oldschool2

I have argued for years that with availability of rental properties (mostly apartment buildings) within bigger school districts it is just about impossible to keep parents from changing their "permanent address" to wherever they choose for whatever reason they want. Does Aledo have this feature (rental property)? I have no idea. I'm just sharing the ways in which successful schools recruit without recruiting.

Every successful program gets accused of it. It's ignorance.

A lot? One good say that ALL teams lose because they don't score more points than their opponent.

Programs like that don't have to recruit. Their success, facilities, community, etc. does all of the recruiting that they'll ever need. If a family lives in or around the DFW area with a great paying job or the means to obtain a great paying job anywhere they choose and have a son/daughter with the potential to be great (size, athleticism, etc.) they are going to put themselves in a position for their kids to experience success. Period. If you had a job in Houston that offered you the ability to live wherever you want around the Houston area to commute to work.. and you have a 6'6 225 pound son who loves football, has spent a lifetime going to summer camps including strength training, speed camps, skill specific camps, had a personal trainer, had a nutritionist, had a personal tutor, etc.. would you choose to live in Houston Scarborough's district? Or would you buy a house in Katy? Don't worry. I know the answer.. in fact. That's similarly what's happening in Aledo. This comment isn't directed at you.. just a general statement for anyone inquiring.

A whole lot happens between middle school and graduation. A whole lot. I'll take note when an area team (other than WOS/Newton) actually beats a team from out of the area. Normally Round 2/3 is about the end of the road. EC is the exception to that recently. We'll see.

I'm not saying I know anything about the situation or anything, because I don't. But I do know that there is ALWAYS more than one side to a story. And I know that just because something appears in a news article doesn't make it factual. I think we can all agree to that. We'll see I guess. I know not to long ago Hamshire Fannett went after a coach for "over disciplining" so to speak.. and it turned out to be misleading. I'll wait until the facts come out before stating my opinion. Which is what all should do.

I have no doubt that folks are upset. This isn't a very "Allen" thing to do. As I stated earlier.. this is some small town bullcrap.

I know what they're saying. What I'm saying is that at a school that size, personnel changes can turn on a dime and it's the decision that is solely based on the head coach's discretion. For whatever reason he/she believes will help the team be the most successful. If this is true, just because you took snaps as the JV quarterback in Allen ISD doesn't guarantee that you'll take the snaps as the varsity quarterback the next year. Allen had a backup QB on their varsity.. I'm certain of it. Was that kid a senior? Or.. there's absolutely no telling who may transfer into Allen's school district for a variety of reasons between now and the start of the season. If this is true at all.. to give the head football coach a hard time at Allen High School over the last year's jv quarterback and whether or not he may be the varsity quarterback is ABSURD. Whoever the football coach is will play the best possible option that Allen has at quarterback. At least I hope that's the case. If this is true, I officially hope that the kid is NOT the varsity quarterback next year.

Truly a tragedy. Rest in peace.

I'm not surprised by anything these days.. but making a big deal over a JV quarterback is about as small school drama as it gets.

Who cares.. getting a state championship trumps whatever ranking there is. I think.

I heard this is proof that "small town politics" infiltrates the biggest of big schools in the state. Just what I hear..

Must be pretty daunting for a parent to know that your kid's new football coach was shot in the chest before by a parent and it didn't 1) make him change his lineup 2) didn't make him quit. Even the following year. That's literally a coach that doesn't give a crap what parents think about who plays.

I agree. Also, the Hancock brothers are friends of mine so I'm glad they got to be a part. Special season for sure.

Indeed. But the popular theory always leans towards most wins, deepest runs, most points, etc. Regardless of having an overabundance of talent or not. Not a popular opinion.. but winning the most games with the most talent isn't really that impressive. Not taking away anything from anyone. Coaches can't help who they have to suit up with any more than kids can help who they play against.

Anyone with a sports eye at all can tell if a team lacks size, skill, or athleticism. Not to mention experience (underclassmen). If a coach has any of the aforementioned attributes or lack-there-of.. yet still beats teams that has it, he/she is doing more with less.

No question. The other "guys" don't compare to a 6'6 D1 prospect, but each of them are still outcome changers for sure. It doesn't necessarily take a college prospect to make the difference between a great season and a mediocre one. It happens all of the time. Another thing that happens all of the time (in pretty much any sport) is a team will have a fantastic year, then the coach will be in an exact conversation like this, then lose one or more good players to graduation and it's a whole new group of "best coaches" the next year. I've always argued that a combination of talent and coaching is absolutely necessary. I love when coaches do more with less. I'm more impressed with that than anything.. watching a game where one team has no business even being in it, yet strategy and preparation keeps it interesting. I get bored with the best players always beating worse players lol. How fun is that..

To be fair, this statement could be said about most of the coaches I've seen listed. Take their "guy" off the team and it's a COMPLETELY different outcome. EC had a guy.. Huffman had a guy.. HD had a guy.. Lumberton had a guy. Remove said guy from the roster and is the coach even in this conversation? Btw.. I HATE these conversations. There are probably coaches in the area that accomplished things (though not significant) with absolutely nothing. It's much easier to win games with the best player(s). What about teams that are competitive when they shouldn't be? That's the sign of a good coach also.

Exactly. And with the way kids are improving their skills these days.. better have a plan for when the "we have superior athletes" mentality isn't working.

Well.. you definitely can't do it when you don't have the kids. What I'm saying is that even when you think you do.. it's working less and less.

I've thought for years that the "out athlete everyone with a press" philosophy is working less and less. Especially in the deeper games when you see good ball handling and/or basketball IQ. There's a reason that college/pro teams don't press back to a zone trap the whole game.

I was asking if you thought I said that.. I didn't. He's a better coach than he was when he won his first title ...no doubt. His players stink right now.

That's what I said?

I believe that's definitely true as well. It's a great fit for all involved. I'll say that I always see a "team first" mentality exhuming from the kids.

The handful of times I've seen one of his teams play I've left with the same reaction. No matter the skill level he's working with or the level of competition.. It's the same every time I've seen.