Jump to content

Shepherd 40 Lumberton 102/FINAL


Recommended Posts

  • AggiesAreWe changed the title to Shepherd 40 Lumberton 102/FINAL
7 minutes ago, The Dragon said:

Mitchell loses four starters and wins the district last year.  He loses a division one player and immediately blasts a team that is in the playoffs every year.  When Green, Boutte, or Sigler retires, those schools need to call this cat.  He just gets it done.  Silsbee better watch out for Lumberton.

That’s just one game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, The Dragon said:

Mitchell loses four starters and wins the district last year.  He loses a division one player and immediately blasts a team that is in the playoffs every year.  When Green, Boutte, or Sigler retires, those schools need to call this cat.  He just gets it done.  Silsbee better watch out for Lumberton.

Let’s not get carried away.  The won by a lot, but shepherd hasn’t had a winning record in three seasons, and lost 5 seniors last year.  We’ll see how Mitchell does against some better teams.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2021 at 9:11 PM, The Dragon said:

Mitchell loses four starters and wins the district last year.  He loses a division one player and immediately blasts a team that is in the playoffs every year.  When Green, Boutte, or Sigler retires, those schools need to call this cat.  He just gets it done.  Silsbee better watch out for Lumberton.

WO-S just beat Shepherd 102-30.

Maybe Lumberton should look out for WO-S instead of Silsbee looking out for Lumberton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AggiesAreWe said:

WO-S just beat Shepherd 102-30.

Maybe Lumberton should look out for WO-S instead of Silsbee looking out for Lumberton.

Seems like shepherd is really down this year, I don’t how good Lumberton will be with losing 2 key guys from  last years team but I’m sure Mitchell will have his group ready like he always does but Silsbee and WOS will be a tough test. 

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...