oldschool2

100-0 If WOS wants...

EC playoff streak comes to an end after 2 decades. Know what will NOT happen? The community will not freak out and try to get the coach fired. Because with schools like this, the town supports the coaching staff. Other communities should maybe take notice.

My dad used to always say "God must love stupid people. He made a bunch of em"

I was honestly just wondering. Because I know that it would be possible to create an email address using a fake name. Not that I could understand how anyone would have time to reply under 2 account names..or even want to. I'm pretty busy just being one alias.

Just out of curiosity. How would you know if someone had more than one account?

I've picked HD more times in the pickems this year than the history of me doing it. Combined. Just a shame ole HD55 is MIA. This would be a good year for some of his usual sayings.

Friendly wager?

1st 28-0 half 42-0 3rd 49-0 4th 56-0

1. Beaumont West Brook 2. Lufkin 3. Baytown Sterling 4. Crosby 5. Barbers Hill 6. Port Neches-Groves 7. Port Arthur Memorial 8. Bridge City 9. Little Cypress-Mauriceville 10. Madisonville 11. Bellville 12. Hardin-Jefferson 13. Woodville 14. Buna 15. East Chambers 16. Hitchcock 17. Corrigan-Camden 18. Groveton 19. Evadale 20. Hull-Daisetta 21. Beaumont Central 22. Livingston 23. Silsbee 24. Jasper 25. West Orange-Stark

HJ wins this one

That's what I was referring to. The last few meetings.

History tends to repeat itself. This case will be no different. I think CHS will take this one.

No...I don't think you understand a single thing I said. Otherwise you wouldn't say my point makes no sense. What is this thread about? A hypothetical situation where a successful coach coaches a team that somebody thinks should have more success. I made a point that most of the time it may not matter who's coaching. Because if a team is terrible, then they are terrible. I then said that even if a coach improves the players on the team, they could still in fact be terrible. I even provided you with an example. You saying "None of your points make any sense at all and are so pointless"....speaks volumes on your level of intelligence. Or lack of.

Well, here we go again... completely misunderstanding what I've written. Guess what guy.. If your son goes from a 6.3 40 to a 5.9 40...he's gotten faster. He's still slow. But better. If your son goes from a 75lb bench press to a 90lb bench press...he's gotten stronger. He's still weak. But better. Improved is a relative term. And that's my point. Even when a coach improves all of the players on the team...they still might be terrible.

TEAM speed usually is more important than having 1 or 2 kids that are fast. I'm sure Hardin has 1 or 2 kids that are fairly quick. Does that mean they're going to score a lot of touchdowns? Certainly not.

The coach that they just got rid of had won almost 30 games in his last 3 years at West Sabine. Burkeville was a powerhouse when Roy Harper was able to bring (literally) a few kids from Newton to the school long enough to muster a state title. You take a few of Newton's horses and insert them into any school that size, and they're trouble for the rest of the state. This comes down to ability, size, strength, speed, and intelligence. All of those things can be improved...but even if I make a 90-year-old woman a little faster and a little stronger...she still isn't catching the running back from La Marque or Hitchcock.

Were you a coach or teacher there while Stark was? Because I personally don't believe you have any idea how he acted on campus. And if so...you're telling me that the way he "acted" was only enough reason to let him go after starting the season 0-5? So if they had started 5-0 the way he "acted" would've been perfectly ok?

Hardin will not finish .500 next year on the season. After that it will depend on alignment, and the coaches ability to make a schedule.

I'm pretty sure he had more success than just about any coach they've had come through there. But by the time he left, the community wasn't happy with him anymore (from what I've heard). I think the school needs to save money on hiring a head football coach. They need to either let the board members coach the team, or whoever has the best peewee record from the year before. Or maybe a combination of the two. Would save the school hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars in the long run.

Most of the better programs in the state keep coaches and leave them alone unless they leave on their own.

Tom Westerberg won 4 state titles in 6 years at Allen High School. Bring new attitude? You bet. Increase numbers and enthusiasm? No doubt. He may even sway a few parents to transfer their kid by him being there. But he will NOT have a fraction of the success he had at Allen while at Barbers Hill. We can put money on that whenever you're ready.

Talent is relative. Having talent and having enough talent to win a state title is another. WOS is a relatively small school and they're sending kids to FBS schools on a regular basis. PAM may also have some kids good enough for big time college football...but so do most schools in Texas that size. Its a lot easier to win deep playoff games when you have overwhelmingly more talent. PAM plays a lot of schools that have as much talent. And yes I stand by my statement. Great coaches can NOT win with zero talent. I can name several schools that Coach Thompson could spend the next 15 years and not make it past round 2 or 3. I'd bet every dollar I have on that.

I defend coaches to the max...because I know that most of the time coaches are doing the best they can with what they have to work with. But on that same note.. I also believe that a coach is limited by what they have to work with. Even great coaches can't win without talent. Period. If Coach Thompson were at PAM, he wouldn't have any rings. If Bill Belichick were at Livingston...they still aren't winning district. If Bill Belichick were at Hardin...they're still going 0-10. Coaches can get more out of players more than others, no doubt. And some coaches have been exposed to more winning experience, no doubt. But nobody is winning a horse race with a donkey.

And what I'm saying is that you are also missing the point.. I know that it wasn't enough to overcome their offense. I know the end result is all that matters. I know that the perceived weakness was in fact offset by an unstoppable offense. My point from the beginning is that Liberty showed that the ball can me moved on WOS defense. And that even a team like Liberty (who's having a good year but not a great team) can keep the ball out of WOS's hands long enough to keep the score relatively low. And yes..a team that is better than Liberty could, in fact, exploit this to their benefit. That's all I said and that's all I meant. The WOS faithful are the ones turning all of that into negative comments. Those stats I kept repeating are in no way representative of how the game "should" have gone. Liberty was beaten by a team they couldn't beat under any circumstance. But I doubt Liberty makes it past round 2. My only point is that if you give a good team 270 yards of offense and 37 minutes of possession..it may be a different story. I really don't understand what's so hard to grasp there.

I would like for you or anyone else to find one statement I said saying that Liberty should've won this game. Or that Liberty had offensive numbers good enough to win. Or one single excuse that was made for Liberty losing. You can't...because I didn't say that. I said that Liberty exposed a weakness. I also gave examples of how I came to that conclusion. Fact is..if they play this game 100 times, WOS wins every time. Liberty isn't good enough to beat em. But if you'd actually read...and comprehend what you're reading...you'd see that. But then again...it's just easier to make assumptions and take things how you want to take them. Like some others. Heaven forbid anyone say anything that may imply anything but greatness about WOS. smh.. Even the best teams in the state have areas for improvement. Depending on who you ask I guess.