Rez

I could qualify it to be “in 5a d2” - I’m more confident in that anyway.

I don’t think it’s controversial at this point in time to say that PNG was the better team against Nederland last year - more talent, better-coached, more bought-in to the system, you name it. Yet, when we actually had to play (even taking into account the weather conditions), Nederland took us to the brink. You have to credit the coaching and the kids. Even with whatever the supposed problems are at Nederland right now, the coaches should get some credit for how Nederland stood up in a down season against the best version of PNG they’ve seen in a long time. On the other hand, the interception that allowed us to get the game winner was an inexcusably bad throw and a bad play call. That’s coaching too. So, yeah, Nederland had problems last year. But they had bright spots too. They’ll be better this year.

I think we had the best d-line and linebackers (as a unit) in the state. Nick Gardner had an incredible performance in the state game, and throughout the playoffs.

I’m excited. It’s sort of a “prove it” year in some ways. Was last year just a combination of great players, good coaching, and luck, or is there a proven, winning system being installed at PNG? I think we have an excellent coach, and it seems to me that the conditioning and mentality is better than it’s been in at least 30 years.

You’re going to hell

They balled out against png. Rain helped them, but they brought it all game.

What does that mean? Not enough money? Dumb policies?

Hate to have to be the one that explains to you how “opinions” work, but here goes: I saw postings from *some* Liberty Hill fans who stated emphatically that PNG would have won the game even with the two starters missing. Those fans might be wrong. They might be right. The world keeps spinning. Sorry you’re butthurt about it, either way.

According to Liberty Hill fans, it would have been the same outcome.

What are PNG’s realistic prospects next year? I don’t mean the assumptions that we’ll recreate last year just because we have Coach Joseph. With who we have coming back are we looking like a deep playoff run again?

Vidor’s playbook has pages?

What if we modified 7-Year Rule? In 7 years, you only learn about a coach’s ability to make THAT school good. It’s possible that same coach goes to a different school and wins state. It’s also possible an elite, winning coach at one program goes to a different school and doesn’t do as well (example: Westerberg from Allen to BH. BH got better under him, but didn’t ever get past the 3rd round). But, when a school board evaluates a coach’s performance, they only have to care what the coach is doing at THAT school. So, in 7 years you’ll have a full picture of what the likely ceiling of that coach is at that school, and if the ceiling isn’t high enough after 7 years it’s appropriate to think about trying something different.

I agree with Reagan’s 7-year principle, but I would modify it. Actually winning a state championship is often out of the hands of even the greatest coaches. Under Reagan’s approach, taken to the extreme, if a coach made it to state 7 years in a row but lost all of them, that coach should be fired. No one in the state would want that coach fired. So apply the 7 year rule more broadly : If a coach doesn’t get you to at least the 4th round within 7 years, you can reasonably assume his ceiling doesn’t go that high. In other words, you can know in 7 years if a coach has the ability to get that team in the range of a state championship. If you can get in that range, anything can happen, but it’s not always in the coach’s control.

You don’t get the success west orange had (/will continue to have if they right the ship) on talent alone. You just can’t reliably have enough talent in such a small sample size for so long and across so many generations to build an entire program on genetics. Coaching and system have so much more to do with it than just “let’s hope we get a good crop this year.”

I’m a part of nefarious conspiracy to get Vidor to have a good football team.

Why is it harder to believe that Vidor has capable kids than it is to believe that the coaching could be better ?

If Surratt came to Vidor, Vidor would immediately do things it has never done in its history. Nearly all of Vidor’s problems can be solved with coaching. Instead, everyone blames the kids. As if there’s some big genetic difference between Vidor and PNG and Nederland (and when Vidor was in our district, except for the last few years they had the same size school as PNG). Before Hurricane Harvey, Vidor was sitting right at around 1400 kids. All respect to Coach Matthews, but I think Vidor runs their gimmick offense because Coach Matthews doesn’t know how to teach the skills necessary to run anything else. Vidor kids can run whatever their coach can or will teach them to run. Vidor players could blow everyone’s minds if their leadership believed they could.

I agree. Groves and Port Neches don’t exactly have a genetic wall erected between them.

yes

Literally any offense. They don’t even run the slot T that well. And the belief that vidor kids “can’t” do a modern offense (a belief that Coach Matthews has shamelessly expressed in news interviews) is baseless. There is nothing different between the PNG / Nederland kids and the Vidor kids except that the Vidor kids’ coaches think the Vidor kids can’t learn how to throw a ball.

Why not look for an outside hire? Vidor could do a lot with a different offense (and defense). I’d love to see it.

SOC would have had about 50 people if the game had been in Houston. Number of fans doesn’t control the game outcome, but it certainly didn’t hurt they were able to have a decent crowd since the game was played in their backyard.

Aledo feels like kind of a given

I would take a tax increase to get Surratt. More than happy with coach Joseph at png, but if and when he leaves …

Game day! Let’s get it.