AggiesAreWe

As I said, I don't recall the incident. Enlighten me.

As long as it's posted in the proper context and forum. If you are speaking on a youth game incident, that post would have to be in that forum and not here in the high school football forum.

When a local news outlet (in this case KOGT, an Orange County news outlet) has published a name for all to see, then it's ok to post the name here as well. Personally, I don't recall the Ozen incident. But KOGT named the coach who will be going in front of UIL and it's Gonzales.

Same

Pretty much anyone in the know has BC winning district. I know TABC and I do.

Dayton 1674

1. Humble at Kingwood 2. Summer Creek at North Shore 3. Barbers Hill at Beaumont West Brook 4. Galveston Ball at Lufkin 5. Crosby at Angleton 6. Fort Bend Kempner at Friendswood 7. Huntsville at Splendora 8. Lake Creek at West Fork 9. Montgomery at Nederland 10. Port Neches-Groves at Dayton 11. Bridge City at Huffman 12. Hardin-Jefferson at Liberty 13. Little Cypress-Mauriceville at Lumberton 14. Livingston at Vidor 15. Hamshire-Fannett at West Orange-Stark 16. Silsbee at Shepherd 17. Tarkington at Jasper 18. Crockett at Fairfield 19. Teague at Diboll 20. New Waverly at Trinity 21. Woodville at Kountze 22. San Augustine at Timpson 23. Colmesneil at West Hardin 24. Hull-Daisetta at Evadale 25. Apple Springs at Burkeville

All seems pretty logical to me.

DCTF has Lumberton as a 2 point favorite.

DCTF has Montgomery as a 18 point favorite.

DCTF has Silsbee as a 18 point favorite.

DCTF has Huffman as a 10 point favorite.

DCTF has Woodville as a 15 point favorite.

DCTF has Angleton as a 19 point favorite.

DCTF has WO-S as a 15 point favorite.

DCTF has Barbers Hill as a 2 point favorite.

DCTF has Beaumont United as a 3 point favorite.

Good to know.

DEC should be all supts. I imagine an AD could sit for supt. if he/she couldn't attend. Assistant coach will be going in front of UIL for decision on his punishment, if any.

LCM

Not affiliated with either school?? You sure post a lot on LC-M game threads, LC-M threads and not other teams in that district. In fact, the vast majority of your posts on this site are all LC-M related. Just sayin.

Only the schools Supt. vote. BC and LC-M could not vote. DEC are school supts. Not coaches.

The video that I have seen shows them in possession of the device. You are correct that it doesn't necessarily prove that LC-M was able to use it to their advantage. That is why the vote went the way it did. Not enough evidence to warrant a forfeit. I agree with that decision. But they were denying that they had the device when video proved they did. When BC asked for the device back, LC-M said they did not have it. Why would they not just give it back when asked? That is what this really is about. Integrity and ethics.

Added these schedules this morning: Pasadena, Pollok Central, San Augustine, Shelbyville, West Hardin, Hull-Daisetta and Burkeville That makes 72 schedules posted. Need 8. These are the schedules I need: Channelview CE King Newton Woodville Kirbyville Coldspring New Waverly Sabine Pass

I tend to agree for the most part. But, I have personally seen video and it clearly shows the player picking up the device off the field and giving it to his coach. Then the coach never attempts to give the device back to any game official. My eyesight may not be as good as it used to be. But I believe what I saw. You can take that for what it's worth. Also the vote was 3-3 for no forfeit. So there were some that thought the information given was enough to warrant a forfeiture. I don't deny that the coaches had their teams prepared.