|
Post by BGH on Feb 11, 2016 17:41:57 GMT -6
When you sober up, come back and maybe we can talk. You talk about memos, rebellions, and the changing of the guard, and you even managed to work in a reference to the NCAA. I can't fathom why you think any of it is relevant to the discussion of watered down playoffs. As far as the " participation trophies", I have never even used that term. I was making the point that the playoffs are watered down. Surely you don't need for me to explain it to you again. If you havent seen the term participation trophies, then you really need to read a little closer. As for "watered down", if your reference is towards the 1st round, well, if its watered down, those teams are easily dismissed. Same applies to Select and Non Select. Watered down as a rallying cry for allowing Select schools to win by 60 in the first round vs Non select schools, kinda is hypocrytical. "If you havent seen the term participation trophies, then you really need to read a little closer."Reading comprehension is key to carrying on a discussion on this board. Perhaps you should take your own advice and read closer. If you do you will realize I never said that I haven't seen the term "participation trophies". I merely said I have not used the term. Once again my point is that I think the playoffs are watered down, I have made no mention of participation trophies. "As for "watered down", if your reference is towards the 1st round, well, if its watered down, those teams are easily dismissed."I already mentioned that we now have 9 state champs as compared to 5 state champs several years ago. I gave that as one of my reasons that I think the playoffs are "watered down". But I am going to explain it little further for you. Prior to the split, we had five playoff brackets composed of 32 teams each. That meant 160 teams made the playoffs each year. As I recall, roughly 58% of the teams in each class made the playoffs each year. (by the way, I thought the playoffs were watered down before the split). Now we have the split. Last year 209 teams made the playoffs. That is 49 more teams in the playoffs which is 30% more teams making the playoffs since the split. As I said above, roughly 58% of the teams in the in each class used to make the playoffs before the split. Now we have 5 different playoff classes where every single team in that class makes the playoffs. I think anyone with common sense would admit that is " watered down". For me it is not about how bad a team is beaten in the first round, it is simply about the number of teams in the playoffs. But it stands to reason that by adding more teams you increase the chances of a very poor team getting trounced in the first round. Remember, every team you add is coming from the bottom of the pool. It is not just a public private issue. I have been an Evangel fan for 20 years. I would have loved for them to win the championship last year and been very happy for them. But ...... it would have been a " watered down" championship. They would have only played 3 games if they had won it all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 10:33:02 GMT -6
If and If and IF.
However, such wasnt the case. Although Evangel now is getting out recruited by what was once your underling. Hey man, happens to the best of us.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 10:34:07 GMT -6
You can cry the watered down cry all you want. No one is listening, simply because, everyone knows the truth. Enjoy your day.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 11:07:19 GMT -6
What I find humorous is the way that the public schools made the rules, private schools followed the rules, still didn't win enough, so the public schools changed the rules AGAIN to make sure they won a championship. My school doesn't need a split to compete. We line up against everyone and run from no one. You should do the same.
|
|
|
Post by btown on Feb 18, 2016 11:40:33 GMT -6
What I find humorous is the way that the public schools made the rules, private schools followed the rules, still didn't win enough, so the public schools changed the rules AGAIN to make sure they won a championship. My school doesn't need a split to compete. We line up against everyone and run from no one. You should do the same. Do not think it had anything to do with public, I believe the majority voted to make changes to the LHSAA playoff system.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2016 11:58:03 GMT -6
Agreed, just as the majority (not just public) set up the rules. This has nothing to do with public/private. Its Select enrollment vs non select enrollment.
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Feb 18, 2016 12:02:03 GMT -6
yeah, a "majority"
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Feb 19, 2016 7:49:29 GMT -6
If and If and IF. However, such wasnt the case. Although Evangel now is getting out recruited by what was once your underling. Hey man, happens to the best of us. Oh, that hurt. I may not recover from that quip.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2016 7:59:10 GMT -6
What I find humorous is the way that the public schools made the rules, private schools followed the rules, still didn't win enough, so the public schools changed the rules AGAIN to make sure they won a championship. My school doesn't need a split to compete. We line up against everyone and run from no one. You should do the same. Do not think it had anything to do with public, I believe the majority voted to make changes to the LHSAA playoff system. Do not public schools hold a large majority in the LHSAA?
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Feb 19, 2016 8:02:38 GMT -6
You can cry the watered down cry all you want. No one is listening, simply because, everyone knows the truth. Enjoy your day. Obviously you are listening! It is clear you don't understand, but you are definitely listening. It takes me a little while to figure out who is worthy of carrying on discussions with and who just talks in gibberish or one liners, or worse yet, just keeps repeating the same old drivel and won't respond to questions. Once I figure them out I just ignore their post from then on. You are right at the border line of being marked IRRELEVANT.
|
|
|
Post by Griffinfan on Feb 19, 2016 8:14:16 GMT -6
You can cry the watered down  cry all you want. No one is listening, simply because, everyone knows the truth. Enjoy your day. Obviously you are listening! It is clear you don't understand, but you are definitely listening. It takes me a little while to figure out who is worthy of carrying on discussions with and who just talks in gibberish or one liners, or worse yet, just keeps repeating the same old drivel and won't respond to questions. Once I figure them out I just ignore their post from then on. You are right at the border line of being marked IRRELEVANT. Hmmmm I guess that's why you aren't speaking to me? Lol
|
|
|
Post by btown on Feb 19, 2016 10:50:18 GMT -6
Do not think it had anything to do with public, I believe the majority voted to make changes to the LHSAA playoff system. Do not public schools hold a large majority in the LHSAA? Yes they do, but private schools voted with the majority and there were a number of privates that did not vote. So again majority makes changes, everyone has one vote.
|
|
|
Post by billyb on Feb 19, 2016 19:00:17 GMT -6
Do not public schools hold a large majority in the LHSAA? Yes they do, but private schools voted with the majority and there were a number of privates that did not vote. So again majority makes changes, everyone has one vote. btown...
You seem to be a reasonable fellow, and one who's posts I find some merit in from time to time. So answer me this, it is a simple question and should involve a simple answer.
In the 70's-80's and early 90's when Non Selects were standing in line to schedule Selects for homecoming or any game for that matter, where was the uproar? It did not exist. Sure you had a few people upset that they were getting beaten up by Curtis, but who didn't.
Non Selects had no problem with Selects when they were beating them handily under (for the most part) the same rules and regulations currently in place (although one could argue they are much more stringent now).
The problems arose and came to a head in the last 5-8 years when the Selects started consistently winning more games. That is a fact.
I can make the case that recruiting and attendance zone fraud occurs at the same level in both Divisions. The Selects have always been able to Select...the problem for the Non Selects is the Selects hired Coaches and built weight rooms. Good kids, good coaching, good facilities, = good football.
By the way the beat down that Curtis put on Winnfield the year before their principal introduced the split was epic....you could make the case that Winnfield had almost as many good athletes as Curtis that year...Winnfield was out coached and out played...Curtis may as well have dropped an A Bomb on Winnfield that night...it would have been allot less painful. After a taken to the woodshed moment like that...something had to be done...right?
Winnfield has never been the same since introducing the split...I hope the folks at Many aren't thinking they'll fair much better...Karma is a...well you know what they say.
I know you will have reasonable explanation...and I look forward to your response. I think most people just want the best teams in the State to play football against each other for the highest of stakes. What is happening now is just pathetic no matter how you look at it or what side you are on.
By the way since nobody else will say it...the Selects that voted for a split (or abstained) are content with playing the least amount of competition in order have an outside shot at a watered down trophy that means half as much as it used to...MaMa's and Daddy's love saying they're going down to the Dome...the rent on that floor is allot cheaper than it used to be.
I'm counting on you btown...don't let me down.
Peace, Love, and Touchdowns
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Feb 20, 2016 1:18:11 GMT -6
my point... select schools have always been able to do what they do, whether it gives an unfair advantage or not, but why is this just a problem in the 2010s decade? NOLA Jesuit dominated the 40s and St. Augustine the 70s and we were still generations from the split
|
|
|
Post by bigred4 on Feb 20, 2016 6:40:31 GMT -6
Unfortunately, it's the way our society is now. Thru the media, so many people have been "victimized" because they are black/white, poor, , Muslim, and many more. If you don't have what someone else has, then you are entitled to it....that's the way many people view life. It used to not be that way, thus the privates weren't seen as a problem back then.
|
|
|
Post by kamala on Feb 20, 2016 14:46:51 GMT -6
Yes they do, but private schools voted with the majority and there were a number of privates that did not vote. Â So again majority makes changes, everyone has one vote. btown...
You seem to be a reasonable fellow, and one who's posts I find some merit in from time to time. So answer me this, it is a simple question and should involve a simple answer.
In the 70's-80's and early 90's when Non Selects were standing in line to schedule Selects for homecoming or any game for that matter, where was the uproar? It did not exist. Sure you had a few people upset that they were getting beaten up by Curtis, but who didn't.
Non Selects had no problem with Selects when they were beating them handily under (for the most part) the same rules and regulations currently in place (although one could argue they are much more stringent now).
The problems arose and came to a head in the last 5-8 years when the Selects started consistently winning more games. That is a fact.
I can make the case that recruiting and attendance zone fraud occurs at the same level in both Divisions. The Selects have always been able to Select...the problem for the Non Selects is the Selects hired Coaches and built weight rooms. Good kids, good coaching, good facilities, = good football.
By the way the beat down that Curtis put on Winnfield the year before their principal introduced the split was epic....you could make the case that Winnfield had almost as many good athletes as Curtis that year...Winnfield was out coached and out played...Curtis may as well have dropped an A Bomb on Winnfield that night...it would have been allot less painful. After a taken to the woodshed moment like that...something had to be done...right?
Winnfield has never been the same since introducing the split...I hope the folks at Many aren't thinking they'll fair much better...Karma is a...well you know what they say.
I know you will have reasonable explanation...and I look forward to your response. I think most people just want the best teams in the State to play football against each other for the highest of stakes. What is happening now is just pathetic no matter how you look at it or what side you are on.
By the way since nobody else will say it...the Selects that voted for a split (or abstained) are content with playing the least amount of competition in order have an outside shot at a watered down trophy that means half as much as it used to...MaMa's and Daddy's love saying they're going down to the Dome...the rent on that floor is allot cheaper than it used to be.
I'm counting on you btown...don't let me down.Â
Peace, Love, and Touchdowns
Your comments about the Winnfield / Curtis game in 2011 made me laugh. What game were you at? The score at halftime was 7-3. Winnfield had 183 yards of offense and 8-9 first downs and had been inside Curtis's 30 three times and inside their 10 twice. On the other hand, Curtis had 2.... Yes TWO first downs at half.... One of those came on a 54 yard touchdown on their 6th play. They had less than 70 yards of offense and had gone 3 and out on 4 of their 5 first half possessions. Which gets us to the other ridiculous part of your post. Winnfield dressed 54 kids that morning. Curtis had 90.... NINETY! They included Ben Gordon , Malachi Dupree, Duke Riley of LSU, Torrey Bell of Mississippi State as well as Eric Thomas, Hunter Dale, the Godfrey kid, and two running backs who all went on to play college ball. Winnfield had Alonzo Moore at QB and is now a receiver at Nebraska and Junior MJ Patterson at defensive end and Soph DJ Chark at receiver. Beyond that, it was just a bunch of regular joes who were good high school players...Including a stsrting guard that was 5' 7", 150 lbs. . Curtis used 6 running backs, 3 tight ends, and 8 offensive linemen during the course of the game ( before they started subbing). By the end of the 3rd quarter Curtis's depth totally took over, aided by two crucial special teams turnovers. Yes it ended up 33-3, but I assure you, it was no woodshed beat down, and I laugh at your assertion that the two teams were nearly equal in talent. Let's me know how little you know about high school football. By the way, that Curtis team only had about 4 senior starters on it. You ARE aware that 12 months later that same exact team was unanimously declared the National Champion by no less than 5 different ranking services, huh? Yea..... They were just an average little old team....lol
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Feb 20, 2016 16:25:31 GMT -6
Your comments about the Winnfield / Curtis game in 2011 made me laugh. What game were you at? The score at halftime was 7-3. Winnfield had 183 yards of offense and 8-9 first downs and had been inside Curtis's 30 three times and inside their 10 twice. On the other hand, Curtis had 2.... Yes TWO first downs at half.... One of those came on a 54 yard touchdown on their 6th play. They had less than 70 yards of offense and had gone 3 and out on 4 of their 5 first half possessions. Which gets us to the other ridiculous part of your post. Winnfield dressed 54 kids that morning. Curtis had 90.... NINETY! They included Ben Gordon , Malachi Dupree, Duke Riley of LSU, Torrey Bell of Mississippi State as well as Eric Thomas, Hunter Dale, the Godfrey kid, and two running backs who all went on to play college ball. Winnfield had Alonzo Moore at QB and is now a receiver at Nebraska and Junior MJ Patterson at defensive end and Soph DJ Chark at receiver. Beyond that, it was just a bunch of regular joes who were good high school players...Including a stsrting guard that was 5' 7", 150 lbs. . Curtis used 6 running backs, 3 tight ends, and 8 offensive linemen during the course of the game ( before they started subbing). By the end of the 3rd quarter Curtis's depth totally took over, aided by two crucial special teams turnovers. Yes it ended up 33-3, but I assure you, it was no woodshed beat down, and I laugh at your assertion that the two teams were nearly equal in talent. Let's me know how little you know about high school football. By the way, that Curtis team only had about 4 senior starters on it. You ARE aware that 12 months later that same exact team was unanimously declared the National Champion by no less than 5 different ranking services, huh? Yea..... They were just an average little old team....lol what point are you trying to make? either that was a woodshed beatdown that justified the split or not... depth might have been a factor but surely Winnfield wasn't the first team in HS football history to go into halftime feeling good about themselves and then get blitzed in the second half
|
|
|
Post by eagle2180 on Feb 20, 2016 17:15:03 GMT -6
So a Winnfield team with 2-3 stud athletes competed with JC and all their recruits? Why the need for a split?
|
|
|
Post by eagle2180 on Feb 20, 2016 17:25:02 GMT -6
If a 2a Winfield team can stay on the field with JC, put a multiplier in effect for all select schools that places JC and Evangel in 5a. Line up and play the game.
|
|
|
Post by billyb on Feb 20, 2016 20:16:19 GMT -6
Your comments about the Winnfield / Curtis game in 2011 made me laugh. What game were you at? The score at halftime was 7-3. Yes it ended up 33-3, but I assure you, it was no woodshed beat down.
Yes it was 7-3 at halftime...so what. Close first half...still beaten by 30 and never scored a touchdown...Oops I forgot we should tell Winnfield they played a great game and were simply overmatched by that mean ole private school...getting beaten by 30 and never scoring a touchdown is embarrassing...well not to everybody I guess.
Let's me know how little you know about high school football.
Curtis runs the Veer...Heard of it? Slow moving...ball controlling...clock killing offense. It was executed against the Winnfield Tigers to perfection...Curtis completely dominated both lines of scrimmage...and could have beaten them 100-3 if they would have kept playing...how dare you challenge my knowledge of the game because you disagree with my point of view...you sir are a buffoon...Kamala...really...did somebody already have thenatureboy. You have no idea concerning my knowledge of the game. By the way, that Curtis team only had about 4 senior starters on it. You ARE aware that 12 months later that same exact team was unanimously declared the National Champion by no less than 5 different ranking services, huh? Yea..... They were just an average little old team....lol Yea..... They were just an average little old team....lol
I never said Curtis did not have a better / deeper team...I am simply giving Winnfield credit for having some pretty good players on their team as well. I know Winnfield had at least 4 standouts on that team...not the specifics you mentioned...but I know there were some good players on their team.
Which gets us to the other ridiculous part of your post. Winnfield dressed 54 kids that morning. Curtis had 90.... NINETY!
Curtis is awesome...They did dress 90...and they can be unstoppable...that's why West Monroe...Neville...Etc...made sure that nobody in 4A or 5A would not have to play them or Evangel again.The LHSAA forced Curtis to play in 2A...they weren't in 2A because they wanted to go around kicking the crap out of the likes of Winnfield and Many...they play who they are forced to play.
My point with this post was not to run Winnfield into the ground...My point was that I'm sure their principal's phone was on fire after that beat down to do something about those mean ole privates schools whipping their tales in the playoffs, and down in the dome. Not sure why Many's principal was inclined to split some additional sports as well...may be some spring sport motivation there...but I digress.
I am simply bringing up the fact that the first of the two schools to put their name on this mess has seen a significant turn for the worse (9-15) since they started it...lets check Many's record next year.
Many 4-6?....Oh well they'd still make the playoffs...Winnfield did at 2-10. Thanks to Winnfield and Many...Thanks.
Peace, Love, and Touchdowns
|
|
|
Post by fridaynights on Feb 20, 2016 21:08:25 GMT -6
We will be ok....that I can promise you. We expect to be in New Orleans.
|
|
|
Post by BGH on Feb 21, 2016 16:08:05 GMT -6
Obviously you are listening! It is clear you don't understand, but you are definitely listening. It takes me a little while to figure out who is worthy of carrying on discussions with and who just talks in gibberish or one liners, or worse yet, just keeps repeating the same old drivel and won't respond to questions. Once I figure them out I just ignore their post from then on. You are right at the border line of being marked IRRELEVANT. Hmmmm I guess that's why you aren't speaking to me? Lol Why would you think I am not speaking to you? I've got your back. Posters change their names so it is sometimes hard to keep up with. Right now there are two people I choose not to respond to. Not because I am mad or they ticked me off, rather it is because it is useless to try a carry on a conversation with them. You know me, I love to get into a heated argument and will argue for the sake of arguing, I may even argue for a cause I don't really believe in, but sometimes you have to realize you are only making yourself look foolish when you are arguing with a wall.
|
|
|
Post by Griffinfan on Feb 21, 2016 16:26:24 GMT -6
Hmmmm I guess that's why you aren't speaking to me? Lol Why would you think I am not speaking to you? I've got your back. Posters change their names so it is sometimes hard to keep up with. Right now there are two people I choose not to respond to. Not because I am mad or they ticked me off, rather it is because it is useless to try a carry on a conversation with them. You know me, I love to get into a heated argument and will argue for the sake of arguing, I may even argue for a cause I don't really believe in, but sometimes you have to realize you are only making yourself look foolish when you are arguing with a wall. I certainly don't blame you! Lol
|
|
|
Post by kamala on Feb 22, 2016 8:07:18 GMT -6
Your comments about the Winnfield / Curtis game in 2011 made me laugh. What game were you at? The score at halftime was 7-3. Winnfield had 183 yards of offense and 8-9 first downs and had been inside Curtis's 30 three times and inside their 10 twice. On the other hand, Curtis had 2.... Yes TWO first downs at half.... One of those came on a 54 yard touchdown on their 6th play. They had less than 70 yards of offense and had gone 3 and out on 4 of their 5 first half possessions. Which gets us to the other ridiculous part of your post. Winnfield dressed 54 kids that morning. Curtis had 90.... NINETY! They included Ben Gordon , Malachi Dupree, Duke Riley of LSU, Torrey Bell of Mississippi State as well as Eric Thomas, Hunter Dale, the Godfrey kid, and two running backs who all went on to play college ball. Winnfield had Alonzo Moore at QB and is now a receiver at Nebraska and Junior MJ Patterson at defensive end and Soph DJ Chark at receiver. Beyond that, it was just a bunch of regular joes who were good high school players...Including a stsrting guard that was 5' 7", 150 lbs. . Curtis used 6 running backs, 3 tight ends, and 8 offensive linemen during the course of the game ( before they started subbing). By the end of the 3rd quarter Curtis's depth totally took over, aided by two crucial special teams turnovers. Yes it ended up 33-3, but I assure you, it was no woodshed beat down, and I laugh at your assertion that the two teams were nearly equal in talent. Let's me know how little you know about high school football. By the way, that Curtis team only had about 4 senior starters on it. You ARE aware that 12 months later that same exact team was unanimously declared the National Champion by no less than 5 different ranking services, huh? Yea..... They were just an average little old team....lol what point are you trying to make? either that was a woodshed beatdown that justified the split or not... depth might have been a factor but surely Winnfield wasn't the first team in HS football history to go into halftime feeling good about themselves and then get blitzed in the second half What's my point? My point is that two schools with enrollments of 240 or so played each other. One dressed 54 kids, which is about normal for a good 2A program. Three of them eventually played college ball. The other dressed 90. And about 15 of them ended up playing college ball in the next 2 years. My point is that when one school with an enrollment of about 240 has 90 boys dressed out...approximately 75% of the male population of the school, and 20% of that 90 is good enough to play college football, there is an issue. Your comment about the second half sums up everything. Winnfield had a once in a generation team. And for a half they were able to hold their own. But once the avalanche of subs started, along with Curtis having no one playing both ways, and then a couple of turnovers at key times, the game got away in a hurry. It's virtually impossible for a traditional 2A public school to hold their own against Curtis over 4 quarters. They have too much quality depth, they are incredibly well coached, and they play everyone one way most of the time. It's just not an equitable match-up. The Curtis coaching staff and Winnfield coaching staff are all friends. But it's unrealistic to expect that a Winnfield or a Many or a Kinder playing a John Curtis is a fair situation.
|
|
|
Post by kamala on Feb 22, 2016 8:10:32 GMT -6
So a Winnfield team with 2-3 stud athletes competed with JC and all their recruits? Why the need for a split? You need to finish your statement. Winnfield competed FOR A HALF. After that, depth and talent and no one playing both ways enabled Curtis to walk away from Winnfield over the last two quarters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2016 8:27:34 GMT -6
what point are you trying to make? either that was a woodshed beatdown that justified the split or not... depth might have been a factor but surely Winnfield wasn't the first team in HS football history to go into halftime feeling good about themselves and then get blitzed in the second half What's my point? My point is that two schools with enrollments of 240 or so played each other. One dressed 54 kids, which is about normal for a good 2A program. Three of them eventually played college ball. The other dressed 90. And about 15 of them ended up playing college ball in the next 2 years. My point is that when one school with an enrollment of about 240 has 90 boys dressed out...approximately 75% of the male population of the school, and 20% of that 90 is good enough to play college football, there is an issue. Your comment about the second half sums up everything. Winnfield had a once in a generation team. And for a half they were able to hold their own. But once the avalanche of subs started, along with Curtis having no one playing both ways, and then a couple of turnovers at key times, the game got away in a hurry. It's virtually impossible for a traditional 2A public school to hold their own against Curtis over 4 quarters. They have too much quality depth, they are incredibly well coached, and they play everyone one way most of the time. It's just not an equitable match-up. The Curtis coaching staff and Winnfield coaching staff are all friends. But it's unrealistic to expect that a Winnfield or a Many or a Kinder playing a John Curtis is a fair situation. I wouldnt go as far as to say "they are incredibly well coached". I will agree with every, other, point. JT Curtis is a solid high school football coach, surely in the top 10% of the coaches in this state. However, give anyone else in that top 10% the same players he has "aquired" over the years, and they would have won as many, if not more, championships. The rub is simply this. They are NEVER down. ANY public school, West Monroe included, has up and down cycles. A select school, if they so choose, never will. We are arguing a mute point. The problem had been resolved at this point. Either these private school pundits need to police their own, or shut the hell up.
|
|
|
Post by kamala on Feb 22, 2016 8:39:36 GMT -6
Billy B let's look at your replies...some valid, some ridiculous.
"Yes it was 7-3 at halftime...so what. Close first half...still beaten by 30 and never scored a touchdown...Oops I forgot we should tell Winnfield they played a great game and were simply overmatched by that mean ole private school...getting beaten by 30 and never scoring a touchdown is embarrassing...well not to everybody I guess."
IF YOU RECALL, CURTIS ANNIHILATED MOST PEOPLES' FAVORITE TO WIN IT ALL THAT YEAR, EVANGEL, THE WEEK BEFORE IN THE SEMIS. MIGHTY EVANGEL, THEY OF THE HIGH FLYING OFFENSE, SCORED A WHOPPING 7 POINTS IN THAT GAME. I'D SAY THAT CURTIS COULD AND WOULD HAVE SHUT DOWN MOST ANY TEAM IN THE STATE THAT YEAR OR THE NEXT.
"Curtis runs the Veer...Heard of it? Slow moving...ball controlling...clock killing offense. It was executed against the Winnfield Tigers to perfection...Curtis completely dominated both lines of scrimmage...and could have beaten them 100-3 if they would have kept playing...how dare you challenge my knowledge of the game because you disagree with my point of view...you sir are a buffoon...Kamala...really...did somebody already have thenatureboy. You have no idea concerning my knowledge of the game."
AGAIN, WHAT GAME WERE YOU AT? THE "VEER" WAS INEFFECTIVE FOR CURTIS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRETY OF THE GAME. THEY HAD TWO FIRST DOWNS ON THEIR FIRST DRIVE, INCLUDING A 54 YARD TD RUN THAT WAS THE RESULT OF ONE PLAYER SLANTING THE WRONG WAY. THEIR NEXT 4 POSSESSIONS PRODUCED ABOUT 5 YARDS TOTAL, AND ZERO FIRST DOWNS. THEY SIMPLY COULD NOT MOVE THE BALL BETWEEN THE TACKLES IN THE FIRST HALf AT ALL , AND NOT WELL IN THE SECOND HALF. CURTIS DID THEIR EVENTUAL DAMAGE WITH HAND SWEEPS AND QUICK PASSES IN THE FLATS. THEIR TRADITIONAL SLOW MOVING, BALL CONTROLLING, CLOCK KILLING OFFENSE WASN'T WHAT BEAT WINNFIELD. OUTSIDE SPEED WAS. CURTIS GAVE UP 183 YARDS IN THE FIRST HALF. HARDLY "DOMINATING THE LINE OF SCRIMMAGE". SECOND HALF WAS A DIFFERENT STORY. THEIR SIZE AND DEPTH TOOK OVER.
YEA IT COULD HAVE BEEN 100-3 "IF WE HAD KEPT PLAYING" . THAT IS ABOUT IS ASININE OF A STATEMENT AS I'VE EVER SEEN. MAYBE WE SHOULD START PLAYING 7 QUARTERS INSTEAD OF FOUR, HUH?
I'M HARDLY A BUFFOON. BUT I'M WAY MORE AWARE OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT GAME THAT YOU EVER WILL BE.
"I never said Curtis did not have a better / deeper team...I am simply giving Winnfield credit for having some pretty good players on their team as well. I know Winnfield had at least 4 standouts on that team...not the specifics you mentioned...but I know there were some good players on their team."
MOORE WAS ARGUABLY THE BEST PLAYER IN SCHOOL HISTORY, OTHER THAN ANTHONY THOMAS. THE RUNNING BACK WAS AN ALL-STATER AND WAS A VERY GOOD HIGH SCHOOL BACK. CHARK WAS AN UNKNOWN SOPRE AT THE TIME. HE WOULD MOVE TO ANOTHER SCHOOL AND EVENTUALLY GROW INTO AN SEC RECEIVER AT LSU. PATTERSON WOULD END UP AT LSU AFTER HIS SENIOR YEAR BUT HASN'T PLAYED MUCH. ONE OTHER KID IS NOW THE STARTING CENTER AT NORTHWESTERN AFTER WORKING HIS BUTT OFF FOR 4 YEARS TO GET THERE.
WINNFIELD ALSO HAD 4 SOPRES STARTING ON DEFENSE THAT MORNING, AND 4 JUNIORS. VERY YOUNG. AND WE HAD A 5'7" 150 LB STARTING OFFENSIVE GUARD. WE WERE HARDLY A FORMIDABLE TEAM.
"Curtis is awesome...They did dress 90...and they can be unstoppable...that's why West Monroe...Neville...Etc...made sure that nobody in 4A or 5A would not have to play them or Evangel again.The LHSAA forced Curtis to play in 2A...they weren't in 2A because they wanted to go around kicking the crap out of the likes of Winnfield and Many...they play who they are forced to play."
TOTALLY AGREE. IN FACT, THE WINNFIELD COACHES ARE GOOD FRIENDS WITH, AND HAVE MUCH RESPECT FOR THE CURTIS STAFF.
"I am simply bringing up the fact that the first of the two schools to put their name on this mess has seen a significant turn for the worse (9-15) since they started it...lets check Many's record next year."
ACTUALLY, THAT'S INACCURATE. THE FIRST YEAR OF THE SPLIT, WINNFIELD WENT 12-2 AND GOT BEAT AT KINDER IN THE SEMIS WITH 19 SECONDS LEFT ON THE CLOCK. KINDER BEAT MANY IN THE DOME THE NEXT WEEK.
AND YOU WON'T EVER SEE MANY GO ANYWHERE NEAR 4-6 AS LONG AS COACH CURTIS IS THERE.
Peace, Love, and Touchdowns
|
|
|
Post by eag on Feb 22, 2016 10:54:44 GMT -6
what point are you trying to make? either that was a woodshed beatdown that justified the split or not... depth might have been a factor but surely Winnfield wasn't the first team in HS football history to go into halftime feeling good about themselves and then get blitzed in the second half What's my point? My point is that two schools with enrollments of 240 or so played each other. One dressed 54 kids, which is about normal for a good 2A program. Three of them eventually played college ball. The other dressed 90. And about 15 of them ended up playing college ball in the next 2 years. My point is that when one school with an enrollment of about 240 has 90 boys dressed out...approximately 75% of the male population of the school, and 20% of that 90 is good enough to play college football, there is an issue. Your comment about the second half sums up everything. Winnfield had a once in a generation team. And for a half they were able to hold their own. But once the avalanche of subs started, along with Curtis having no one playing both ways, and then a couple of turnovers at key times, the game got away in a hurry. It's virtually impossible for a traditional 2A public school to hold their own against Curtis over 4 quarters. They have too much quality depth, they are incredibly well coached, and they play everyone one way most of the time. It's just not an equitable match-up. The Curtis coaching staff and Winnfield coaching staff are all friends. But it's unrealistic to expect that a Winnfield or a Many or a Kinder playing a John Curtis is a fair situation. What other private schools did Winnfield play that year? How many did they dress out, and how many of the kids playing on those teams played in college? Here are the scores, all Winnfield victories: St Mary's 35-0 Holy Savior Menard 48-6 St Thomas Aquinas 41-0 Episcopal 27-24 OT Calvary Baptist 41-21 S always, my point is that ALL these schools got separated when most is not all are not really a problem for schools like Winnfield or Many. JC is, sure, but why are we moving all these other schools just because Curtis is dominant?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2016 10:59:17 GMT -6
What's my point? My point is that two schools with enrollments of 240 or so played each other. One dressed 54 kids, which is about normal for a good 2A program. Three of them eventually played college ball. The other dressed 90. And about 15 of them ended up playing college ball in the next 2 years. My point is that when one school with an enrollment of about 240 has 90 boys dressed out...approximately 75% of the male population of the school, and 20% of that 90 is good enough to play college football, there is an issue. Your comment about the second half sums up everything. Winnfield had a once in a generation team. And for a half they were able to hold their own. But once the avalanche of subs started, along with Curtis having no one playing both ways, and then a couple of turnovers at key times, the game got away in a hurry. It's virtually impossible for a traditional 2A public school to hold their own against Curtis over 4 quarters. They have too much quality depth, they are incredibly well coached, and they play everyone one way most of the time. It's just not an equitable match-up. The Curtis coaching staff and Winnfield coaching staff are all friends. But it's unrealistic to expect that a Winnfield or a Many or a Kinder playing a John Curtis is a fair situation. What other private schools did Winnfield play that year? How many did they dress out, and how many of the kids playing on those teams played in college? Here are the scores, all Winnfield victories: St Mary's 35-0 Holy Savior Menard 48-6 St Thomas Aquinas 41-0 Episcopal 27-24 OT Calvary Baptist 41-21 S always, my point is that ALL these schools got separated when most is not all are not really a problem for schools like Winnfield or Many. JC is, sure, but why are we moving all these other schools just because Curtis is dominant? Your point is rendered mute considering the fact of the schools you listed records SINCE that year. The point is public sector schools have a natural cycle of athletes. Private sector schools, if they so choose, can remain loaded yearly. Since Winnfields run then, what have they done? What has the schools listed done? The Select school pundits have to search for examples to prove everything is viable and fine (although out of the other side of thier mouth, they scream how much better they are), meanwhile, one only needs to look at ANY 5 year cycle and see how public schools are up and down.
|
|
|
Post by btown on Feb 22, 2016 11:07:55 GMT -6
Yes they do, but private schools voted with the majority and there were a number of privates that did not vote. So again majority makes changes, everyone has one vote. btown...
You seem to be a reasonable fellow, and one who's posts I find some merit in from time to time. So answer me this, it is a simple question and should involve a simple answer.
In the 70's-80's and early 90's when Non Selects were standing in line to schedule Selects for homecoming or any game for that matter, where was the uproar? It did not exist. Sure you had a few people upset that they were getting beaten up by Curtis, but who didn't.
Non Selects had no problem with Selects when they were beating them handily under (for the most part) the same rules and regulations currently in place (although one could argue they are much more stringent now).
The problems arose and came to a head in the last 5-8 years when the Selects started consistently winning more games. That is a fact.
I can make the case that recruiting and attendance zone fraud occurs at the same level in both Divisions. The Selects have always been able to Select...the problem for the Non Selects is the Selects hired Coaches and built weight rooms. Good kids, good coaching, good facilities, = good football.
By the way the beat down that Curtis put on Winnfield the year before their principal introduced the split was epic....you could make the case that Winnfield had almost as many good athletes as Curtis that year...Winnfield was out coached and out played...Curtis may as well have dropped an A Bomb on Winnfield that night...it would have been allot less painful. After a taken to the woodshed moment like that...something had to be done...right?
Winnfield has never been the same since introducing the split...I hope the folks at Many aren't thinking they'll fair much better...Karma is a...well you know what they say.
I know you will have reasonable explanation...and I look forward to your response. I think most people just want the best teams in the State to play football against each other for the highest of stakes. What is happening now is just pathetic no matter how you look at it or what side you are on.
By the way since nobody else will say it...the Selects that voted for a split (or abstained) are content with playing the least amount of competition in order have an outside shot at a watered down trophy that means half as much as it used to...MaMa's and Daddy's love saying they're going down to the Dome...the rent on that floor is allot cheaper than it used to be.
I'm counting on you btown...don't let me down.
Peace, Love, and Touchdowns
You put a lot out that you want a response to, so I will try my best. Waterdown The first round of the the playoffs are watered down. Easy fix drop playoffs to 16 team bracket and that is solved. On the select side something needs to be done with the brackets but not sure what. Understand LHSAA has never had a chance to improve the select/non select playoff system. It was voted in and played the first year. Came around second year, yes we played in the same system, but when everyone wanted to take a look at it Bonine said give me one year. What did he do for one year nothing. Then after third year what did Bonine do, put everyone in fight not mode not improving mode. I think with time the system will be improved one way or the other, but hard to say where it will go. 80's and 90's I played in the 80's and there were dominate private schools then. Hanson, if you where a male and went to Hanson you were on the football team doing something. So what private school donimated has changed during the past years and decades. Yes, there are public and private schools that break the rules and LHSAA falls short on enforcing the rules. Enforce the rules and a lot of problems are sovled. Remember perception is 100% of reality. So there is a big perception of what the non select thinks the select is doing. The one thing I know for sure is that Bonine has lost all creditablity to be able to bring both sides back togehter. I still think outside of multiplier, out zone attendance and transfer it needs to come down to a competition committee that takes a look at any school that is successful every year, the eye test. Are they playing in the correct classification? It is not hard to look at some schools a say yes you may be a 2A school by enrollment, but you are putting out a 3A football program and that is where you need to be. We had 7 classfications in all other major sports. Could we have solved a lot of our problems by making 7 classifications in football based on enrollment? Just because something has been done for decades does not make it the best way. I am to the point and my opinion the split is best and is the best because it hurts no program. You may not like the competition level but no harm is being done to any program.
|
|