Silsbee 35 Lumberton 13/FINAL

[Tigers2010]

9 minutes ago, Raiders94 said:

I'm sure its hard for some parents to get their kids to some camps. I pay a good bit of money for position specific camps and it does help. But also their are situations where players positions changes ( linebacker to guard) and the parents feel like they have wasted their money.  

I am not at all blaming anything on the parents, or really the players. I think our perception is wrong here. Yes, we love football, and it is great tradition for the communities, but is it really? Compared to the teams that are consistently in it, I don't think so. Again that is just me. 

[BMTSoulja1]

14 minutes ago, bigdog said:

I disagree, actually with the whole premise as I have already had this discussion before not even a week ago.  I don't want to rehash that whole thread again, but  there are teams (white teams as you put it) in this area that have made deep runs  fairly recently in the playoffs and can always do it again if everything falls right.  There is always a modicum of luck involved in a deep run ,  the playoff draw, a fumble goes the right way, weather.   I have seen teams from here win playoff games that no one picked them to win many times.  That's what makes the playoffs interesting.

 

I'm talking a out constant teams majority white kids like Katy for example...

[Bigdog]

4 minutes ago, BMTSoulja1 said:

I'm talking a out constant teams majority white kids like Katy for example...

7 minutes ago, Tigers2010 said:

I didn't put it that way. There has been a handful of people in the last couple of weeks put it that way, I have not. I try to stay away from that. I'm confused on what you disagree with. We seems to be on the same page.  I am assuming that you disagree that other areas take a more active approach to winning rather than hoping to make a run every few years or hoping to get a fumble or pick six? I don't have the data but I would bet the farm that the teams that are consistently in the mix every year, do more than just breed the athletes. It has to be a lifestyle to win big time highschool football games. It's not a August to November life and win a title. It has to be your job year around, and I imaging that those teams that are in it every year dedicate their time and money to winning it. Idk, everybody has opinions. 

All teams have the same goal every year.   Coaching is a big part of it, and that goes for during the offseason  as well.   Ned for example was really good in the 50's and 60's and then faded off until Neumann got here and now Barrow.  Like I said , Katy disappeared for a long time until the current coach got there.   Mojo is gone now after a couple of good coaches in the 70's and 80s.   Highland Park  went 50 years between championships, probably coaching and population related.

[Tigers2010]

20 minutes ago, BMTSoulja1 said:

I'm talking a out constant teams majority white kids like Katy for example...

$$$$ you already know. It is not the field it is the resources that comes with. Coaching staff. Position Coaches that are more knowledgeable than many HC's here, perfecting an individual players craft. 

If asked you to build a house and gave you all the wood and a hammer and a nail it would not be that great.

If I gave the same contractor unlimited tools and resources and said, build a house, which turns out better?

Katy just don't talk the football is life theme, they show it. Year around.

 

[BMTSoulja1]

4 minutes ago, bigdog said:

All teams have the same goal every year.   Coaching is a big part of it, and that goes for during the offseason  as well.   Ned for example was really good in the 50's and 60's and then faded off until Neumann got here and now Barrow.  Like I said , Katy disappeared for a long time until the current coach got there.   Mojo is gone now after a couple of good coaches in the 70's and 80s.   Highland Park  went 50 years between championships, probably coaching and population related.

So, you're saying its more program related and/or the pedigree of athlete?

[Tigers2010]

8 minutes ago, bigdog said:

All teams have the same goal every year.   Coaching is a big part of it, and that goes for during the offseason  as well.   Ned for example was really good in the 50's and 60's and then faded off until Neumann got here and now Barrow.  Like I said , Katy disappeared for a long time until the current coach got there.   Mojo is gone now after a couple of good coaches in the 70's and 80s.   Highland Park  went 50 years between championships, probably coaching and population related.

All teams may have the same goal, but not all teams are doing what it takes to have a shot at that goal, and some no matter what they do, wouldn't.

[Tigers2010]

Superior Coaching, Superior Resources, Superior Talent.

At a smaller school, you ain't winning State without 2 of the 3 

5A-6A you ain't winning a title without 3-3.

White,Black,Hispanic, Asian, don't matter. 

[Bigdog]

4 minutes ago, BMTSoulja1 said:

So, you're saying its more program related and/or the pedigree of athlete?

Both.  And both are cyclical.   Ned and PNG both had good athletes in the 80's but both teams didn't have good coaches.  Vidor is a prime example, look at the ups and downs of their seasons, the coach is the same since 99 but when they have the athletes they make more noise.   And Katy, NS and some those other teams don't make it deep every year, sometimes they get knocked off too.

[Tigers2010]

6 minutes ago, bigdog said:

Both.  And both are cyclical.   Ned and PNG both had good athletes in the 80's but both teams didn't have good coaches.  Vidor is a prime example, look at the ups and downs of their seasons, the coach is the same since 99 but when they have the athletes they make more noise.   And Katy, NS and some those other teams don't make it deep every year, sometimes they get knocked off too.

Anything before 2000's you going to have to throw out. Times have changed, technology, coaching, how kids are trained, mechanics, the list goes on and on and on. Pre-2000's is irrelevant to the what it takes to win now question.

[Bigdog]

7 minutes ago, Tigers2010 said:

All teams may have the same goal, but not all teams are doing what it takes to have a shot at that goal, and some no matter what they do, wouldn't.

Doubtful.  If the coaching is good they have the kids doing what they need to do to prepare for the season.  You are also leaving out population shifts as a reason you see deeper runs more often by Houston and Dallas area teams.   Both areas are exploding in growth which give you a much deeper talent pool.

[BMTSoulja1]

7 minutes ago, Tigers2010 said:

Superior Coaching, Superior Resources, Superior Talent.

At a smaller school, you ain't winning State without 2 of the 3 

5A-6A you ain't winning a title without 3-3.

White,Black,Hispanic, Asian, don't matter. 

Gotcha...

[Tigers2010]

7 minutes ago, bigdog said:

Doubtful.  If the coaching is good they have the kids doing what they need to do to prepare for the season.  You are also leaving out population shifts as a reason you see deeper runs more often by Houston and Dallas area teams.   Both areas are exploding in growth which give you a much deeper talent pool.

What is doubtful? That some teams aren't doing what they need to do to win a State title? Please..

[Tigers2010]

8 minutes ago, BMTSoulja1 said:

Gotcha...

You agree? That is just me.

[Bigdog]

5 minutes ago, Tigers2010 said:

Anything before 2000's you going to have to throw out. Times have changed, technology, coaching, how kids are trained, mechanics, the list goes on and on and on. Pre-2000's is irrelevant to the what it takes to win now question.

Nope, teams with a history of winning tend to know what to do to get back to that.  Teams that don't tend to fade out or panic once they get to the playoffs.  Especially if the coach has been there for a long time which is another big part of it .   If you don't have some consistency in coaching it is hard to get a program going in the right direction.    the BMT schools are a prime example of that.  (Sorry Soulja).

[Bigdog]

4 minutes ago, Tigers2010 said:

What is doubtful? That some teams aren't doing what they need to do to win a State title? Please..

The implication that teams around here aren't doing it.   Are you a Silsbee fan or from somewhere else?

[BMTSoulja1]

5 minutes ago, bigdog said:

Nope, teams with a history of winning tend to know what to do to get back to that.  Teams that don't tend to fade out or panic once they get to the playoffs.  Especially if the coach has been there for a long time which is another big part of it .   If you don't have some consistency in coaching it is hard to get a program going in the right direction.    the BMT schools are a prime example of that.  (Sorry Soulja).

No, point well taken.  Good point and example...

[Bigdog]

5 minutes ago, bigdog said:

Nope, teams with a history of winning tend to know what to do to get back to that.  Teams that don't tend to fade out or panic once they get to the playoffs.  Especially if the coach has been there for a long time which is another big part of it .   If you don't have some consistency in coaching it is hard to get a program going in the right direction.    the BMT schools are a prime example of that.  (Sorry Soulja).

Nederland, for example went out early in the playoffs the first couple of years after Neumann got there because they weren't used to being there.  Once he established that the team could make it there and advance, you started seeing deeper runs.

[Bigdog]

Lumberton , since it is a Lumberton thread, started establishing some of that swagger in 07-08 but then the coach had a couple of bad years and then left.  Some of that was talent since they are a small school (same thing with Vidor) the talent is a lot more cyclical than for bigger schools that have more kids to choose from.

[SETX Football Lover]

15 minutes ago, bigdog said:

Nope, teams with a history of winning tend to know what to do to get back to that.  Teams that don't tend to fade out or panic once they get to the playoffs.  Especially if the coach has been there for a long time which is another big part of it .   If you don't have some consistency in coaching it is hard to get a program going in the right direction.    the BMT schools are a prime example of that.  (Sorry Soulja).

You love bringing up 80s, 70, etc. These kids were born in 2000 on down. When you have to refer to championships from 30 plus years ago you no longer have a history of winning.  You just won a long time ago and havent won since. Thats the typical dallas cowboy fan argument, all the glory 30 years ago with nothing but a couple runs to show today.

Unless you define winning as a few deep playoff runs every few years.

College station is brand new and has had success more than anyone in setx

[Tigers2010]

10 minutes ago, bigdog said:

The implication that teams around here aren't doing it.   Are you a Silsbee fan or from somewhere else?

No, the Tigers thing is from college 2010 is from kids. I have family all over the areas, from big school to little schools. Coaches, players, former players... I am no expert. These are strictly opinions formed from what I see. I am not implying coaches aren't trying to win every year. I am saying some lack the players, some lack the coaching talents needed, some lack the resources. In today's high school football, the teams winning it especially in the upper levels, aren't lacking in any of the 3 discussed areas. 

[Coach #23]

Comes down to culture, quality coaching, and disciplined program. Can't wait til kids get to high school to develop them.  Has to start at the lower levels.  High school staff has to be involved all the way down to the elementary level. You have to build the right culture through discipline, hard work, and a good off season program. And you have the have coaches that go, above and beyond, with passion. Some schools have this, in all or certain sports, some don't. Two good examples are Brock and Argyle.  Year in and year out, they are deep in the playoffs in several sports.

[Tigers2010]

12 minutes ago, bigdog said:

Lumberton , since it is a Lumberton thread, started establishing some of that swagger in 07-08 but then the coach had a couple of bad years and then left.  Some of that was talent since they are a small school (same thing with Vidor) the talent is a lot more cyclical than for bigger schools that have more kids to choose from.

Shiiii, I gotta get back to work before I get canned. We gonna have to agree to see things from different perspectives. Athletes,Coaches (not just HC), Resources (not just turf). Gotta have all 3 to win in 5A-6A... Got have at least 2 to win under that. Thanks for the conversation, it was fun.

[Bigdog]

6 minutes ago, Tigers2010 said:

No, the Tigers thing is from college 2010 is from kids. I have family all over the areas, from big school to little schools. Coaches, players, former players... I am no expert. These are strictly opinions formed from what I see. I am not implying coaches aren't trying to win every year. I am saying some lack the players, some lack the coaching talents needed, some lack the resources. In today's high school football, the teams winning it especially in the upper levels, aren't lacking in any of the 3 discussed areas. 

I agree, but I think the coaches and players are doing as much as they can with what they have.

[Tigers2010]

6 minutes ago, bigdog said:

I agree, but I think the coaches and players are doing as much as they can with what they have.

This is my exact point. Some have the players, some have the coaching, not everybody has the resources. Gotta go for real this time lol

[Bigdog]

11 minutes ago, WHO DAT???? said:

You love bringing up 80s, 70, etc. These kids were born in 2000 on down. When you have to refer to championships from 30 plus years ago you no longer have a history of winning.  You just won a long time ago and havent won since. Thats the typical dallas cowboy fan argument, all the glory 30 years ago with nothing but a couple runs to show today.

Unless you define winning as a few deep playoff runs every few years.

College station is brand new and has had success more than anyone in setx

Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.   A coach that has been deep in the playoffs knows what to do to get back.  Coaches that haven't are playing it more by ear.   That's why there is a history.  You don't think those kids didn't go to playoff games when they were younger and wanted to be on the teams when they hit high school?   If the team was bad when they were younger you think that encourages them to be a football player ?   Why do think that Ned had more players out there than United a couple of weeks ago?