bullets13

1. Humble Atascocita 2. La Porte 3. Nederland 4. Humble Kingwood Park 5. Port Neches-Groves 6. Texas City 7. Hardin-Jefferson 8. Vidor 9. Lumberton 10. Silsbee 11. Little Cypress-Mauriceville 12. West Orange-Stark 13. Anahuac 14. Diboll 15. Kirbyville 16. Palestine Westwood 17. East Chambers 18. Woodville 19. Colmesneil 20. Garrison 21. Deweyville 22. Groveton 23. Shelbyville 24. Timpson 25. Katy St. John 23

seems like a good idea to me. I've always thought it strange that different series could be played under different rules based solely on a coinflip.

Yup

I was gonna say 75

This. I made a point like this in one of the many other threads. Year in and year out WOS benefits from the experience they get from playing an extremely difficult schedule before district. This year the schedule was no different, but I think they would’ve benefited from a couple of easy games to start out considering they’re working on new schemes with a new coach this year. I know Nederland isn’t having a good year, but traditionally they play wos tough, and the coaches certainly couldn’t go into that game with the mindset of working on things the way they can against your liberty and bridge cities of the world. This is also the strongest district they’ve been in possibly ever? I can’t remember a district that WOS has been in with 3 teams that were good enough to keep it close with them, much less actually beat them. It’s funny, for all the doom and gloom, they easily could’ve beaten Newton (who’s handed them plenty of losses over the years), and probably should’ve beaten HF. I strongly believe Silsbee beats them this year no matter who is on the sidelines. There’s no doubt been some growing pains on the sidelines, but WOS is only a couple of plays from being 6-2, and there’s a good chance that’s where they’d be if they didn’t get a new coach this season.

Sure can.

That EC is down this year, despite their record.

Earlier in the year I had them ranked in the “bullets13 rankings that mean nothing poll” between 17-20. I currently have them at 12-15. It’s tough, because the more I watch this district, the more apparent it is that they’re going to go into the playoffs having played only one really good team, which beat them handily. It’s undeniable that they have a good squad this year, but they’ve hardly been tested at all with this schedule, and failed the one true test they had by 3 scores. They also squeaked by the other two quality teams on their schedule, one of whom is a 3A school with a 4-3 record, and the other likely a 3rd place district finisher in 4A-D2. The LCM game was the one district game on their schedule that I thought could be a good litmus test for them, but the way LCM has played this year, the #7 team in the state should blow them out. This Friday they had a nice solid win against Vidor, but I look at what Silsbee did to them, and that’s truly what a top-10 team should be able to do against the pirates this year, IMO.

Huffman is a shell of the team they were last year, and lumberton has taken a big step forward. Lumberton by at least 40

[Hidden Content] @tvc184

I read about the snapchats in a news article. Will see if I can find it

@JimAdler I believe my suspicions have been confirmed

Yeah, the only thing that makes sense to me is that the Snapchats were discovered and it led to the discovery of a prior relationship from when she was at lumberton.

Now this explanation I do understand. Good analysis. I expect/hope HF gives them a game this year, but it’s a tough ask.

Not really understanding your next post in relation to mine, as in the last 4 years the 2nd string hasn’t seen the field much, if at all, against HF??

HF has played Silsbee close the last few years. 2021: Silsbee 36, HF 35 2020: Silsbee 24, HF 2 2019: Silsbee 27, HF 21 2018: Silsbee 27, HF 26 HF is better this year than any of those teams were, but… So is Silsbee. I don’t think the tigers blow them out, but I don’t think it’s going to be another 1-score game. I’ll take the tigers 34-20, and hope like heck I’m wrong.

I read tonight that she was inappropriately snap chatting them, and is accused of attempting to receive child pornography from them. So they must be under 17. Also, I thought that if the educator and the student are at different districts then the law didn’t apply if they’re of legal age, because the teacher doesn’t have the position of authority over them, but I guess I was wrong.

💪🏻💪🏻

!!:55/34/F

If my calculations are correct I just dropped a 23 bomb and retook the lead.

!!:0/34/3

Anybody?

!!:56/7/F

Shocked with this one

!!:43/14/4