oldschool2

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.

I hate the idea of rating the skill of a coach solely on wins/losses. Keven Foster is without question the best coach in the area and arguably anywhere in the state for these reasons: Character and effort of his players, adaptability midgame, experience, poise, and yes.. success. What a great coach and better person. Big Sandy is very fortunate to have him. It sounds like this would've been an excellent game to be at.

What were you saying? It would appear as if HD ran out of fortunate events. Great season nonetheless.

Flatonia played HD in the second playoff game in two consecutive days. That's a fortunate event.. for HD. Was it the difference? I'm not saying that, but they literally had zero days to rest or prepare. Mumford played HD on one day's rest/preparation. They played a single digit playoff game on 2/25, then another on 2/27. That's a fortunate even.. for HD. Again, was it the difference? I'm not saying that. It definitely helps, though. HD overcame a 17 point 4th quarter deficit to win their second consecutive playoff game by 1 point. That's a fortunate event that statistically, normally doesn't happen. Calm down, Karen. I'm not saying they didn't earn the wins. Just that some things went right that normally don't and it needs to happen again. AP will be a test.

I have never said coaching doesn't play an important part. I'm saying that without kids, coaching isn't enough to matter. Case in point.. we have here one of the arguably best coaches in the area for sure. More than one state championship... how many region appearances? District titles? What happened? Same coach. Same tradition. Same culture. Same expectations. Is he a worse coach? I don't hardly think so. The only thing that changes from year to year is players. So it should come as no surprise when I run to the defense of a coach when they're bashed by a parent/fan. Blaming the coach is a poor excuse to the possibility of perhaps the players just aren't good. Are their bad coaches? Sure. But bad coaches can still be successful with good teams. Good coaches can NOT be successful with bad teams. I don't care how much winning experience one has.. you aren't winning a horse race with a donkey. Period.

Go get em, Coach DD.

Or down one more.