Jump to content

Buna vs East Chambers Reg Quarterfinal Predictions


TopDawG52

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, buchorn2005 said:

Hey About a week ago, by undecided, does that mean that one school wants to play on Monday and the other wants to play on Tuesday or is it just taking a while to find a location?

 

Buna coaches left early last night, and Sutherland was just going to call today. I know they a re close on closing the deal, just working out details with venue. Will know within the next hour or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ECBucFan

The team that plays the best Tuesday will advance.

Personally I don't think the venue will be a deciding factor, but rebounding, ball handling, free throw shooting, accurate passing and defense will.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, MOSSHILL said:

Buna will beat EC if they are able to do two things:

1) prevent turnovers

2) hit the 3 in high percentage and (at least 10-12 makes)

I have EC winning this game by 10 plus.

I hope your right, but beating a team 3 times is difficult! We just need to act like this is the first game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, About a week ago said:

The coaches are in agreement it's a matter of the venue's details, and yes the game will be played on Tuesday. Sutherland and Whitmire are good friends, no issues between them!

Where is the game going to be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is just a little too much conspiracy theory going on here.  Folks need to remember that this match up wasn't finalized until late Saturday night.  Thus, that left Coaches Sutherland and Whitmire trying to find a venue and dealing with entities whose regular office hours don't begin until, well, right about now. 

Don't worry, they'll find a place that will be close enough to where the supporters of either team, or for that matter anyone in the area the wants to attend, will not travel all that far and you'll know about it in plenty of time to get there.

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...