Jump to content

Hardin 19 Kountze 14/Final


WOSgrad

Recommended Posts

Kountze was eliminated from playoff contention tonight.

Hardin must win two more games to get the 4th spot.

Teams yet to be played: Anahuac/Buna/EC/Kirbyville

If: Woodville loses to Kountze, Hardin still has a shot to get in, even with only 1 win of those 4 games.

The lost to Woodville hurts a little, because we gave that game away.

Hardin could easily be 5-1 right now, but that's not the case. We still have a lot of football left to be played.

This team was expected to finish last and Stark has them competing every week.

Grayland did not play tonight, but he didn't play much vs. EC last week either. "pulled muscle"

Great game. The crowd finally got behind the Hornets tonight and for some reason, that's a tough thing to ask for.

Let's keep it going in the right direction, Hardin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grayland should sit out one more week at least to let the leg heel. I feel sorry for our boys, they definitely have the talent without him but they are lacking one very very crucial part. Hopefully they can pull a win off next week, get Grayland and the running back healthy and make a run at going undefeated from hear on out. That's pretty much the only chance I see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as Woodville beats Anahuac and Warren and Hardin loses to EC, Kirbyville, and Buna, Woodville will have that forth spot. The only way Hardin can win that forth spot is if they beat EC, Buna, or Kirbyville. Kountze can win it by beating Buna and Woodville. Woodville will win it with a win or loss against Kountze as long as Hardin doesn't beat Buna, EC, or Kirbyville. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, head to head comes into play, EW #1

 

Hardin must win two of next four games.

Hardin needs Kountze to beat Woodville.

Those things happen and Hardin is the 4th seed.

Still a lot of football to be played though.

 

Could come down to last game of season. Buna at Hardin in Week 10

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

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined


  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...