oldschool2

I'm referring to the kid the thread is about. So losing. But...I don't think EITHER makes that much difference. It's good to have good wideouts, no doubt. But a lot of variables come into play when completing a pass. QB, WR, O-line, timing, defense.

Forgive me for not knowing OR caring about all things relating to Silsbee. My point remains. I doubt a 1000yd WR makes that much difference.

As of now: 1. Kirbyville 2. CS 3. WV 4. Buna/Trinity 6. Ktze 7. Warren I think KV will be too fast for everyone. CS lost some...but will still have some kids that can go. WV has been on the verge as of late. They will play some close ones with top 2 teams. Trinity is a little unknown, but they may mess things up for some. Buna lost a lot I hear. They'll still be Buna. Ktze/WHS will be battle. I still think Ktze wins it. I've been wrong before.

Who cares. I doubt 1 kid will make that much difference in what Silsbee does this year. But may make a pretty big difference at Evadale. Didn't Silsbee's QB graduate last yr? Takes 2 to complete a pass. Don't act like these kids bouncing from school to school is a new concept.

Typical AAW.... Lol. First lines of that thread: "I'm out of here for a while. Maybe I'll be back...maybe I won't."

Surely you didn't think I'd let you guys go through the season without me. Too many people to aggravate.

I'm out of here for a while. Maybe I'll be back...maybe I won't. At first, it was fun on here, as I've had some good conversation and some quality debates. Now...every time I post any little thing somebody gets all butt hurt and all the whiny babies join in. I came on here a couple years ago in hopes of getting word to some parent or board member on how things operate around the state. The result was being labeled a "setx hater". Typical response of those with no valid argument. That was an epic fail on my part. Most people I've met or talked to from this area are content. Whatever. I believe I'm seeing on this site happen that I suspect happened to a lot of small towns in the setx coverage area. Anyone with any common sense left. Well, I'm jumping ship too. At least for a while. Maybe in a few months or longer things will be similar to when I started as a member. Doubtful..but maybe. I may say a lot of things that most won't....but....nevermind.

Brock is closer to Arlington than Celina by 7 minutes according to mapquest.

Oh because they played Refugio? I was referring to what he said about the effect on your fans and kids. And not a person traveled further than Canadian. By the way...I'm willing to bet Refugio had more people in Houston than Canadian did.

Um...can you not read? CANADIAN is in the panhandle. Maybe you should look at google maps. And I said Canadian because not only are they the only team in Texas High School history to win state titles back to back in both basketball and football. And they won 2 different football titles in 2 different venues...and they traveled further than any team in the state by far. Refugio?... lol. Where did that even come from?

Canadian disproves this theory.

Like I said...shake things up.

Texas Tech University. Shake things up a bit.

I'm calling it now..it will be between Orangefield and HF for the 4th spot. WOS wins...HJ and Liberty are 2 and 3. I'm calling it.

What....exactly....are you talking about? I was just saying that there are a lot of people on here that claim to know what they're talking about, bash coaches, always have the "should've been" answer. Legacy most likely doesn't require the same things as public schools do as far as employment. So it's out there for the taking. Wow. Um..that's a negative Ghost Rider. But yes...rest of the statement is correct.

That's usually a tough feat. Yet to be seen. Good luck.

I'm actually not surprised at all by this response. I offer a fact: 43 of last 50 state champs play on turf. An opposed argument comes in with a list. Which has the opposite intended effect. 9.7% of schools with turf played in December, 4.1% of schools with grass did. Lo and behold....here comes "they were already successful". I suppose that maybe they were. I already said...turf alone is not a formula for success. It is one piece to the puzzle. But you have to admit those statistics are a little compelling. Some schools have an easier time upgrading because of tax base. No doubt. But some schools just make it a priority...no matter what. That's all I'm saying. And like I said before...just figure in the cost of: mowing the field/practice field twice a week 8/9 months out of the year, fuel for mowers/weed eaters, equipment maintenance costs, painting the field plus paint, edging/weed eating around the fields, watering the fields 3/4 months out of the year, plus the cost of man hours to accomplish those things. Now take that number and multiply it by 10 or 15 years. Plus...what would the cost of missing 1, 2, or 3 days of preparation due to water/weather be? Or practicing on the gym floor to keep from tearing up the field. And don't forget baseball/softball can benefit from it also. And youth football... May not be as expensive as it seems. That's all I'm saying. I'm sure this will get a rebuttal as well.

Haven't you ever heard what it means to assume? I just happen to know a little bit about college athletics. And I know that MOST kids aren't good enough to play college ball. On any level.

I'm old. I was probably in bed....and certainly not concerned with this site. I'm just fortunate that I get to spend a little time in an office (finally) at work. But yes...the second list didn't do anything but prove a point. The point that statistically schools with turf did better than schools with grass. Even though that wasn't even a point I was trying to make..I guess it'll work.

By the way WOSgrad: "So, of the 31 schools that we cover that have artificial turf, 3 (9.7 %) played football in December" "Thus, of the 73 schools who play on grass, only 3 (4.1%) played in December " These are your findings...not mine. 9.7% of schools with turf played in December. 4.1% with grass....um....that's more than double. So...

I used Clinton or Sanders as a reference because of facts bouncing off of the argument. Of the last 50 state champions...43 of them happen to play on turf. I didn't make that up. That's a fact. Having a turf field is not a status symbol. And I've said several times before...that would be just the beginning anyway. Even with a facilities upgrade, I still would think setx is behind the times. Number of coaches, salary of coaches, salary of teachers, etc. There are a lot of things that go into it. Most of which are centered around money, yes. But there is a difference between spending money...and smart money spending. By the way...your findings do not bolster my case. A majority of setx schools are 4A and down...almost all of which play on grass fields. Of course the statistics will show favor to grass if they all play on grass. 4 schools in every district make playoffs so yeah....going to be a lot of schools with grass fields that are in. Really not the point. My original point was that it's not as economically dumb as people think. And even if it was (which it's not), WOS deserves nicer facilities just for being good. If any setx team could make a case for nicer facilities...it would be WOS. Unbelievable. How about one more list. How about setx schools that play on grass vs schools that play on turf? (playoffs).

Yikes...that's a long time to coach without making kids run. He may end up with a criminal investigation too.

Well.. I see I've stirred up a mess. Excellent. For the the record..I never said a turf field is the reason for winning a state title. I just said its a funny coincidence 43 out it the last 50 state champions happen to play on turf. I said the WOS community should provide those kids with a nice field. I also happen to think they're economically smart over time. I was met with the typical "we don't need one". Maybe you don't. I just think it would be nice. By the way...between fund balance and a bond. It wouldn't cost as much as people think. Oh gosh! A million dollars! .. That really isn't that much money over the time it would take to pay for it. I've heard of bonds increasing taxes in the neighborhood of $17 per year per 100K of property value. I'm talking bonds a lot more than the cost of a facilities upgrade. But whatever..I hope your grandkid's grandkids are still playing on that grass, if that's what you want.

I hope the guy does well. But I think this is a no win situation. We'll be having this conversation again in 2 years. It'll be some other guy and Lance Dale in the top 2 in 2018.

Of course. But sometimes facts or statistics just bounce off people. Similar to Bernie or Hillary voters.