CardinalBacker

Yeah... I'm not gonna lie. I felt bad for the K-ville kids last night. With all of the drama over the vice principal, coach Neece and much of his staff leaving, and a whole new scheme, it has to have been a rough few months. I wondered if a lot of kids had dropped out of the program. I thought the little scuffle was the best part of the evening for you guys... sometimes you just gotta let 'em know that you're not going down without a fight.

Wow..... that's impressive. Really impressive. I know Newton fans are already planning on playing at Jerryworld... How did the Eagles look, Bearfan? Was the scrimmage as one-sided as the "score" would indicate?

The rain held off long enough for us to host Kirbyville in a scrimmage. I thought that our defense looked solid. Our offense looked better than they did last week. If my count was correct, BC scored 4 times and Kirbyville didn't score. Things got a little chippy late in the "game," which is a little surprising for a scrimmage. The kids from Kirbyville never gave up... it just seems like the transition to the triple option is proving a little difficult for the Wildcats. Can anybody from K-ville tell me how y'all felt about the scrimmage, specifically how a Kirbyville fan would grade their progress so far? I know that the recent games (and scrimmage last year) have been competitive, even if BC came out on top. This year didn't seem very competitive, and I don't think it'd because we're that awesome.

You're right. Even the experts agree that your schedule is tougher. We don't have to face Bridge City.

So I guess you're saying that you don't expect to repeat last years 60-21 score because Shadow Creek is going to be so greatly improved? Like, such a great game that Silsbee might lose? It's hard to pretend they're a tough test when they haven't yet done a thing in their short existence. I mean, somebody has to be the worst team in 5A (and possibly soon 6A), right?

How are the Stangs looking?

It's okay this once..... BUT DON'T LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN. Lol. Thanks for all you do.

What happened to the field in Livingston?

I haven't checked my schedule, but I hope to go see this one. I've WOS by three touchdowns.

Nah... we just had this same conversation about Silsbee's toughest non-district schedule in the Lumberton-Silsbee Scrimmage thread. Trust me... Tigre fan is fishing for some love.

After starting 1-3 (and one point away from being 0-4), what was the final score against "powerhouse" Alvin Shadow Creek last year? 60-21. All I'm saying is, it's hard to show up seeking praise for having the toughest non-district schedule around when it's almost exactly the same as ours.

Well, let's see... Silsbee has: PNG WOS Newton Jasper Bridge City has: North Forest WOS Newton Jasper So I'd say Silsbee by far has the toughest non-district schedule in the history of tough non-district schedules. Besides that, Silsbee played the same schedule last year and started the season 1-3 after squeaking out a one point win over Jasper, so I must once again reiterate that Silsbee must have the absolute toughest non-district schedule.

Bridge City's is pretty tough, too. North Forest WOS Newton Jasper Lol. We've also got Hamshire Fannett in Week one... Do you y'all have "cupcake" for that 5th game? All jokes aside, whose bright idea was it to schedule WOS for homecoming? Jesus.

This could be a good year for you guys to compete. So far, other than Silsbee I wouldn't consider anybody as a "lock" for the playoffs. LCM should be in the mix, we could, but who knows about Huffman or Navasota. Besides... y'all really should make the playoffs at least once out of this district before the UIL moves y'all to 5A.

So in a few years, when white people total less than 50% of the US population, you'll be okay with whites getting preferential treatment as a "minority" group? The local news was talking a week or so about an elementary school in PA and they described it as a "minority majority" school. That must be a PC way of saying that the school is predominantly non-white. If I believe your way of thinking, then there is no way for a white educator or white student to be "treated fairly" at this school because "the majority (in this case, people of color) has never and never will be fair"

My wife works at a firm of about 100 people, and I think that only about two of them are black. There are some other people of color, but I won't pretend like their roster represents a cross-section of society as a whole. The funny thing is, you'll never guess who gets the promotions and raises. It's the "yes men" and those ones with the right affiliations. The "vocal" ones always seem to get passed over at promotion time. Things happen in her "segregated" office just like you describe them in your diverse workplace. She can't blame racism for the way promotions are handed out in her workplace, even though promotions seem to be handed out the same as they are at your job. I wish that I had a better answer to making sure hiring opportunities are equal. I don't agree with Affirmative Action, but it's what we have and it's what we'll do until somebody comes up with something better.

C'mon... it was an honest question. Re-read Tobie's post to which I was replying. It seems genuine enough to me. I can assure you that Tobie isn't working towards a future in which his company employs no whites. If we're ever going to get anywhere in this country on the race issues, people need to understand where the other guy is coming from. We don't have to agree, and we don't have to change each other's way of thinking, but just understanding where the other guy is coming from helps a lot.

I'm glad that worked out for you. Integrating workplaces is a great idea, but I've never really agreed with the way Affirmative Action works in reality. Hiring a person based on their race seems wrong to me, regardless of the intentions. I hear what you're saying, but I don't understand when you say "the opportunities were not (I get that) and still are not equal." At what point will you believe that opportunities are "equal" and all grievances can finally be laid to rest?

The North didn't have a problem with slavery, either, or they'd have freed their own slaves. But that's not what they did, now is it? At the end of the day, the location where you and your family lived and owned property played the main deciding factor on which side of the conflict you found yourself. Think about it. Let's assume you were a landowner in Texas, which joined the union in December of 1845. Fifteen years later (1861) the Federal government is trying to impose much more authority over the people of the State of Texas than the government of the Republic of Texas ever had. What would you do? Abandon your land and head North in a show of solidarity to this new, over-reaching goverment, or stay home and join with your friends and family to defend your home? Too many people who never owned slaves died too close to home to ever paint all Southerners as traitors who just wanted to keep the institution of slavery in place.

So why wasn't an executive order issued for the Northern slaves at the same time? Those people remained enslaved. I'll give you a hint... the US government didn't care about freeing slaves... ol' Honest Abe was solely interested in disrupting production of slave-made war goods in the South. If the North was truly fighting to free the slaves, they would have been freed in the North before the war ever started. Of course slavery was a key issue in the dispute over states' rights. But pretending that the war was fought solely over slavery by people who were either for it (South) or against it (North) is as silly as claiming the Revolutionary War was fought over stamp prices. There was enough common sense around 150 years ago that people realized that reconciliation and cooperation were the keys to rebuilding a strong union. Its kinda funny how suddenly after the 2016 Election you have Democrats realizing that they have seemingly forever lost the support of the South, suddenly wanting to punish Southerns by branding them all as racists.

Robert E Lee opposed slavery. He freed the slaves on his plantation (which later became the Arlington National Cemetery) before the war, educated black children (which was illegal at the time), and was a decorated general in the US Army before and after the Civil War. He even taught at West Point. At the time of the Civil War, the majority of governing power was centralized in state governments instead of the federal government. It's hard for people to imagine today, but in the mid 1800s state governments played a much larger role in everyday life. The federal government was only 70 years old at the time of the civil war. Most states had been members of the US for an even shorter period than that. If I'm not mistaken, Texas had joined the Union less than 20 years before the war broke out. Leaving the union didn't seem to be the "traitorous" or "treasonous" act that it seems to be today. Robert E Lee was a patriot and unfortunately was a major landowner in the self-glossed Commonwealth of Virginia at the time that they decided to secede. People who claim that the civil war was primarily about slavery are taking a very simplified view on a very complex subject. The Emancipation Proclamation enacted by the federal government in the North freed slaves, but only those in the South. Slaves in the North weren't freed by the Federal Government until much later. If it truly fought over slavery, then why didn't the North free their own slaves until later? Seems to me that Northern slaves would have been freed first, not last, if the North was truly fighting just to end slavery. But why let actual history get in the way of a good story.

And uneducated.

Ozen.... Legacy.... you name it. Lol. This is where I'd normally cue the theme from the Beverly Hillbillies and sing about how they "loaded up the truck and they moved to Sils-beereeeee," but it's just the first scrimmage. I've got to pace myself.

It's hard to say with Baker out. We had one sustained drive that resulted in a td. The other TD came when Denton outran everybody outside... but I don't think he'll start on "o." There seemed to be too many blue jerseys making plays in our backfield, IMO. Overall, they looked like a bunch of kids getting ready to make their first varsity start. I wouldn't say we're in trouble, but we've definitely got our work cut out for us. Go Cards!

Bridge City has some work to do. Buna's D line looked pretty good. BC defensive front played well, too. Several key pieces were out of action for BC tonight, but the team overall just looks green. I think we'll start slow and gel by the time district rolls around. I counted 2 BC touchdowns and 1 Buna TD.