Jump to content

Silsbee 68 Hamshire-Fannett 45/FINAL


WOSgrad

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, ST413 said:

DYton will probably be online tickets...

The real hold up is a belt is making a noise in my 02 truck.  Some days I feel it's a classic, some days a hoopty beater truck.  I may get it fixed by then, or maybe not.  That's the beauty of being retired, I move when I wanna move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Kountzer said:

I thought about that. I should of mentioned Deandre Hopkins and the Beard.

It’s a shame what has become of the Texans and the Rockets... at least the Stros still have a glimmer of hope. Although that cheating thing didn’t go over too well and Verlander is already done for the year.

I’ll add something here to stay on topic, I figured Silsbee would win but they went on out and dominated the game. I think they are just starting to hit their stride this season and I wouldn’t be surprised if they go far. I know nothing about Yates but people say they use a heavy pressure defense. I don’t see how you can have a more aggressive press defense than what Silsbee can apply without fouling everybody out. Should be a very interesting game, I think the Tigers keep it close if not pull the upset. One think is for sure, it will be a battle of endurance and Silsbee seems pretty deep to me. Maybe not Yates deep, I heard they have like 30 dudes on the bench... But Silsbee doesn’t lose much when they substitute, at least not on the defensive end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Boneyard Boys said:

It’s a shame what has become of the Texans and the Rockets... at least the Stros still have a glimmer of hope. Although that cheating thing didn’t go over too well and Verlander is already done for the year.

I’ll add something here to stay on topic, I figured Silsbee would win but they went on out and dominated the game. I think they are just starting to hit their stride this season and I wouldn’t be surprised if they go far. I know nothing about Yates but people say they use a heavy pressure defense. I don’t see how you can have a more aggressive press defense than what Silsbee can apply without fouling everybody out. Should be a very interesting game, I think the Tigers keep it close if not pull the upset. One think is for sure, it will be a battle of endurance and Silsbee seems pretty deep to me. Maybe not Yates deep, I heard they have like 30 dudes on the bench... But Silsbee doesn’t lose much when they substitute, at least not on the defensive end.

Yates has a more aggressive defense, Yates will press for 32 minutes with a 18 Man Roster.  It's the only way they know how to play defense, give up easy baskets to keep the flow running up and down like a track meet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Boneyard Boys said:

It’s a shame what has become of the Texans and the Rockets... at least the Stros still have a glimmer of hope. Although that cheating thing didn’t go over too well and Verlander is already done for the year.

I’ll add something here to stay on topic, I figured Silsbee would win but they went on out and dominated the game. I think they are just starting to hit their stride this season and I wouldn’t be surprised if they go far. I know nothing about Yates but people say they use a heavy pressure defense. I don’t see how you can have a more aggressive press defense than what Silsbee can apply without fouling everybody out. Should be a very interesting game, I think the Tigers keep it close if not pull the upset. One think is for sure, it will be a battle of endurance and Silsbee seems pretty deep to me. Maybe not Yates deep, I heard they have like 30 dudes on the bench... But Silsbee doesn’t lose much when they substitute, at least not on the defensive end.

You are right about this Tiger team.....however we are very young and it will be the first time dealing with a team like Yates.  Now we can apply just as much pressure as they do but where we may have trouble is dealing with their pressure and still being able to apply ours.  Legs will get tired and decision making of our youngsters will be tested.  To most anyone it will be a surprise if we can make it a real good game.   With that said i have faith in my young Tigers and know they will give it all they can.  I wont be surprised to see this one either way.  Unfortunately i dont know if i will even make the trip with a 5:30 start time.  I would miss the first 20 minutes or so and unless i get tickets online wouldnt want to make the trip and get turned away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ST413 said:

You are right about this Tiger team.....however we are very young and it will be the first time dealing with a team like Yates.  Now we can apply just as much pressure as they do but where we may have trouble is dealing with their pressure and still being able to apply ours.  Legs will get tired and decision making of our youngsters will be tested.  To most anyone it will be a surprise if we can make it a real good game.   With that said i have faith in my young Tigers and know they will give it all they can.  I wont be surprised to see this one either way.  Unfortunately i dont know if i will even make the trip with a 5:30 start time.  I would miss the first 20 minutes or so and unless i get tickets online wouldnt want to make the trip and get turned away.

I’m sure the game will be broadcast in some form correct? I hope so, I want to watch this one or at least listen to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SportsJunkie32 said:

Yates has a more aggressive defense, Yates will press for 32 minutes with a 18 Man Roster.  It's the only way they know how to play defense, give up easy baskets to keep the flow running up and down like a track meet.

Good points but I’m interested in if JY can handle the pressure that Silsbee will bring. I’m sure they have played a tough schedule, have they faced aggressive defensive teams like Silsbee? Does Yates have elite guard play to deal with it? I’m not saying they can’t handle it, maybe they can maybe they won’t. I know nothing about them so I’m depending on you for info. I have only have seen Silsbee and I know they can bring it.

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...