Jump to content

Nederland VS. West Orange...


Reagan

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, L-Train11 said:

I think that would be a useless game for both teams.. but I've seen crazier things happen, for example Crosby playing LCM this week.... so who knows!

I don’t see it useless. Your trying to get your team more reps. The better your prepared the better you will do in the playoffs. You have to realize we will face north east Texas teams in the first round in Carthage Henderson and Kilgore and they play good football there. Crosby defense is suspect right now so there coach is giving them more reps imo. I believe WOS will play them. There district is weak and they will need experience. Nederland will need to see one of the best defenses in the area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, LCM17 said:

I don’t see it useless. Your trying to get your team more reps. The better your prepared the better you will do in the playoffs. You have to realize we will face north east Texas teams in the first round in Carthage Henderson and Kilgore and they play good football there. Crosby defense is suspect right now so there coach is giving them more reps imo. I believe WOS will play them. There district is weak and they will need experience. Nederland will need to see one of the best defenses in the area.

Good points. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, WOSgrad said:

Playing the Bulldogs on that date would probably benefit the Mustangs a lot more this season than if it were played on its original date.

I agree with that. Also, some say because it's in the middle of district, why risk the players? Well, I guess you could do a 4 quarter controlled scrimmage??? Sounds strange but this season hasn't started out exactly "normal" either. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, kicker 2.0 said:

I agree with that. Also, some say because it's in the middle of district, why risk the players? Well, I guess you could do a 4 quarter controlled scrimmage??? Sounds strange but this season hasn't started out exactly "normal" either. Lol

Well, UIL rules prohibit a scrimmage once you have played your first game, so it would have to be an actual game.

But having Nederland at this point gives the Mustangs the same things that the Silsbee matchup does.  A team that can throw the ball as well as running it.  Otherwise, this Friday will be the last time that the Mustangs will see a team that does not run either the Slot or Wing T until they start the playoffs.  They will need reps against a passing offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, WOSgrad said:

Well, UIL rules prohibit a scrimmage once you have played your first game, so it would have to be an actual game.

But having Nederland at this point gives the Mustangs the same things that the Silsbee matchup does.  A team that can throw the ball as well as running it.  Otherwise, this Friday will be the last time that the Mustangs will see a team that does not run either the Slot or Wing T until they start the playoffs.  They will need reps against a passing offense.

I completely agree with needing Nederland to break the "wing T" curse. Lol. What if they called it a "practice"? Or maybe because of the circumstances, the UIL would grant a waiver??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This game works for both teams if no injuries occur. If somebody they depend on gets hurt some people may view this as a dumb. Personally I wouldn't doi it because I rather avoid the injury possibility on a game that doesn't matter for either team. Plus that late in district why is anyone worried about a non district opponent from a lower classification. All for it in the beginning of the season if Harvey never arrived

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...