Jump to content

#20 East Chambers vs Poth


Recommended Posts

Guest ECBucFan
Not a lot of info out there about Poth. They are 19-8 and 9-4 in district, 2nd place.

Yoakum      78-75  W
La Vernia  39-37 W
Medina      47-39 W
Cigarroa    56-40 W
Medina V.  50-45 W
Episcopal,  52-49 L
Pleasanton 58-38 L
Goliad,        48-41 W
Schertz J.P. 64-30 W
Woodsboro 75-35 W
Stockdale,  49-47 W
Goliad        51-42 L
Schulenberg 42-39 W
Nixon-Smiley 52-50 L
Hallettsville  61-59 L
Stockdale    51-47 L
Luling          65-46 W
Karnes City  52-37 W
Antonian      85-58 L
Schulenberg 55-47 W
Nixon-Smiley 64-33 W
Hallettsville  67-56 L
Stockdale    82-44 W
Luling          64-45 W
Karnes City 52-39 W
------------------------
Comfort 65-37 W

From what I can gather, they are efficient and well coached, but non necessarily athletically overwhelming. The coach, Fred Radsky, has been there since 2005 and has a 103-49 record. Poth defeated Comfort handily in the first round 65-37. 

Game is in Columbus at 6:00 PM. Schobels restaurant is a great place to eat before or after the game.

Good Luck & Go Bucs!  8)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't tell you a whole lot, I'm more familiar with the girls programs (a friend of mine's daughter played on their state championship volleyball team a couple of years ago).

They are usually well coached with good discipline. Athletically not overwhelming but not a bunch of cupcakes either. Should be much better than most of the district opponents EC faced. EC should be able to handle them but they are usually the kind you have to beat, don't generally beat themselves. Usually have a bunch of Polish kids, usually descent to good height and ball skills. Usually have at least one or two good shooters.

Notice I said usually a lot. I haven't seen this specific group and don't "KNOW" much about them. My post is generalizations about the program and what can usually be expected from them based on what I have seen and heard over the past 5-6 years. Tried, but haven't been able to get ahold of my friend to get any "scoop" on this particular bunch.
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...