Jump to content

Beaumont West Brook Bruins vs Strake Jesuit Crusaders 2.0


Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, ECBucFan said:

Dumb question maybe but why is a Catholic private school in the UIL playoffs? When did this change?  

I could be wrong but both Dallas and Houston Jesuit have been in the UIL since 2010 re-alignment.  And since they have no attendance zone, they are in the largest classification no matter their enrollment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Austin1985 said:

I could be wrong but both Dallas and Houston Jesuit have been in the UIL since 2010 re-alignment.  And since they have no attendance zone, they are in the largest classification no matter their enrollment

100% correct. They petitioned to be in UIL knowing that they would have to play in 6A with a lower enrollment.

My question is, why aren't they classified 6A DI? I thought they had to play in highest enrollment class and division?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

100% correct. They petitioned to be in UIL knowing that they would have to play in 6A with a lower enrollment.

My question is, why aren't they classified 6A DI? I thought they had to play in highest enrollment class and division?

I was told just highest enrollment class, Didn’t matter about division 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Austin1985 said:

I could be wrong but both Dallas and Houston Jesuit have been in the UIL since 2010 re-alignment.  And since they have no attendance zone, they are in the largest classification no matter their enrollment

 

Strake has played in UIL 6A formerly 5A since the late 90s when they were banned from TAPPS. 

Dallas Jesuit has also been banned from TAPPS and been playing in UIL since 2004 if not slightly earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're all wrong to some extent. Both Strake Jesuit and Dallas Jesuit were the first private schools allowed to join the UIL in 2004. They competed in the TCIL until it ceased to exist in 2000. Both schools played as independent schools from 2000-2003 as TAPPS refused to allow them in due to having too large of an enrollment compared to all other private schools in the state and the UIL refused them due to having neither restrictions on recruiting nor a geographically specified attendance zone. They petitioned the UIL and were allowed in starting with the 2004 season but they are required to play in the largest classification. Since 6A doesn't divide into a division 1 and division 2 until the playoffs they are allowed to play in the division 2 playoff bracket if they qualify as they had to compete with larger schools in district competition during the regular season.

 

This is the hidden content, please

 

This is the hidden content, please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Goblin said:

You're all wrong to some extent. Both Strake Jesuit and Dallas Jesuit were the first private schools allowed to join the UIL in 2004. They competed in the TCIL until it ceased to exist in 2000. Both schools played as independent schools from 2000-2003 as TAPPS refused to allow them in due to having too large of an enrollment compared to all other private schools in the state and the UIL refused them due to having neither restrictions on recruiting nor a geographically specified attendance zone. They petitioned the UIL and were allowed in starting with the 2004 season but they are required to play in the largest classification. Since 6A doesn't divide into a division 1 and division 2 until the playoffs they are allowed to play in the division 2 playoff bracket if they qualify as they had to compete with larger schools in district competition during the regular season.

 

This is the hidden content, please

 

This is the hidden content, please

Okay, I got the date wrong but the bottom line is, since they have no attendance zones, they have to compete in the largest classification.  At 1st, they had to play Katy ISD schools for a while.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Yes

Ok, so they have seen him before. I was thinking Yeoman started. My next question is, is Peevey planning on throwing the entire kitchen, not just the kitchen sink, at them? I feel like we're going to have to run every trick play, flea flicker, halfback pass, double reverse, statue of liberty play, and everything else to catch SJ off guard, to have a chance to win. We need to pull out all the stops. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 82 5A State Champs said:

Ok, so they have seen him before. I was thinking Yeoman started. My next question is, is Peevey planning on throwing the entire kitchen, not just the kitchen sink, at them? I feel like we're going to have to run every trick play, flea flicker, halfback pass, double reverse, statue of liberty play, and everything else to catch SJ off guard, to have a chance to win. We need to pull out all the stops. 

That I do not know.   But I would believe so no sense in saving anything

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 82 5A State Champs said:

Ok, so they have seen him before. I was thinking Yeoman started. My next question is, is Peevey planning on throwing the entire kitchen, not just the kitchen sink, at them? I feel like we're going to have to run every trick play, flea flicker, halfback pass, double reverse, statue of liberty play, and everything else to catch SJ off guard, to have a chance to win. We need to pull out all the stops. 

Scoring points won't be an issue. Whether the defensive game plan stays aggressive and get some stops will determine the outcome. I think the Bruins pull out a win here.

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...