Jump to content

TABC Rankings - Feb 11th


Bobcat1

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Coach.Shu said:

1A - Cherino is ranked #22   

2A - Woden is #10  (only loss was to #9 Lovelady)

Teneha is #11     (only loss was Center)

 

I still think SETX gets overlooked on the TABC rankings...

 

Orangefield should be in as well as United and prob Silsbee.

All we can do is keep beating the opponent in front of us...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎11‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 7:48 AM, Coach.Shu said:

True!

Not talking about anyone's team but at 9-0, we really hadn't beaten anyone that would warrant us to be in the top 25 in 6A.  I just looked at our 6 games for the Livingston tournament and we should come out of it 15-0 but I still wouldn't rank us.  Our district schedule starts next week and we have the Barbers Hill tournament the last week of December, if we are still looking good by then, then I think we will finally crack into the polls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Alpha Wolf said:

Not talking about anyone's team but at 9-0, we really hadn't beaten anyone that would warrant us to be in the top 25 in 6A.  I just looked at our 6 games for the Livingston tournament and we should come out of it 15-0 but I still wouldn't rank us.  Our district schedule starts next week and we have the Barbers Hill tournament the last week of December, if we are still looking good by then, then I think we will finally crack into the polls.

63-40 over Silsbee shows some strength.   I am not familiar with the other teams they have played.   Kinda thought Clements and Harker Heights might have been pretty good.  I felt United should of been ranked pre-season top 25 - but I still feel TABC snubs SETX.   It's hard to beat a team that warrants getting into the top 25 when they are all out in West Texas or the Metro Plex.  

But as we all know - polls don't = championships either.... I just want to see SETX teams get more coverage and more respect.

I am going to try and come see some of the games in Livingston this Saturday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 11:13 AM, Coach.Shu said:

63-40 over Silsbee shows some strength.   I am not familiar with the other teams they have played.   Kinda thought Clements and Harker Heights might have been pretty good.  I felt United should of been ranked pre-season top 25 - but I still feel TABC snubs SETX.   It's hard to beat a team that warrants getting into the top 25 when they are all out in West Texas or the Metro Plex.  

But as we all know - polls don't = championships either.... I just want to see SETX teams get more coverage and more respect.

I am going to try and come see some of the games in Livingston this Saturday.

Maxpreps has us at 26th.  Maybe if we can beat our district foes North Shore and Deer park this week we might be able to crack the poll.  This same poll's predictions for district at the beginning of the season were...

1. North Shore

2. West Brook

3. Deer Park

4. United

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The late Al Davis said  "Just Win Baby"... being ranked would be nice reading material and recognition for the work the team has put in thus far. What counts and matters is  sufficient wins to get you a district title and a playoff spot. Texas Association of Basketball Coaches(TABC) votes and until they feel we warrant being ranked in the top 25 it is what it is....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, JustUs said:

The late Al Davis said  "Just Win Baby"... being ranked would be nice reading material and recognition for the work the team has put in thus far. What counts and matters is  sufficient wins to get you a district title and a playoff spot. Texas Association of Basketball Coaches(TABC) votes and until they feel we warrant being ranked in the top 25 it is what it is....

I agree for the most part.  Unless they have a total collapse, I'm not worried about them getting a playoff spot.  The district title should be theirs to as long as they continue to do what they are doing, winning.  It's just more about being recognized for the work that the coaching staff and young ladies have put in.  Hey, if they don't get ranked all season but make it to San Antonio, I'd take that in a heart beat.

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...