Jump to content

Anahuac Open?


RidinTheRange

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Hazer said:

WoAh! From what I've heard around town this hire is going to be a great hire for the Panthers if they get who I think they are. Going to turn some heads as well. This thing is not a done deal like some think.  

Well... what did you hear? Someone other than Barbay or the Dickenson coordinator?  That's not going to turn any heads because that's what most people are already hearing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, oldschool2 said:

Well... what did you hear? Someone other than Barbay or the Dickenson coordinator?  That's not going to turn any heads because that's what most people are already hearing. 

Yes, heard it was someone other than those two and heard he was the actual front runner, but I will not be posting any names. Sorry just out of respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, waltersobchak said:

have heard the front runner has recently been to the biggest stage as a coordinator

Would love to see him get it, I want to see the panthers compete again in the next couple years and I feel he is the man for the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hazer said:

Would love to see him get it, I want to see the panthers compete again in the next couple years and I feel he is the man for the job.

It's a mistake in my opinion.. if that's the route they go.  I have it on very good authority that recent success as a head coach (that everyone's talking about) was due solely to the fact of a crap ton of talent.  Loaded in fact.  Other than just a stupid amount of size/speed/strength things were sort of a free-for-all.  Don't shoot the messenger... that's what I heard.  If even a fraction of that is true then Anahuac will have made a wrong decision.  Can't make decisions based on popularity.. or a last name. 

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

    45,935
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined



  • Posts

    • Actually I wasn’t responding to your comment. It was funny. I was using your comment to take issue with baddog’s comparison. 😎
    • I mean the baseball kids aren’t even doing football after school, they go to baseball… baseball kids get about a hour during the period. 
    • That is yet to be determined in trial. ”Taking” in the Fifth Amendment doesn’t mean ownership, title changing hands, etc. A government can “take” your property without “taking” your properties.  That has been true.  This issue is, did Texas take the property under the Fifth Amendment and subsequent Supreme Court rulings and not the dictionary definition of “taking”. As always in the law, definitions matter. 
    • Wrong again. This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up   The day that Trump took office, our nation debt stood at 19.9 Trillion dollars (End of Q4, 2016).  After his tax cuts (without corresponding cuts in spending), the national debt stood at 23.2 Trillion dollars at the end of Q1 of 2020 that was the Start of COVID, FYI... Or a total increase in debt of almost 17% during Trump's first three years (and one quarter) in office.  At the end of his reign (with COVID spending for which Trump himself signed off on) was at 27.7 Trillion Dollars.  That's a 39% increase in the National Debt while Trump was in office.  For further reference, Biden inherited a 27.7 Trillion dollar debt to start.  At the end of Q4 2023, the debt stands at 34 Trillion.  That's an increase of 19% over the first three years. I know that math and facts hurt your feelings, but Trump was horrible for the country before he allowed "them Dirty Democrats to shut down the economy."  Anybody that says "Trump was good for the country" doesn't know the first thing about micro/macro economics or the effects of deficit spending.  Trump hurt us like no other president, period.  Anybody that says "Trump was good for the economy" is actually stating for the rest of us with some sense "I don't know what I'm talking about."
    • But of course you wouldn’t understand the saying. You’re so clever. Your education precedes you. 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...