9-4A D1

[Reagan]

47 minutes ago, BBfan061 said:

Bingo!

Curious:  You don't think much of PNG's staff either?  

[89Falcon]

1 hour ago, Reagan said:

A famous coach once said:  Your record as a coach will tell you who you are as a coach.  So, is it always the coach (usually) and always the player's fault (usually not).  But I'd say over 90% is coaching.  It's hard to argue that through 27 years, Vidor has had 2 coaches with losing records.  Again, never had the athletes?!  But, you are right -- nothing is 100%!  Thank you for your opinion!

There is an unlimited number of examples with coaches "winning with good players, losing with bad players". Is Bill Belichick a good coach? He seems to be struggling at NC and ultimately flamed out in NE after he lost certain players. 

There is another saying that 1000+ famous coaches have made as well (since you like quotes): "It is about Jimmies and Joes, not Xs and Os".   

[Reagan]

27 minutes ago, 89Falcon said:

There is an unlimited number of examples with coaches "winning with good players, losing with bad players". Is Bill Belichick a good coach? He seems to be struggling at NC and ultimately flamed out in NE after he lost certain players. 

There is another saying that 1000+ famous coaches have made as well (since you like quotes): "It is about Jimmies and Joes, not Xs and Os".   

I only like quotes that actually make sense!  

PS -- he's only been at NC for one year.  Great coaches building a winning program is a process.  But if it hasn't been done it in 7 years, it's probably not gonna happen.  That's why, if a school is serious, you look elsewhere!  Again, nothing is 100%.

[BBfan061]

42 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Curious:  You don't think much of PNG's staff either?  

Awesome staff… doesn’t mean they go to another school and start winning without the jimmys and joes.

[Reagan]

Just now, BBfan061 said:

Awesome staff… doesn’t mean they go to another school and start winning without the jimmys and joes.

Fascinating thought:  They are good -- but...

Let me ask you another easy one:  You don't think Surratt at Carthage could win anywhere else?  

[BBtater984]

22 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Fascinating thought:  They are good -- but...

Let me ask you another easy one:  You don't think Surratt at Carthage could win anywhere else?  

You remind me of one of those people who can't accept when they are wrong. They keep trying to prove their theory, and all it does is dig a deeper hole. Just stop because you know damn good and well that PNG's staff, Carthage's staff, is not rolling into Vidor and winning WITHOUT the help of Jimmy's and Joe's transferring in. 

[89Falcon]

35 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Fascinating thought:  They are good -- but...

Let me ask you another easy one:  You don't think Surratt at Carthage could win anywhere else?  

He would not win at "Huntington" or "Tarkington". 

[AggiesAreWe]

4 minutes ago, 89Falcon said:

He would not win at "Huntington" or "Tarkington". 

Or Hull-Daisetta, or High Island, or Colmesneil, etc etc.

[Reagan]

14 minutes ago, 89Falcon said:

He would not win at "Huntington" or "Tarkington". 

Maybe not right at first.  But what in his past history of being a head coach would make you think he couldn't do it within 7 years?  Personally, i think it would be sooner.  But that's my opinion.  

[Reagan]

10 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Or Hull-Daisetta, or High Island, or Colmesneil, etc etc.

Read my awesome answer to 1989falcon.  (grin)

[89Falcon]

15 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Maybe not right at first.  But what in his past history of being a head coach would make you think he couldn't do it within 7 years?  Personally, i think it would be sooner.  But that's my opinion.  

He would have an overwhelming losing record. 

[Reagan]

1 minute ago, 89Falcon said:

He would have an overwhelming losing record. 

His record as a head coach would not dictate this statement.  Carthage: No State Titles before Surratt -- 11 Championships after he arrived.  So, I'm gonna say you have the intelligence to not say that the right kids only started to show up when he did.  So, in my opinion -- it's all on him!  In the 82 years prior to Surratt, they never had the athletes to win a State Title?  Not once?!  I just don't think it's a coincidence that Surratt was the one able to do it.  And if he went anywhere else he could do the same thing.  

 

[BBtater984]

6 minutes ago, Reagan said:

His record as a head coach would not dictate this statement.  Carthage: No State Titles before Surratt -- 11 Championships after he arrived.  So, I'm gonna say you have the intelligence to not say that the right kids only started to show up when he did.  So, in my opinion -- it's all on him!  In the 82 years prior to Surratt, they never had the athletes to win a State Title?  Not once?!  I just don't think it's a coincidence that Surratt was the one able to do it.  And if he went anywhere else he could do the same thing.  

 

And every kid that has played for him during those 11 state titles has all been from Carthage? No extra Jimmys and Joes... all from Carthage

[Reagan]

6 minutes ago, BBtater984 said:

And every kid that has played for him during those 11 state titles has all been from Carthage? No extra Jimmys and Joes... all from Carthage

Well, can't 100% answer that.  I'm sure his winning had some move in.  But enough over the years to help him win 11 State Titles where none were won before?  What's interesting, this past year they were still in 4A D2.  Seems like with all these impressive move ins they'd be quicky moving up in classification don't you think?  Let me also remind you, that in the previous 82 years, what, they had no move ins of any significance that would propel them to a State Title?  Not even one?!  

[BBtater984]

6 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Well, can't 100% answer that.  I'm sure his winning had some move in.  But enough over the years to help him win 11 State Titles where none were won before?  What's interesting, this past year they were still in 4A D2.  Seems like with all these impressive move ins they'd be quicky moving up in classification don't you think?  Let me also remind you, that in the previous 82 years, what, they had no move ins of any significance that would propel them to a State Title?  Not even one?!  

Ohhhhhh No... Your 7 year rule is written in stone. It's 110% factual information. So, you can't say "can't 100% answer that" 

[89Falcon]

48 minutes ago, Reagan said:

His record as a head coach would not dictate this statement.  Carthage: No State Titles before Surratt -- 11 Championships after he arrived.  So, I'm gonna say you have the intelligence to not say that the right kids only started to show up when he did.  So, in my opinion -- it's all on him!  In the 82 years prior to Surratt, they never had the athletes to win a State Title?  Not once?!  I just don't think it's a coincidence that Surratt was the one able to do it.  And if he went anywhere else he could do the same thing.  

 

Carthage was competitive long before Suratt arrived and he has done a great job of transforming a perennial winner to a perennial state champion. He also benefitted from the watering down of the classifications. Huntington has never had a single winning season in school history. There is not a single chance in hell that he would do the same at Huntington. 

**I suspect you are being silly at this point. I dont believe that you believe what you are saying. 

[Reagan]

36 minutes ago, 89Falcon said:

Carthage was competitive long before Suratt arrived and he has done a great job of transforming a perennial winner to a perennial state champion. He also benefitted from the watering down of the classifications. Huntington has never had a single winning season in school history. There is not a single chance in hell that he would do the same at Huntington. 

**I suspect you are being silly at this point. I dont believe that you believe what you are saying. 

Talk about a silly statement.  You don't know that.  If he wasn't a championship coach then that statement would actually have validity.  So, I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.

[Reagan]

52 minutes ago, BBtater984 said:

Ohhhhhh No... Your 7 year rule is written in stone. It's 110% factual information. So, you can't say "can't 100% answer that" 

I'm having a hard time understanding this in relation to what I posed to you.  I didn't say anything about the 7 year rule in that statement.  What's 110% factual info?