Jump to content

Kirbyville At BC Predictions


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think in the mud bowl tonight this becomes a low scoring game. My prediction

Bridge City 14

Kirbyville 07

Oh and Kballa which year do you play? :oops:

ALL TIME SERIES

YEAR BC Kirbyville Series

1956 00 38............0-1 K'ville

1960 14 20............0-2 K'ville

1961 26 00............1-2 K'ville

1992 21 07............2-2 TIED

1993 33 12............3-2 Bridge City

2000 42 09............4-2 Bridge City

2001 22 00............5-2 Bridge City

2004 30 14............6-2 Bridge City

2005 40 12............7-2 Bridge City

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YEAR BC Kirbyville Series

1956 00 38............0-1 K'ville

1960 14 20............0-2 K'ville

1961 26 00............1-2 K'ville

1992 21 07............2-2 TIED

1993 33 12............3-2 Bridge City

2000 42 09............4-2 Bridge City

2001 22 00............5-2 Bridge City

2004 30 14............6-2 Bridge City

2005 40 12............7-2 Bridge City

2006 27 12............7-3 K'ville

looks like ol kville balla was right....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YEAR BC Kirbyville Series

1956 00 38............0-1 K'ville

1960 14 20............0-2 K'ville

1961 26 00............1-2 K'ville

1992 21 07............2-2 TIED

1993 33 12............3-2 Bridge City

2000 42 09............4-2 Bridge City

2001 22 00............5-2 Bridge City

2004 30 14............6-2 Bridge City

2005 40 12............7-2 Bridge City

2006 27 12............7-3 K'ville

looks like ol kville balla was right....

The series is now 7-3 Bridge City. Kirbyville has not won 7 games in the series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, balla. When are you going to answer the question "What years did you play for Kville?" You ashamed? You keep ducking the question. Don't be afraid, little man. The truth will set you free! Fact is, you could not get the job done when you were a running back for Kville.

Trying to heal your pain through the performance of Pierce Rhodes is pretty pathetic, don't you think? No matter how good the Cats are, you remain a loser. That has to be hard for you, I know, but see if you can't get over it.

From the posts that I have read from you, I suspect that when you played, Bridge City and Silsbee must have broke it off in you! :lol: That's why you got it bad for those guys, huh?

C'mon balla, what years were you the RB for Kville?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 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...