Jump to content

PN-G vs Angleton poll


PN-G Angleton Poll  

74 members have voted

  1. 1. PN-G vs Angleton Who wins?

    • PN-G by 10+
      28
    • PN-G by less than 10
      38
    • Angleton by 10+
      1
    • Angleton by less than 10
      7


Recommended Posts

Angleton... much like Nederland has a playoff gear. I think they can slow the game down enough with their running game to disrupt PNG's rhythm, keep the score close and keep it from being an all out shoot. Angleton always has plenty of athletes to match up on D as well. I think this one can go either way, but I'll take PNG by 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To slow down our offense, Angleton is going to have to disrupt Morse. If he gets in a rhythm he will hurt you. MCZeal hand is still tender, but I think he'll see more playing time. McGough, also a Jr., has done a phenomenal job filling in. He is about the same size as Giblin. With McZeal at almost 100% Angleton will have to stay in Morse face. A lot of weapons on that WR core. Can we incorporate that Dayton bubble screen? Man that is a good play....also Cropper is peaking at the right time.

Rembert is playing at 100% at the right time. He was part of our injury bug early on. He goes from sideline to sideline with a lot of speed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should be an interesting match with our receivers. Giblin 6'3" Sulivan 6'1" McZeal 6'5" Mcgough 6'3" all are very athletic. They key for Angleton would be to put pressure on Morse. If you give time time he will tear you up. Robanadana, Yes I agree that Vidor wasn't really up to their last game. But I think by us playing against you guys over the years has helped us against the wing-t.

True dat. We run the slot well and you guys have faced it when we run it well or if we're off. I would still watch Angleton to do more than just line up and run the ball. Personally, I think we need to evolve our offense to match that style. Unlike Buddy Garrity, I'm sitting with the Indians this week. I'm numb to Cherokee after 50+ years of hearing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angleton... much like Nederland has a playoff gear. I think they can slow the game down enough with their running game to disrupt PNG's rhythm, keep the score close and keep it from being an all out shoot. Angleton always has plenty of athletes to match up on D as well. I think this one can go either way, but I'll take PNG by 3.

Dayt 1-3 vs Ang,won 2002.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why didn't McZeal play more last week? I think I saw him go in one time. PNG MLB #2 is a good football player. I like how PNG had him blitzing the Dayton QB.

not sure they want mczeal back. his back up looks pretty good and makes the routine plays. mczeal can't catch the easy ones but will make some circus catches. with a QB like morris i will stick with the guy who can make the routine plays. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have 2 teams in our district that run the T or a variation of it... Vidor and Lumberton... However they do it without the athletes that Angleton has.. That being said I've watched some film on Angleton and they have plenty of team speed.. Nothing is a gimme at this point.. It also appears Angleton has several athletes on defense, so it should be a good one... PNG runs a multiple and can take whatever the defense is willing to give us... We can pound it off tackle if needed or spread you out and throw it 30 times a game.. I see this as a highly competitive game and think the team that plays mistake free will win.. At this point everyone is battle tested and injury plagued.. It's next man up and hope you brung enough......

Disagree on athletes .  We played Angleton numerous times last 4/5 years quality fans / teams etc . athletes not better than our district but much like  Dogs & Indians they've been here a number of times know how to playoff and they will bring it . In the end I think Air Indian wears  them down --- too  much M AIR  . Indians by 7 . But down to the wire . 

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...