Jump to content

Woodville (39) @ Newton (44) - FINAL


jdawg03

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, jds82 said:

Hmmm I know this is probably against UIL rules, but my thought is that Woodville should take these last two non district games and rest (forfeit), figure out their identity as a team (coaches included) and start district play on a clean slate. What say ye???

There is nothing wrong with Woodville. They are a very good team and has played two consistently great programs back-to-back, while barely coming up short in both. The 0-2 record does not reflect a bad team by any means. Woodville will be just fine and will beat a lot of teams this year. Good job, Newton. This is a young team and will only get better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jds82 said:

Hmmm I know this is probably against UIL rules, but my thought is that Woodville should take these last two non district games and rest (forfeit), figure out their identity as a team (coaches included) and start district play on a clean slate. What say ye???

I say your being dramatic 😂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jds82 said:

Hmmm I know this is probably against UIL rules, but my thought is that Woodville should take these last two non district games and rest (forfeit), figure out their identity as a team (coaches included) and start district play on a clean slate. What say ye???

Absolutely not... The teams they played are perennial powerhouses where you like it or not which one is a defending champion and the other one has won a few recently.  Woodville played the 2 games on the schedule and for them to be hanging around in both games speaks a lot about them.  I've teased @Woodvillian1980 all night but I'm a realist and not a fool so DO NOT count them out as the rest of the schedule is "fairly easy" and that's start with Liberty next week and I will pay attention to that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TrojanWarrior08 said:

Absolutely not... The teams they played are perennial powerhouses where you like it or not which one is a defending champion and the other one has won a few recently.  Woodville played the 2 games on the schedule and for them to be hanging around in both games speaks a lot about them.  I've teased @Woodvillian1980 all night but I'm a realist and not a fool so DO NOT count them out as the rest of the schedule is "fairly easy" and that's start with Liberty next week and I will pay attention to that one.

I agree with you 100%. Playing top notch competition the first two games is no slouch. I would say about 90% of teams wouldn’t dare schedule back to back teams on the caliber of Franklin and Newton. It should bode well for Woodville down the stretch. I’m sure they’re not happy about the result but shouldn’t be discouraged. Keeping their focus and continuing to grow is what they need to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Woodvillian1980 said:

I just dont understand why you kick a on-side kick and give them a short field...smh.

I understand your point but I think it's pretty clear we had trouble stopping Newton's offense. Why not try an onside when we've had success with it in the past? Especially in a non district game that really doesn't count for anything other than bragging rights 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GATA! said:

Both teams fumbled, both teams had penalties, both teams had injuries, both teams took a kickoff to the house and both teams played hard! Great first showing for this young Newton team.

Newton definitely got some young gunz on that team. Freshman running back and lots of sophomores up front. Should be really good in the future 

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...