bullets13
SETXsports Staff-
Posts
35,615 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
52
Everything posted by bullets13
-
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
-
East Chambers (20) @ Anahuac (45) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
@JimAdler I believe my suspicions have been confirmed -
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.
-
💪🏻💪🏻
-
Shelbyville (55) @ Grapeland (34) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
!!:55/34/F -
If my calculations are correct I just dropped a 23 bomb and retook the lead.
-
Beaumont Kelly (7) @ Houston Lutheran South (41) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
!!:0/34/3 -
Beaumont Kelly (7) @ Houston Lutheran South (41) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
Anybody? -
Humble Summer Creek (56) @ Humble Kingwood (7) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
!!:56/7/F -
Coldspring-Oakhurst (18) @ Palestine Westwood (21) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
Shocked with this one -
West Hardin (43) @ Normangee (14) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
!!:43/14/4 -
Hemphill (42) @ New Waverly (35) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
What a comeback! Needed this one for my pickems -
West Hardin (43) @ Normangee (14) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
!!:22/6/H -
Lovelady (63) @ Hull-Daisetta (0) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
!!:50/0/H -
Deweyville (40) @ Colmesneil (28) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
!!:11/20/H -
Evadale (47) @ Sabine Pass (12) - FINAL
bullets13 replied to jdawg03's topic in High School Football
!!:47/0/H -
!!:0/64/H