Jump to content

West Orange-Stark 24 Silsbee 21/FINAL


ST413

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, venom33 said:

I would venture to say that lack of execution is playing a part as well. 

I agree. But its week 7 and QB hasn't gotten any better. U have to do things he can do or go with the sophomore. He throws the ball better.he made a few mistakes but haven't we all. And u totally give up on him.lord knows I'm trying to knock #2 the kid isn't accurate at all. Makes a few plays here and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said this was a toss up game.These two were evenly matched from what saw.Could have gone either way.That 4th down call to go for it by Silsbee with 30 something seconds left was really stupid.Punt the ball and try to win it in overtime.Mustang still having problems scoring td's when they're in the red zone.Great win for the Stangs.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, MMstangfan said:

Well that wasn’t one sided , we had ball 2nd and goal from 4 , and they drop QB back ?? ?? I’d ave given it to Copper 3 times. 

Ty. Bcz I don't get it !! The kid makes mistakes from time to time.and I'm just smdh.thankfully silsbee play calling hurt them in the end. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, GUNHO said:

I said this was a toss up game.These two were evenly matched from what saw.Could have gone either way.That 4th down call to go for it by Silsbee with 30 something seconds left was really stupid.Punt the ball and try to win it in overtime.Mustang still having problems scoring td's when they're in the red zone.Great win for the Stangs.   

Or run on third and let the clock run all the way down and throw it deep on fourth. Dont give them any time with a good kicker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ST413 said:

Or run on third and let the clock run all the way down and throw it deep on fourth. Dont give them any time with a good kicker.

I agree.Funny but our kicking game cost us the game with Nederland.Didn't make one extra point but the kid has really improved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First congratulations Wos on the win.

I have to say i am surprised at the number of points in this one.  I didnt really think we would score 21, well at least until last week.  As far as wos 24 pts. ,  suprising to me but not so much since 10 were really by special teams and the defense.  Credit that d with the fg after putting he deep in our end and the offense not doing anything. I would really like to see some stats on this one.  Other than that td drive in the 4th, the only time wos really had us on our heals was the one possesion where they threw some short passes. As far as your qb goes,  i was kind of neutral on him.  He may not be up to the standards you are used to but i didnt think he was that bad either.  He did have the big overthrow down field that had 6 written all over it but i didnt see many other bad throws.  23 is another tough little back but that offense just sputters.  I didnt really think the chain gang was quite up to par either but they did what they needed to do when it was time to win.

now as far as my Tigers,  i know its a dissapointing loss..  we fought and played a pretty good game.  As far as our play calling i dont always agree but we dont have a reliable passing game either.  I saw a couple plays i liked in that department including the one on third down before the fake punt that i am still not sure was on purpose.  The qb was just a little off on that throw.  I didnt like going for it and giving them that short field at all.  However thats getting the bad”press” for just the opposite of what Jason Garret got it for sunday night.  As far as the repeated runs up the middle, that was really the only thing we were getting yards on consistently. Yet you have to keep them on their toes.

overall i am still not sure if we are all overreacting on both of these teams at this point.  Or if both just arent quite what we expect.  Heres to a good rest of the season for both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    46,206
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Ceb2000
    Newest Member
    Ceb2000
    Joined



  • Posts

    • You got a LOT more than that, you’ve got Riceland filling up. GCM is dropping down from 23-6A back down to 5A in ‘26.  GCCISD is redrawing attendance zones to make sure of that.  At the same time, BH was only about 100 students under the 6A threshold last time UIL drew districts so BH is definitely going up to 6A when those maps get redrawn, probably right into the empty spot in 23-6A GCM is leaving when they drop down.
    • Like I said, even if it’s only 10% of the 100 kids BHISD takes from GCCISD each year, that’s 10 athletes per year and that’s being generous.  You’re right about the jobs with BHISD, BTW.  There’s more than 1 athlete from Baytown originally who got transferred to BHISD after a job opened up for Mama.
    • Here’s a link to another story about it This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
    • It’s behind a paywall but here’s Baytown Sun’s story on it.  It was reported on in other papers statewide so if you search by the date I think you’ll find other stories on it. UIL strengthens student transfer rules By Ron McDowell [email protected] Oct 18, 2024   In order to maintain a level playing field for all member schools, the University Interscholastic League strengthened rules regarding transfer student eligibility at its most recent meeting in Austin. Every year thousands of students transfer schools in the state of Texas. A student’s ability to participate in UIL sanctioned activities may be limited base on the reasons for the transfer. A change in family status, work transfers, enrollment in an academic magnet program, or a move across town, receive scrutiny, but only rarely does one of these reasons result in the loss of eligibility. The only reason to automatically cause the loss of participation eligibility is a transfer for athletic purposes. The current rule, which has been in place since 1981, does not require a Previous Athletic Participation Form (PAPFs) to be submitted if the student-athlete does not participate in a varsity level sport during the first year of enrollment. There has been growing concern among some member schools, that other members are breaking the current rule and creating “super teams” with new transfer enrollees, and that the UIL is not doing enough to police, what appear to be, the inordinate number of transfers among high school athletes. To mitigate these concerns, the UIL approved a proposal to expand the power of the State Executive Committee (SEC) and allow it to investigate schools based upon the number of PAPFs submitted. Schools that submit an inordinate number of PAPFs would face heightened scrutiny and possible public reprimand and future sanctions. The UIL has also changed the requirements for PAPF submission, mandating that the form be submitted before a grade 9-12 transfer student may participate at any level of school athletics. This is a marked departure from the current policy which encourages schools not to complete PAPFs for students who transfer in, if the school believes that the student will not play a varsity sport in the first year the student is enrolled at the new school. Some critics of the current system think that the change doesn’t go far enough. Speaking on background, one local school district source suggested that there should be an automatic year wait for transfer students due to the number of loopholes in the waiver process. “If a student transfers, it should be a year out of competition automatically,” the source said. In addition, the UIL also approved a proposal that gives the SEC the power to appoint an independent administrator to oversee the conduct of the local District Executive Committee (DEC) if it is determined that the DEC is not consistently enforcing the rules of the governing body. The change is significant since all appeals that a school brings, starts and usually ends with the DEC. That includes the determination of transfer student eligibility. It is believed that with the implementation of this change, schools in a UIL district will be less likely to face retribution from the DEC chair and other members. The policy changes will go into effect, Aug. 1, 2025 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up  
    • I was hoping WOS was going to win. To get another chance to redeem ourself. Silsbee did not look good in that game and has not played consistent during the season. Hopefully against La Vega they will play 4quarters of football
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...