Jump to content

WO-S @PN-G


skipper

Recommended Posts

I understand the sentiment and to an extent I agree with it.  But there is just one problem in the execution of that sentiment in this case. 

Schools in this area do have the schools listed above as their opponents.  In fact, the very West Orange-Stark team which you claim would not be of any use in preparing Crosby for the post season is one of those area schools.  But, I don't see any of those teams on Crosby's schedule. 

Crosby has the 4-time defending 22-5A champ on the schedule. They also have Angleton, who went three deep last year, on the pre-district schedule.  For only having 2 non-district games it's hard to argue with those two. I'm sure there will be more quality non-district games on the schedule next year also. 

Look at Crosby's non-district schede for about the last decade, we haven't played down a single time and other than maybe Willis there's not a single slouch on there. 

Like I said, WOS is on Foster's schedule out of necessity for Foster have 5 non-district games. We'll see how that game goes this year now that Foster can score. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, the sentiment isn't matched with action.  Y'all get a pass on Angleton as at the time they were scheduled, they were a pretty good team.  However, this Nederland team that is now one of the as, you say it, powers, that Crosby looks to prepare them for the post season happens to be the same Nederland that two weeks ago (and to some since then) was merely the lead school of a district that was so weak that you and the Cougar faithful thought would be swept in bi-district.  So to go from bi-district also-ran to a power capable of being among those names that you mentioned above in a period of less than two weeks......NOW THAT IS A TRANSFORMATION!!!!

And the reason that Foster is on West Orange-Stark's schedule is a little more simplistic than you held it out.....they simply asked Foster to play them.  I do not expect WO-S to be favored in that one, but you are correct, we will see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, the sentiment isn't matched with action.  Y'all get a pass on Angleton as at the time they were scheduled, they were a pretty good team.  However, this Nederland team that is now one of the as, you say it, powers, that Crosby looks to prepare them for the post season happens to be the same Nederland that two weeks ago (and to some since then) was merely the lead school of a district that was so weak that you and the Cougar faithful thought would be swept in bi-district.  So to go from bi-district also-ran to a power capable of being among those names that you mentioned above in a period of less than two weeks......NOW THAT IS A TRANSFORMATION!!!!

And the reason that Foster is on West Orange-Stark's schedule is a little more simplistic than you held it out.....they simply asked Foster to play them.  I do not expect WO-S to be favored in that one, but you are correct, we will see.

When Ned was put on the schedule during the '12 re-alignment they were coming off a 3rd round appearance. During '12 and '13 while they were on the schedule they won the most games of any 5A team in the coverage area along with SC. If a team in your class wins 33 games in 3 years and wants to play you and say "no", it'll probably be considered ducking them. I'm sure that's part of the reason they're on the schedule for the last alignment. 

Wait until you see the non-district schedule for the next re-alignment. 

If Foster didn't need a non-district game in week 6 the Mustangs wouldn't be on the schedule. They were just the best team available while everyone else has been in district play for two weeks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,968
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    yielder
    Newest Member
    yielder
    Joined



  • Posts

    • Trump walks to the beat of a different drummer so he could very likely pick a person that is on no one’s radar. Going by typical political logic, assuming that a VP pick might bring 0.5%-1% votes, who should it be? A half to one percent is not much but in a potentially razor thin election, a couple of thousand votes in a state could decide the presidency. Biden won AZ by just over 10,000 votes. The most recent Beaumont mayoral election, where almost no one votes, had over 15,000 votes cast. In GA it was 12,000 votes and Biden did not even get 50%. In WI it was 20,000 and again Biden didn’t get to 50%.  There are other states in that area of percent point difference. How important? If any two AZ, GA and WI flip, Trump would have won. So while the VP probably never matters…. can it this time? I think that it could. What then does the VP pick bring to the table? FL and SC were both won by Trump in 2020 so a favored son vote for Rubio or Scott won’t help Trump. Both are in a fairly comfortable position within the conservative community so they will neither hurt nor help with strong conservative voters.  What about the few fence riders that could and likely will determine the election by either sticking with Biden or switching from the last election? What about the people who did not vote in the last election, but may come out to vote in this one just to support the VP candidate? Could Scott sway a percentage point or two from Black support? Could Rubio help draw a percentage point or two of Hispanic support? Possibly on both counts. Like I already mentioned, they won’t help in their own states because Trump already won those in 2020. I personally think that either would actually do a good job as president (although VP picks are about the politics of being elected and not the “best” possible president) and might be the difference in a few votes but a few votes more is all that is needed.  Or…. My outlier, Tulsi Gabbard.  She had some decent support when are ran for the presidency in the Democrat primary. Could some people follow her because they support her and not necessarily the party? I’m sure that’s true for all candidates. Could she bring female support? As a strong mentally and physically person and a member of the military who was deployed into a combat zone into Iraq. Then she went to OCS and became an officer, then deployed to Kuwait. Can that military history, including deployment into a war swing some votes? As of late, she has been on a one person tirade against Biden and the Democrats. Let’s remember that Ronald Reagan was a Democrat and so was Texas governor John Connally. Connally was not only a Democrat governor in Texas but also Secretary of the Navy under JFK. Both ended up switching to the Republican Party so there is a fairly strong history of former Democrats switching parties and being successful, all the way up to the presidency. Gabbard is a pretty fiery campaigner and doesn’t mince her words. She would really be a thorn in the Democrats’ hopes and has the inside knowledge of the party. Could she potentially swing more votes than Scott or Rubio? I think so. But…. I don’t think that Trump would pick her and I’m not sure that she would accept if offered. Her odds of being Trump's pick are at about 1%.  Scott or Rubio at about 10%. Trump being Trump, will choose someone who no one has ever heard of. 
    • So biden's a creepy old pedophile after all...shocker! But that's where the smart votes are landing.
    • You’re quibbling over the word “most”.  I agree that the UK is our most important military ally but we have overwhelming other support from Europe through NATO.   What other support do we have in the Middle East?  What are the “most” important issues? Military strength or intelligence that might head off the need for military action? It’s certainly debatable.  I honestly wouldn’t argue with any points on which if the most critical to our interests. I am sure that people can make valid arguments from different points of view. Military? The UK. Middle East intelligence? Israel.  As far as Israel, SmashMouth said that they “may very well be” the most important. ”May be” is not an adamant statement but a suggestion. They might be… depending on what the discussion is about. Worrying about the word “most” (especially “may be”) seems to be the definition of trivial. 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...