oldschool2

Here are the only facts that matter. The former AD at HF made the playoffs each of his final 2 seasons. Fact. Criminal charges were brought up against the man...by parents of athletes...for excessive punishment. Fact. The charges were dismissed because they were found to be untrue. Fact. He resigned shortly thereafter. Fact. Was he ran off? Who knows... Truth is only HE himself knows the real reason why he resigned. But this news article came out right after he resigned [Hidden Content] ... and it doesn't say 1 single thing about the fact that the charges were dropped. Not 1. So now this ridiculous story (that very strongly implies he resigned because of this) may end up following him to all future employment opportunities. Because of some whiny, complaining parents of some obviously out of shape kids..This man's life may be affected. That too..sir..is a fact.

That's on UIL..not this coach. He can't help that it was so watered down. Don't you think for one second that Houston Scarborough coach don't have on his resume that he broke a whatever long playoff streak. And to be honest he's WAY better off leaving. If he caught this much grief imagine if he'd stayed. And "other things" are irrelevant. He made the playoffs, I'm sure did all of the things he was assigned to do per his contract, and the criminal charges were dismissed. Because they were WRONG. Which just tells me it was a bunch out of shape kids that couldn't hack it. Don't like it...plenty of room in the band. I just hope there isn't anything lasting for this guy associated with a bogus criminal investigation. Those parents need to realize they were messing with someone's livelihood. And like I said already...good luck getting a good coach to come to this dump after the last guy was criminally charged for "excessive workouts". And good luck being one of the 4 in a 5 team district without your D1 quarterback.

Wait...this reminds me of something. Oh that's right. I can't help but think about the time I had some clients tell me what an idiot Gary Kubiak was. And how he was a disgrace to the coaching world. And how the Texans would never have a shot at the superbowl with him as head coach. Someone remind me please...How did Kubiak do this past season. I'm forgetful these days. Yep. This sounds a lot like that. I just love when people think they can do it better than people being paid to do a job. So easy to blame coaches.

I'm sure people will be lining up to get involved in that cluster of a school...(sarcasm). If you think by now that every coach in the entire state hasn't heard that parents at HF started up a criminal investigation against the coaches for "tough workouts".. then you're crazy. Any coach that's worth anything will stay as far away from that place as possible...and I'm sure they'll spread the word. Good job HF. I hope you all realize what's coming. All this just in time to graduate the only hope of a good football team you had (King)....Again. Good, good job.

No...I believe you're missing the point. Under those other "regimes" the school enrollment was higher. Significantly higher. Do me a favor, if you would. Find out for me how many boys are playing football in the area schools near you. West Hardin, Hardin, Liberty, Dayton, Kountze...then find out the total number of boys in the high school. I think you might see that statistically HD is probably about where they need to be as far as participation. Are you not seeing what I'm saying. It's simple math... Higher enrollment=more kids playing. Lower enrollment=less. You're saying there are 89 boys in high school...and you are expecting 50 to play? That's over half. You need to understand that that's fairly uncommon to begin with. AND...you keep talking about these other "regimes" like they were the saviors. You do realize I hope...that under the previous 2 "regimes", the junior high teams used 6th graders. You do know why JH teams use 6th graders, don't you? It's because of lack of participation or low numbers. It's seems that everyone realizes that when those groups (that used 6th graders) got to high school, numbers would be down. Everyone but you. It's not the coach my man. You guys are running out of kids...like we all said would happen. Low enrollment + high band numbers = low football numbers. Not hard to see. I also seem to remember that your previous "regimes" had several transfers on the teams. Y'all still have transfers?

Awe...I think it's cute you may actually believe that I would be offended by something you posted. You must not have seen my other posts... No I just think it's funny that every time I even infer that a team is bad, I get jumped on from every direction (not that I care)...Yet you come on here and say a football team is "gay"..I believe that right...and not a peep is said. Like I said, it's funny.

Couple things. I highlighted the areas I want to address. You see....if this group of high school players had to use 6th graders in Junior High...then there is no surprise at all that there isn't a JV team. Why would there be? If they had to use 6th graders in JH...then there weren't enough kids. By the way...the former "regimes" that you speak of are the staffs that had 6th graders playing football. What happened...kids didn't want to play for those guys? Next: Largest band? Ever think that may be the reason the football team numbers are down? I sure know that makes sense to me. How many kids were in band when the football team had these 50 players or so? Hmm..And also...isn't HD's enrollment like the lowest it's ever been? You guys dropped in division...so the enrollment is definitely down. Lastly: 28 out of 89? That's 31%...that's probably as good or better than any school in the area for certain. How many do you expect to play? 89 boys...if 50 played that's over half. You can count the schools in the state on 1 hand where half of the boys in the school play football. You guys better be glad you have Hodges....just how long do you think the list is of people that want to be there? The UIL has granted you a chance to make the playoffs with that team...and you have a coach that wants to be there. Well...did anyway. Who knows with all this petition crap. Not sure I'd hang around for that. Anyway...better leave well enough alone.

Interesting. Cant believe this post isn't getting more attention. I make a comment about a team being bad and the board lights up like a Christmas tree. Sabine Pass gets labeled the "one act gay mecca of effeminate dudes"...and nothing. Note to self. Better to call a group of kids effeminate than bad. Got it.

May seem harsh to some. But I've never been accused of showing sympathy... Bottom line is that Ozen literally slapped the UIL in the face by going against what people have been fighting for for years. There are over 10 different state champions now because of the decision to let teams play others with similar enrollment. Not saying I'm in absolute agreement with UIL because I'm not..but I will say this. UIL came up with a system for equal chance competition based on what 1000s of parents were complaining about up to this point. No offense but I could care less what the parents of Ozen athletes feel about my comment. How many parents were forced to watch their kids play schools with twice the enrollment hoping their kids simply didn't get hurt..much less compete? And the Ozen administration is doing it voluntarily? I wish UIL would've put them in a different district than Central just because.

I hope Ozen loses every single district game over the next 2 years. Deciding to play up in classification even tho the school enrollment suggests otherwise is completely unfair to every athlete on campus. Agree or not..the state sets those district cutoffs for a reason and schools shouldn't have to play schools with much higher enrollments in competition for state championships. This isn't 1950s Indiana. And whether or not they CAN compete in basketball or whatever is irrelevant. I feel bad for the kids but whoever made that decision needs to see that schools play other schools their same size for a reason. So again...I hope Ozen absolutely tanks because of this.

Hardin will do less traveling in this district than in the other one.

I would never bet money that there's no chance Tatum competes in football.

well...well...well... Look who's back. It's a funny thing...I actually knew you'd come back around as soon as I saw the district alignments. I actually think HD will get out of this district. Whether or not they win it I have no clue. Honestly, every school in the district has the potential any given year to be the worst team in football. So who knows. I am with AAW though...didn't you guys organize a petition to run Hodges out of town?

I think it's better. Just saying.

No that was to AAW about proving me wrong. Not you lol.

Yes I'll agree that anybody that has some skill can more than likely get some college ball experience of some kind. If they're willing to go far and wide..and most likely pay for their schooling. But I'll bet your ex teammate didn't get recruited to go to that dump school in South Dakota. I though the purpose of this conversation was to figure out why the Bullock kid wasn't being recruited. And I figured you'd sniff out an opportunity to prove me wrong. Curiosity tho...didn't those kids play college football? For some reason I was thinking those Cayuga kids were football players.

No doubt in my mind they're the favorite. As they should be. But remember...they lost the title game last yr to a team that most likely has zero college basketball players. See what I'm getting at? And...um...false. "wants to play bad enough" unfortunately will not get you on a college roster. As an ex college player of 4 years, I'm pretty proud of the fact that I accomplished something that can not be accomplished by simply "wanting it bad enough". Lot of things in play here.

Notice what I said too...I said a lot of better teams than BS don't have 3 college basketball players. I'm talking about any level as well. Trust me...if I coached a 2A school that had 3 D2 players on it I better be winning state every year I got em. Because that's a dynamite team. You guys are throwing these terms around pretty loosely...D2, D3, JUCO...you better believe those kids can ball too. Tell me the last time a small school had more than 1 player end up on a college roster.

There are a lot of bigger school state champions, and quite a few schools better than Big Sandy that don't have 3 college basketball players on their team. Think about what you're saying.

You're right it was a month ago. I didn't look at the date very closely. And I didn't say the Bullock kid wasn't a good player. I've seen him a couple times also. I'm playing devil's advocate...because I've personally seen a lot of D1 basketball courtside. And sometimes people believe that just because "he's the best we got" means he/she is better than they really are. College athletes are pretty serious on every level. Yes the Williams kid is some kind of smooth. For argument's sake..and just to rattle some cages ;).. I'm gonna say I might rather have him on my team than Bullock. I think he's more well rounded.

My 2 cents. This game is a year ago December vs Kountze. First of all...If I see this film as a recruiter, I eliminate the possibility of D1 immediately. There isn't a D1 basketball payer on the floor of this game. You can tell Bullock is a decent player for sure.. But you guys are selling him as a lights out shooter. First off, he shoots from in front of his face (too low). 2nd, he's a pure set shooter, 3rd, he was like 1 for however many in the first half of this game including an air ball. And Kountze played zone only..which means he didn't have to create at all. He didn't move much, run off screens, create a shot off the bounce..My initial thoughts from this film is he is opportunistic scorer only. Catch and shoot, snowbird, etc.. I know the kid can shoot better than that because I've seen them play a few times. My thoughts are the same tho. 6'2 is a stretch BIG TIME, and he shoots with his feet to close to the floor. No doubt in my mind, however, that he absolutely annihilates the likes of West Hardin, Sabine Pass, Evadale, and those guys.. But the fact remains.. Kountze is terrible when it comes to team defense, but really fast. And he was only to hit one 3 in 16 mins of basketball. You guys are talking like he's the best shooter that's ever played the game. He's pretty good I'll admit..but D1? Sorry. Subsequently I really like the #4.

Well I wasn't going to reply to this anymore...just can't help it I guess. Yes. They WILL NOT WIN. I'm not talking about state. I mean in general. They will win (possibly) any of these games but definitely not guaranteed. Sabine Pass, Burkeville, West Hardin, Hull Daisetta, Galveston O'Connell, Evadale. But like I said..NOT GUARANTEED. Most of those schools will be a loss for Colmesneil...currently. But they all fluctuate back and forth for worst 11 man football team in Texas. If Chester and High Island hadn't dropped to 6 man they'd be on the list too. If they have anyone other than that list on their schedule..they will lose. Hire who you want..won't matter. And no, I don't have a grudge against Colmesneil. Why do you think that? Because I said it's already a crappy job..and the fact they don't pay, give support, or have good players means they won't get a seasoned winner of a coach. You ever read any of my other posts? I'm not picking on Colmesneil..I pick on everybody. And yes...Waskom would NOT have won state if they hadn't had good players. Sorry bud...Even good coaches have to have something to work with. You can't make chicken salad out of chicken crap.

Well it seems you are finally starting to get it...my original point to this whole mess was that Colmesneil will not win, no matter who they hire. You then fired off some nonsense about how Waskom was traditionally bad and then the new coach fixed it. Are you now admitting that Waskom had the talent to win on a high level. Because Colmesneil does NOT have the talent...and that's ok. But can you finally admit that even the Waskom coach will not be successful at Colmesneil like he was at Waskom. I sure hope so...I'm done with this either way. This conversation is making my IQ drop.

can't stop it. Only thing would be to make every single kid sit out a year no matter what. But then recruiting would become even more rampant...I believe...as the article states.

Yeah..I inferred that Waskom won state because they had a D1 commit in the backfield. He didn't win it by himself...but without him, I'll bet money that they don't win it. You take that kid out of the equation, they don't win it. You take a different kid out of the equation...they are probably still VERY good. You gave some names of some small school super stars that were on terrible teams. Yeah...great job. There are surely more examples that you can't even think of. But there are just as many or more examples of super star small school guys who were the reason their team was really good. And we will see how great of a coach he really is before long....Because every year he's been there is another year he's gotten to "develop" them. So technically he should keep racking up titles right? After he loses the kids I'm talking about that is... Right?