Jump to content

Crosby 54 Port Neches-Groves 7/FINAL


WOSgrad

Recommended Posts

  • WOSgrad changed the title to Crosby 54 Port Neches-Groves 7/FINAL
12 minutes ago, Rez Ipsa said:

I blame coaching. I'm a massive Faircloth fan, but this is a complete breakdown of fundamental football. PNG has got to start playing the best players both ways, and get back to a tough style of aggressive, disciplined football. There is no reason we can't be excellent at offense and at least competent on defense. 

Well to be honest, you only scored 7 points on the 1st team defense so I’m not sure that woulda helped tonight!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CougarCal said:

Well to be honest, you only scored 7 points on the 1st team defense so I’m not sure that woulda helped tonight!

Well, overall there needs to be improvement. And even with only 7 points on our end, we could at least hold the other team to 7 points. That would make a big difference. Remember last year when ya'll won by like 5 because of a decent defense? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rez Ipsa said:

Well, overall there needs to be improvement. And even with only 7 points on our end, we could at least hold the other team to 7 points. That would make a big difference. Remember last year when ya'll won by like 5 because of a decent defense? 

Did you have players going both ways last year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CougarCal said:

Did you have players going both ways last year?

Are you scrutinizing the concept of players going both ways? Crosby had players going both ways tonight. I'm not saying teams should absolutely always have two-way players, but only that the team should play the person in the position that most makes them able to win. And PNG doesn't appear interested in that concept at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rez Ipsa said:

Are you scrutinizing the concept of players going both ways? Crosby had players going both ways tonight. I'm not saying teams should absolutely always have two-way players, but only that the team should play the person in the position that most makes them able to win. And PNG doesn't appear interested in that concept at all. 

If you noticed the one kid Crosby had going both ways was cramping and came up a little gimpy several times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CougarCal said:

If you noticed the one kid Crosby had going both ways was cramping and came up a little gimpy several times.

Yeah, it's not always ideal. But even without playing kids both ways, there are so many ways PNG could improve its tackling. It's not an effort problem. The PNG players literally do not know how to tackle. They seem to be planting their feet and hoping to just hold on, which is why there are so many broken tackles - You don't tackle with your fingers, you tackle with a your body and with legs that don't stop driving. The PNG defense is playing flat-footed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CougarCal said:

If you noticed the one kid Crosby had going both ways was cramping and came up a little gimpy several times.

Another thought is I've observed teams who just insert a two-way player in certain situations - Like the way Crosby did tonight, or Nederland (which, if I'm not mistaken, uses Fuselier both ways sometimes). Just to plug in a little extra skill in key moments. 

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...