Whats does Colmesneil have coming back??

[superstud]

After some looking the starting quarterback from Texas recruited by Mack Brown went 1-9 his senior year. Graylond Arnold headed to Baylor 2-8 senior year. Shock Linwood 5-5 none made playoffs senior year.

[oldschool2]

34 minutes ago, superstud said:

And it looks like your reading comprehension needs some work. I said they would still be very good. May not win state but still very good. I have seen many big time D1 commits at the TB and QB position at small schools that don't win state or even make it three rounds deep. Shock Linwood breaking records at Baylor as a TB had a 5 and 5 season his senior year. POINT PROVEN. Tyron Swoopes, Traylon Shead, The Baylor kid from kountze none won State Championships.

no, my comprehension is just fine.  Not that I need to debate with you about that.

And no your point is not proven.  Yes, when you get to a certain level it takes more than one superstar to get it done. All of the kids you mentioned played schools that takes more than one star to beat.   But if you put any of the kids you just mentioned in Colmesneil's backfield...then yes they go from a losing team to a winning team.  I really don't care who the coach is.  Will they win state?..Maybe not.  Maybe tho.  Just goes to show that perhaps the rest of the players for the Waskom State title team may have been better than you think.

My point was this...Colmesneil will not win with the kids they currently have.  You said..."Waskom had a tradition of losing as well"... and the Coach made all the difference.  Well..that just isn't true.  Had that coach come to Colmesneil instead of Waskom...Colmesneil would've still been terrible.  And Waskom would've still been good.

I'm a basketball guy so here's something you need to remember.. Phil Jackson won ZERO championships in Chicago without Michael Jordan. But, won 6 with him.  Wow...what a funny coincidence 

Players can make the difference in someone being Coach of the Year... or being fired.

[PlayActionPass]

2 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

no, my comprehension is just fine.  Not that I need to debate with you about that.

And no your point is not proven.  Yes, when you get to a certain level it takes more than one superstar to get it done. All of the kids you mentioned played schools that takes more than one star to beat.   But if you put any of the kids you just mentioned in Colmesneil's backfield...then yes they go from a losing team to a winning team.  I really don't care who the coach is.  Will they win state?..Maybe not.  Maybe tho.  Just goes to show that perhaps the rest of the players for the Waskom State title team may have been better than you think.

My point was this...Colmesneil will not win with the kids they currently have.  You said..."Waskom had a tradition of losing as well"... and the Coach made all the difference.  Well..that just isn't true.  Had that coach come to Colmesneil instead of Waskom...Colmesneil would've still been terrible.  And Waskom would've still been good.

I'm a basketball guy so here's something you need to remember.. Phil Jackson won ZERO championships in Chicago without Michael Jordan. But, won 6 with him.  Wow...what a funny coincidence 

Players can make the difference in someone being Coach of the Year... or being fired.

Not going to argue with you, but comparing high school football to the NBA might not be the best comparison.

And to correct one misconception, Tyrone Swoopes went to Whitewright High School which has a similar enrollment as Colmesneil and they were still 1-9 his senior year.

[RETIREDFAN1]

3 minutes ago, PlayActionPass said:

Not going to argue with you, but comparing high school football to the NBA might not be the best comparison.

And to correct one misconception, Tyrone Swoopes went to Whitewright High School which has a similar enrollment as Colmesneil and they were still 1-9 his senior year.

last realignment: Colmesneil 133 kids....Whitewright 245 kids....no similarity whatsoever in enrollment.......

[superstud]

Well how bout this. Waskom and Linden Kildare were in the same district so yeah the numbers were comparable. I also disagree that waskom would have done what they did without that coach. If he was the coach at colmesneil they would win. Probably not a state title I wont argue that but they would win more games and be a lot more competitive.... 

Coaching Matters!

[Guest]

Athletes matter.

I'll take 3 stud athletes at a 2a program, with ONE good coach (does not have to be AD/HC or DC) but one good offensive minded coach and I'll kill your BEST COACHED team in the state with no athletes ANY DAY of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

[TomEvans]

33 minutes ago, Colmesneilfan1 said:

last realignment: Colmesneil 133 kids....Whitewright 245 kids....no similarity whatsoever in enrollment.......

That is very similar, 1 is Division 1 and the other Division 2.  Both are 2A...

[RETIREDFAN1]

112 kids is a lot.....there is no similarity at all between the two.......

[oldschool2]

37 minutes ago, superstud said:

Well how bout this. Waskom and Linden Kildare were in the same district so yeah the numbers were comparable. I also disagree that waskom would have done what they did without that coach. If he was the coach at colmesneil they would win. Probably not a state title I wont argue that but they would win more games and be a lot more competitive.... 

Coaching Matters!

Lets do this...you hand pick 25 football coaches from anywhere in the country, including college and pro...and let them coach at Colmesneil High School with the kids they had this last year.  I'll let my 4 year old granddaughter be head coach at Bremond with the current coaches they have on staff, and the players they had this year.

Both get 16 weeks to prepare...How do you think it's going to go?  Because I know how it's going to go...It will be a true testament to how much or little you think coaching truly matters. 

[superstud]

1 hour ago, oldschool2 said:

Lets do this...you hand pick 25 football coaches from anywhere in the country, including college and pro...and let them coach at Colmesneil High School with the kids they had this last year.  I'll let my 4 year old granddaughter be head coach at Bremond with the current coaches they have on staff, and the players they had this year.

Both get 16 weeks to prepare...How do you think it's going to go?  Because I know how it's going to go...It will be a true testament to how much or little you think coaching truly matters. 

I would agree with you but then we would both be wrong. 

You said current coaching staff. What are they not real coaches? I am sure they have great coaches other than the AD on staff. So they would still have good coaching. Put two teams that are relative in skill level and I take the better coaching staff everytime. There is a reason Nick Saban and Urban Meyer win championships and at multiple schools. Not on talent alone.

Coaching Matters!

[PlayActionPass]

Yes, Oldschool2, talent does matter. It is much easier to win with talent. Yes, talent beats coaching. We have all heard the argument and to some extent it is true. But, if you don't think coaching matters, then you are wrong.

[oldschool2]

13 minutes ago, superstud said:

I would agree with you but then we would both be wrong. 

You said current coaching staff. What are they not real coaches? I am sure they have great coaches other than the AD on staff. So they would still have good coaching. Put two teams that are relative in skill level and I take the better coaching staff everytime. There is a reason Nick Saban and Urban Meyer win championships and at multiple schools. Not on talent alone.

Coaching Matters!

You just proved my point with that one single statement.  You are comparing Colmesneil and Waskom...they are not relative in skill level.

11 minutes ago, PlayActionPass said:

Yes, Oldschool2, talent does matter. It is much easier to win with talent. Yes, talent beats coaching. We have all heard the argument and to some extent it is true. But, if you don't think coaching matters, then you are wrong.

Did I say even one time that coaching doesn't matter AT ALL?  Because I'm pretty sure I didn't.  But I can tell you this...you can't name a single coach that's ever won any championship of any kind with only bad players.  You can NOT do it.

[PlayActionPass]

5 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

You just proved my point with that one single statement.  You are comparing Colmesneil and Waskom...they are not relative in skill level.

Did I say even one time that coaching doesn't matter AT ALL?  Because I'm pretty sure I didn't.  But I can tell you this...you can't name a single coach that's ever won any championship of any kind with only bad players.  You can NOT do it.

That is very true. But part of the process is developing talent, putting kids in the best position to be successful, making the most of the skills that they do have and then getting them to give you everything that they have. That is coaching, coaching is not just X's and O's.

[oldschool2]

4 minutes ago, PlayActionPass said:

That is very true. But part of the process is developing talent, putting kids in the best position to be successful, making the most of the skills that they do have and then getting them to give you everything that they have. That is coaching, coaching is not just X's and O's.

I'm not saying you're wrong.  I'm just saying that cards you were dealt has a lot more to do with it than being a great coach.  I personally think some of the best coaches in the state are some that have maybe never even won a playoff game.  And some coaches aren't very good coaches but may have been blessed with exceptional talent.

It's a lot easier to teach a 6'4 265lb lineman to block than it is with a 5'10 145lb lineman.

[PlayActionPass]

3 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

It's a lot easier to teach a 6'4 265lb lineman to block than it is with a 5'10 145lb lineman.

Not really, but it easier to teach him to get in the way and sometimes that is all you need.

And some of the best COACHES are not the winning-est coaches, this we can agree on.

[oldschool2]

11 minutes ago, PlayActionPass said:

Not really, but it easier to teach him to get in the way and sometimes that is all you need.

And some of the best COACHES are not the winning-est coaches, this we can agree on.

Lot easier to get the first one into a college uniform than the second.

[TomEvans]

4 hours ago, Colmesneilfan1 said:

112 kids is a lot.....there is no similarity at all between the two.......

I agree that it is a lot for you, but it is not a lot.  Cut off numbers for this year in 2A is a difference of 115.  (105-220)  So, I think that they are comparable.  Tell Big Sandy that 112 kids is a lot when they are running Nederland and others out of the gym...  C'mon.  

Don't say that football is different.  2A's routinely beat 3A's, 3A's routinely beat 4A's, etc, etc, etc. 

Face it.  The level of play/talent in Colmesneil is down.  You got rid of a coach because he....lost.  The next guy will lose too.  And the one after that, and the one after that, and the one after that.  Maybe in 30 years or so you will find a group that can be successful.

[superstud]

i wasn't comparing Waskom and colmesneil. You said Waskom won state because of one guy and at that level one guy is all you need. I was pointing out that is wrong. One guy goes a long way but doesn't win state. That's when I brought shock Linwood into it and compared his season with chan amie from waskoms. Who are in the same district. Talent in that case didn't go the whole way. And part of coaching is building programs up and putting kids in the right position to be successful. The Waskom coach didn't do it over night. He developed his players for their entire high school career before they won state. Something a coach hadn't done before him. He didn't just walk in and all of a sudden they had studs walking the halls. He developed them for years. That makes a great coach. 

[Guest]

This is an interesting thread. Some people are making others arguments and not even realizing it. Awesome.

[RETIREDFAN1]

12 hours ago, TomEvans said:

I agree that it is a lot for you, but it is not a lot.  Cut off numbers for this year in 2A is a difference of 115.  (105-220)  So, I think that they are comparable.  Tell Big Sandy that 112 kids is a lot when they are running Nederland and others out of the gym...  C'mon.  

Don't say that football is different.  2A's routinely beat 3A's, 3A's routinely beat 4A's, etc, etc, etc.

When one attempts to compare Apple's to oranges, one can come up with all kinds of absurdities.........

[CardinalBacker]

This has to be the biggest Colmesneil thread evah. 

[oldschool2]

10 hours ago, superstud said:

i wasn't comparing Waskom and colmesneil. You said Waskom won state because of one guy and at that level one guy is all you need. I was pointing out that is wrong. One guy goes a long way but doesn't win state. That's when I brought shock Linwood into it and compared his season with chan amie from waskoms. Who are in the same district. Talent in that case didn't go the whole way. And part of coaching is building programs up and putting kids in the right position to be successful. The Waskom coach didn't do it over night. He developed his players for their entire high school career before they won state. Something a coach hadn't done before him. He didn't just walk in and all of a sudden they had studs walking the halls. He developed them for years. That makes a great coach. 

Yeah..I inferred that Waskom won state because they had a D1 commit in the backfield.  He didn't win it by himself...but without him, I'll bet money that they don't win it.  You take that kid out of the equation, they don't win it.  You take a different kid out of the equation...they are probably still VERY good.  

You gave some names of some small school super stars that were on terrible teams.  Yeah...great job.  There are surely more examples that you can't even think of.  But there are just as many or more examples of super star small school guys who were the reason their team was really good.

And we will see how great of a coach he really is before long....Because every year he's been there is another year he's gotten to "develop" them.  So technically he should keep racking up titles right?  After he loses the kids I'm talking about that is...  Right?

[superstud]

He lost three or four kids last year that were studs and only had one left. I thought he wouldnt do it again and I was wrong. They were even better this year than last beating Center. I don't think you have the talent year in and year out to win state championships at about any school but good coaching can keep you in a winning season even with much less talent. It takes a special combination of athletes and coaching to win titles. Rarely the most talented team wins state. 

[oldschool2]

24 minutes ago, superstud said:

He lost three or four kids last year that were studs and only had one left. I thought he wouldnt do it again and I was wrong. They were even better this year than last beating Center. I don't think you have the talent year in and year out to win state championships at about any school but good coaching can keep you in a winning season even with much less talent. It takes a special combination of athletes and coaching to win titles. Rarely the most talented team wins state. 

Well it seems you are finally starting to get it...my original point to this whole mess was that Colmesneil will not win, no matter who they hire.  You then fired off some nonsense about how Waskom was traditionally bad and then the new coach fixed it.  Are you now admitting that Waskom had the talent to win on a high level.

Because Colmesneil does NOT have the talent...and that's ok.  But can you finally admit that even the Waskom coach will not be successful at Colmesneil like he was at Waskom.  I sure hope so...I'm done with this either way.  This conversation is making my IQ drop.

[PlayActionPass]

3 minutes ago, oldschool2 said:

Well it seems you are finally starting to get it...my original point to this whole mess was that Colmesneil will not win, no matter who they hire.  You then fired off some nonsense about how Waskom was traditionally bad and then the new coach fixed it.  Are you now admitting that Waskom had the talent to win on a high level.

Because Colmesneil does NOT have the talent...and that's ok.  But can you finally admit that even the Waskom coach will not be successful at Colmesneil like he was at Waskom.  I sure hope so...I'm done with this either way.  This conversation is making my IQ drop.

I actually think the arguments for all involved have been supported by each others comments. We all know talent is necessary to win and especially to win championships. Good coaching can overcome some deficiencies, but not a total lack of genetic makeup. Great coaches can develop talent if given the amount of time necessary and great coaches can scheme and put the talent they do have in the best position to be successful.

Now after watching some Colmesneil film, there was more talent on this years team than many are giving them credit for.