Jump to content

Vidor is open !!


lcm93

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

DWAYNE DUBOIS
9 years 45-51-0
---staff, Vidor--
2013    Hardin-Jefferson     8-5-0 T
2014    Hardin-Jefferson  11-2-0 R
2015    Bridge City                7-4-0 T
2016    Bridge City                9-3-0
2017    Bridge City                1-7-0
2018    Hardin-Jefferson     2-8-0
2019    Hardin-Jefferson     1-9-0 F
2020    Hardin-Jefferson     5-5-0 T
2021    Hardin-Jefferson     1-8-0

ALVIN CREDEUR
7 years 34-39-0
2013    Lumberton       4-6-0
2014    Lumberton    11-2-0 C
2015    Lumberton      8-2-0 C
2016    Lumberton      5-5-0
2017    Lumberton      5-5-0
2018    Lumberton      1-9-0
2019    Lumberton     0-10-0

 

This is the hidden content, please

Credeur coached Lumberton back in 2007.

He hasn't coached at Lumberton since 2015 I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2023 at 8:02 AM, oldschool2 said:

There are always and will always be exceptions to the rule.  Especially when a school gets a run of D1 commits through the program.  Either way.. it's documented that household income, school tax base, and poverty correlate to success in athletics.  To ignore that is just naïve.  You should take a field trip to other areas of the state and look at what poor schools are competing with.  State of art facilities, immaculate neighborhoods, brand new businesses, etc.  Player A (6'4 220) has two working parents, attends summer camps/workouts around the country, has a dietician, has a personal trainer, has a private tutor, has 24hr access to the nicest facilities money can buy, has 3+ of the most nutritious meals imaginable that are specifically designed for health/performance, and has a team full of friends/teammates with the same exact life.  Player B (6'4 220) has to work summers/weekends to help around the house, can't afford sports camp, eats whatever happens to be in the house, lifts/trains alone in a 30 year old weight room when he can find a ride, has zero teammates willing to put in extra work with him.

Who has the head start, Player A or Player B?  If you don't think that and similar scenarios play out across the state... you're either ignorant or stubborn.

This is the hidden content, please

So is there any correlation to athleticism???  

I ask because people whine about "money always wins" which is totally false, but never seem to acknowledge that many "poor" school have overwhelming athleticism. Isn't that a huge, huge advantage? Look at North Shore, one of the most impoverished communities around, they won 3 of the last 4 6A Championships. 

Your example should compare a 5'10", 185lb "rich kid" who runs a 5.3 with a 15in. vertical, to a 6'1" 190lb "poor kid" who runs a 4.5 with a 22in. vertical. Who would you start? 

        

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Separation Scientist said:

 

Your example should compare a 5'10", 185lb "rich kid" who runs a 5.3 with a 15in. vertical, to a 6'1" 190lb "poor kid" who runs a 4.5 with a 22in. vertical. Who would you start? 

        

The 5'10" kid will probably have a hard time getting playing time anywhere with that 5.3 40. 😂 I don't think that's the norm 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

The 5'10" kid will probably have a hard time getting playing time anywhere with that 5.3 40. 😂 I don't think that's the norm 

You are just trying to poke a hole in my example.  Let me rephrase for YOU:

Your example should compare a 5'11", 190lb "rich kid" who runs a 5.1 with a 16in. vertical, to a 6'1" 190lb "poor kid" who runs a 4.5 with a 22in. vertical. Who would you start?

Happy now?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Separation Scientist said:

You are just trying to poke a hole in my example.  Let me rephrase for YOU:

Your example should compare a 5'11", 190lb "rich kid" who runs a 5.1 with a 16in. vertical, to a 6'1" 190lb "poor kid" who runs a 4.5 with a 22in. vertical. Who would you start?

Happy now?  

 

Maybe that'll get it done in 6 man 😂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

DWAYNE DUBOIS
9 years 45-51-0
---staff, Vidor--
2013    Hardin-Jefferson     8-5-0 T
2014    Hardin-Jefferson  11-2-0 R
2015    Bridge City                7-4-0 T
2016    Bridge City                9-3-0
2017    Bridge City                1-7-0
2018    Hardin-Jefferson     2-8-0
2019    Hardin-Jefferson     1-9-0 F
2020    Hardin-Jefferson     5-5-0 T
2021    Hardin-Jefferson     1-8-0

ALVIN CREDEUR
7 years 34-39-0
2006    Lumberton       4-6-0
2007    Lumberton    11-2-0 C
2008    Lumberton      8-2-0 C
2009    Lumberton      5-5-0
2010    Lumberton      5-5-0
2011    Lumberton      1-9-0
2012    Lumberton     0-10-0

 

This is the hidden content, please

These would be perfect hires for Mathews. If he hired a good coach that had instant success with this program using a different offensive strategy ,then that would prove his philosophy was wrong all along. He knows what he's doing plus all the homeboy assistants get to keep their jobs. 

    He was below .500 doing it his way. It's time for him let it go man, he had his chance and it didn't work.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Separation Scientist said:

So is there any correlation to athleticism???  

I ask because people whine about "money always wins" which is totally false, but never seem to acknowledge that many "poor" school have overwhelming athleticism. Isn't that a huge, huge advantage? Look at North Shore, one of the most impoverished communities around, they won 3 of the last 4 6A Championships. 

Your example should compare a 5'10", 185lb "rich kid" who runs a 5.3 with a 15in. vertical, to a 6'1" 190lb "poor kid" who runs a 4.5 with a 22in. vertical. Who would you start? 

        

In a way, it does correlate to athleticism.  Because players with access to money, state of the art facilities, personal trainers, proper nutrition, adequate sleep habits,  etc. will likely be in better physical shape than a kid without access to those.  It's not the RULE, but it definitely makes it more likely. 

By the way, and I've been clear about this, it's referring to a LIKLIHOOD.  There are always and will always be exceptions.  I don't understand why that's so hard to understand. By the way.. which years are you talking about? 20-21 was Austin Westlake and Katy.  21-22 was Northshore and Austin Westlake.  Include the 5A champions... Aledo, Guyer, Katy Paetow... you not familiar with the areas?  Even if you're correct about 3 out of 4 including this year, look at the last 10 years.  Or 15.. list the football state champions for 4A/5A/6A and tell me the percentage of those communities that have an average household income higher than the state average.  Not to mention the state champs in all other sports.  If you don't see that communities with money have a higher likelihood of success in athletics (not to be confused with athleticism), then your eyes are closed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

In a way, it does correlate to athleticism.  Because players with access to money, state of the art facilities, personal trainers, proper nutrition, adequate sleep habits,  etc. will likely be in better physical shape than a kid without access to those.  It's not the RULE, but it definitely makes it more likely. 

By the way, and I've been clear about this, it's referring to a LIKLIHOOD.  There are always and will always be exceptions.  I don't understand why that's so hard to understand. By the way.. which years are you talking about? 20-21 was Austin Westlake and Katy.  21-22 was Northshore and Austin Westlake.  Include the 5A champions... Aledo, Guyer, Katy Paetow... you not familiar with the areas?  Even if you're correct about 3 out of 4 including this year, look at the last 10 years.  Or 15.. list the football state champions for 4A/5A/6A and tell me the percentage of those communities that have an average household income higher than the state average.  Not to mention the state champs in all other sports.  If you don't see that communities with money have a higher likelihood of success in athletics (not to be confused with athleticism), then your eyes are closed. 

Why don't you use some local examples.  Say.... WOS and Newton.  Certainly there must have been some affluent school districts in 3A and 4A during those years, right?

People use the "facilities" argument as an excuse. I mean, now that you mention it, Newton claimed that they lost that one year because they had to ride Yellow Dogs to Dallas and the competition (Lord, the Competition) got to ride charters. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

Why don't you use some local examples.  Say.... WOS and Newton.  Certainly there must have been some affluent school districts in 3A and 4A during those years, right?

People use the "facilities" argument as an excuse. I mean, now that you mention it, Newton claimed that they lost that one year because they had to ride Yellow Dogs to Dallas and the competition (Lord, the Competition) got to ride charters. 

 

Even though money can have less impact the smaller the classification... because one or a handful of stud players can change an entire season.. Let's see who knocked out Newton and WOS going back to 2010

10-11 Newton- C.H. Yoe
11-12 Newton- Crockett
12-13 Newton- C.H. Yoe
13-14 Newton- White Oak
14-15 Newton- Waskom
15-16 Newton- Franklin
16-17 Newton- Arp
17-18 Newton- State Title over Gunter
18-19 Newton- State Title over Canadian
19-20 Newton- Daingerfield
20-21 Newton- Omaha Paul Pewitt
21-22 Newton- Waskom
22-23 Newton- Harmony

10-11 WOS- Brookshire-Royal
11-12 WOS- Coldspring
12-13 WOS- Navasota
13-14 WOS- Carthage
14-15 WOS- Gilmer
15-16 WOS- State Title over Celina
16-17 WOS- State Title over Sweetwater
17-18 WOS- Pleasant Grove
18-19 WOS- Silsbee
19-20 WOS- Silsbee
20-21 WOS- China Spring
21-22 WOS- China Spring
22-23 WOS- Bellville

You really wanna compare facilities of many of these schools that made them exit?  Not all.. but many..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Mr. Thornton Melon said:

These would be perfect hires for Mathews. If he hired a good coach that had instant success with this program using a different offensive strategy ,then that would prove his philosophy was wrong all along. He knows what he's doing plus all the homeboy assistants get to keep their jobs. 

    He was below .500 doing it his way. It's time for him let it go man, he had his chance and it didn't work.

 

 

 

 

Offensive strategy does not dictate success 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, oldschool2 said:

In a way, it does correlate to athleticism.  Because players with access to money, state of the art facilities, personal trainers, proper nutrition, adequate sleep habits,  etc. will likely be in better physical shape than a kid without access to those.  It's not the RULE, but it definitely makes it more likely. 

By the way, and I've been clear about this, it's referring to a LIKLIHOOD.  There are always and will always be exceptions.  I don't understand why that's so hard to understand. By the way.. which years are you talking about? 20-21 was Austin Westlake and Katy.  21-22 was Northshore and Austin Westlake.  Include the 5A champions... Aledo, Guyer, Katy Paetow... you not familiar with the areas?  Even if you're correct about 3 out of 4 including this year, look at the last 10 years.  Or 15.. list the football state champions for 4A/5A/6A and tell me the percentage of those communities that have an average household income higher than the state average.  Not to mention the state champs in all other sports.  If you don't see that communities with money have a higher likelihood of success in athletics (not to be confused with athleticism), then your eyes are closed. 

So what exactly are you proposing to help the "poor" teams loaded with D1 athletes, so it will be "fair enough" for them to play affluent schools? 

What exactly do you think should be done? Endlessly whining about finacial disparaties is not accomplishing anything. Give us specific examples what you think should be done to help out the poor North Shores, WOS's, and Newtons of the world. Do you suggest the UIL should provide cash payments to help out the "poor" 4.5 40 kids? Should the UIL assign a nutritionist to each "poor" athlete? Maybe a state of the art NFL type training facility be built at every "poor" school? Tell us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Separation Scientist said:

So what exactly are you proposing to help the "poor" teams loaded with D1 athletes, so it will be "fair enough" for them to play affluent schools? 

What exactly do you think should be done? Endlessly whining about finacial disparaties is not accomplishing anything. Give us specific examples what you think should be done to help out the poor North Shores, WOS's, and Newtons of the world. Do you suggest the UIL should provide cash payments to help out the "poor" 4.5 40 kids? Should the UIL assign a nutritionist to each "poor" athlete? Maybe a state of the art NFL type training facility be built at every "poor" school? Tell us. 

I'm not proposing anything.  I don't know that anything can be done, actually.  In fact, one could argue that it was all of the things I mentioned that money buys that made it possible for kids without the God given athleticism to be competitive.  It just got out of control in that direction.

Suggestions?  I don't have any.  There will always be haves and have nots unfortunately. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's exactly right. ^^^ 

Life, and sports are not fair. Some are blessed with speed, some are not. Some have size, some don't. Some have new facilities, some don't. Some have extra money, some don't. Some have better families, some don't. Some have higher IQ's, some don't. It goes on and on.

That's just the way the world ticks. I don't see the point of beating the issue to death. Its general knowledge differences exist across the board. The best thing any player and school can do is take responsibility, maximize whatever you can, and live with the result.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

   NO WAY Crueder is even being considered. He got booted from the OC position because he screwed up the offense soOoo bad and it still hasn't recovered. He did some good things at Lumberton for a couple years but he had some great players with Hannah , Beard & company. After those players graduated he was never successful again.

  DuBois had two good years in Vidor but he had some great players (EX: Montana Quirante & Company). He also had a few good years at HJ but he had some really good players and never emulated the success after they graduated. 

 Mathews having a losing record and recommending other coaches with losing records is preposterous  He's sabotaging the process if this is the case. He shouldn't have a say.

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

    45,991
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    praise086
    Newest Member
    praise086
    Joined



  • Posts

    • Anahuac will be much better than some of those listed in the top 25. It will not take long for them to be ranked. 
    • Slightly more black than white in Section 8.    This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up But that’s completely understandable based on the percentage of single parent households  in those respective communities. 
    • How does the doorman’s decision make Trump a racist?
    • But this is the type of thing I’m talking about. Are black people to stupid to get a photo ID? That’s what liberals would have us believe. Requiring everybody to provide a photo ID when voting is discrimination towards blacks? Gimme a break.    It’s a proven fact that black people commit the majority of violent crimes in America, despite making up only 13 percent of the population. But racism is the reason that there are more black people in jail for committing violent crimes? Duh.    The majority of individual wealth is comprised of our homes… but it’s exceptionally hard for single moms of any race to achieve home ownership. When 75% of AA kids are born to single moms, it’s not surprising that more black kids grow up in rent houses and apartments.    I know a young man that dropped out of high school, got arrested a couple times, has three baby mama’s did some actual time, likes to smoke a lot of weed, has neck tattoos and can’t speak the King’s English. You’d say “well, that’s institutional racism, the legacy of our original sin of slavery, and the effects of growing up in poverty.” I’d say, “hold up… you’re completely wrong-this kid is white and he’s just an eff-up.”  But you give no possibility to the idea that a lot of problems are self-inflicted, not the ol’ racist boogey man.    And there wasn’t a current racist policy in that article. There was a lot of conjecture on the part of the author, trying to pin outcomes on racism, without a single shred of evidence, other than the outcomes.    Racist laws and policies against minorities have been illegal since 1964. You can’t point out a single policy that’s discriminatory to minorities in 2024. Racism is imagined at this point. 
    • There are black and whites on Section 8. Probably more white people.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...