 Huntington 71

Shepherd 48 Jasper 51

22-4A

Bridge City 69 Hamshire-Fannett 33

Orangefield 56 West Orange-Stark 58

Silsbee 75 Little Cypress-Mauriceville 56

23-4A

Hardin-Jefferson 70 Tarkington 36

Cleveland over Liberty

21-3A

Hempstead 64 Anderson-Shiro 35

New Waverly 39 Coldspring-Oakhurst 74

Onalaska 42 Crockett 95

22-3A

Garrison 42 Pollok Central 59

Nacogdoches Central Heights 58 Newton 55

Woodville 54 Corrigan-Camden 47

23-3A

Kirbyville over Anahuac

Hardin 36 East Chambers 93

Kountze 71 Buna 64

Warren 55 Port Arthur Bob Hope 36

20-2A

Centerville 31 Grapeland 63

Dallardsville Big Sandy 78 Lovelady 61

Latexo 45 Groveton 58

22-2A

Shelbyville 75 Joaquin 48

Tenaha 75 San Augustine 58

Chireno def. Timpson

23-2A

Colmesneil def. Brookeland

Lufkin Pineywoods 104 Zavalla 53

West Sabine 22 Broaddus 41

24-2A

Hull-Daisetta 51 West Hardin 52

Sabine Pass 56 Evadale 107

28-1A

Chester 51 Apple Springs 68

Kennard 39 Wells 72

Martinsville 56 Groveton Centerville 23

29-1A

Leggett 55 Goodrich 51

Richards 54 Spurger 83

TAPPS 7-3A

Tomball Rosehill Christian 36 Beaumont Legacy Christian 71

TAPPS 7-2A

Highlands Chinquapin at Baytown Christian, 7:30 pm

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 charge 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...