Jump to content

11-4A UNDEFEATED DISTRICT CHAMP


LOLZ

District 11-4A UNDEFEATED DISTRICT CHAMP  

33 members have voted

  1. 1. Will there be an undefeated district champion in 11-4a?



Recommended Posts

Interesting District Championship facts. Here is the last year that each school either WON or SHARED a District Football Championship. (according to Texas HS Football History website)

2016-Bridge City Cardinals

2008-Livingston Lions

2008-Lumberton Raiders

2007-Splendora Wildcats

1994-LCM Bears

1985-Huffman Falcons

Either way, some school(s) will be able to hang a new banner!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Raiders94 said:

It is tough loosing Bridges, but I think the way we have changed things up we should be ok.

Does that mean you are going to the Slot-T offense ? That was his goal when he first got to Lumberton. Everyone argued that "No thats not his intentions" but just wait and see. He wants to be Mathews ! LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, LOLZ said:

How have you changed things up? Lost two straight going into district?

Well considering we were still under the impression that Bridges would be able to play with a brace going into the Silsbee game, then he hurt his knee worse that week during practice. So I’m sure most of the changes that Raider94 was referring to probably took place the last two weeks during our bye week.

Its tough when you go into a game thinking you will have your qb, but I’m sure Coach Babin has come up with something these past couple of weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, L-Train11 said:

I like our chances going forward if our defense plays like they did second half last night.

Real question is, who wins the toilet bowl between Livingston and BC??

Well depends how many BC kids get ejected for kicking kids in the head during the game. But who knows ID expect BC to win. but to be honest we probably could have put a lot more points on the board but we ran the ball the second half because Crouch didn't want to run the score up. Im sure the BC fans will get on here just like they did against WOS and say they shut us out the second half lol IF we score 33 on you the first half we can put more points up. But whats the point when you run the ball every play and run the clock out for us. We brought up several freshman and sophomores and they got to play in the game. This team is young but I think they can have a bright future with the upcoming talent. Huffman and Lumberton will be fine against BC. The BC coach ran 8 min off the clock in the 3rd quarter I don't think he ever wanted to get back in the game. Then he kicked the ball deep to us instead of onside kicking it. IF Dubois was still there we would have faced a different team last night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, PlayActionPass said:

Tonight will either answer a lot of questions for the Raiders or open up a whole big can of worms.

I saw the rusty can you speak of and it did indeed look like the lid was almost off in the first half.  However, in the second half, as each minute passed and another play made on both sides of the ball, that lid got a little tighter.  By the end, it was screwed down securely and wrapped with duck tape.  I heard a few players drove to the Village Creek bridge after the game and tossed it over the side. 

As for the questions, I think we answered many.  A lot of work still left to do, but we  came away from this game with quite a bit to work with.  We will improve offensively as we iron the wrinkles from an offense that saw its first live play last night.  There is a lot we can do with the simplified version rolled out in this game to make it very effective and efficient.  Defensively, we made some adjustments that will translate well to most of what we will see for the rest of district play.  We showed we can do some things that will improve our pass defense and are already pretty salty against the run. 

Hard work and improvement each week and the Raiders have a real shot to run the table. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LC-M said:

Well depends how many BC kids get ejected for kicking kids in the head during the game. But who knows ID expect BC to win. but to be honest we probably could have put a lot more points on the board but we ran the ball the second half because Crouch didn't want to run the score up. Im sure the BC fans will get on here just like they did against WOS and say they shut us out the second half lol IF we score 33 on you the first half we can put more points up. But whats the point when you run the ball every play and run the clock out for us. We brought up several freshman and sophomores and they got to play in the game. This team is young but I think they can have a bright future with the upcoming talent. Huffman and Lumberton will be fine against BC. The BC coach ran 8 min off the clock in the 3rd quarter I don't think he ever wanted to get back in the game. Then he kicked the ball deep to us instead of onside kicking it. IF Dubois was still there we would have faced a different team last night.

Yeah... the whole thing was puzzling. We had a lot of key players playing both ways, but trying to run a hurry-up offense in the first half... then we started chewing clock once we got down by 20+. New strategy I guess. 

I think we can beat Livingston, but it’s a meaningless win. I don’t see us beating anybody else in the district, no offense. I mean that... we have no offense. We didn’t look this inept the first year we implemented the Slot T, and this is the fourth year in the system. Our first three drives resulted in a 3 and out and three fumbles. You’re not going to beat anybody if you tee them up like that. We played better in the second half, with the long drive and some better defensive efforts. Our secondary is...... not good defending the pass. We don’t tackle. It’s the smallest BC team I can remember in both size and numbers. 

And we’re having kind of season that leads to decreased future participation. It’s a sad time in Cardinal Country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

Yeah... the whole thing was puzzling. We had a lot of key players playing both ways, but trying to run a hurry-up offense in the first half... then we started chewing clock once we got down by 20+. New strategy I guess. 

I think we can beat Livingston, but it’s a meaningless win. I don’t see us beating anybody else in the district, no offense. I mean that... we have no offense. We didn’t look this inept the first year we implemented the Slot T, and this is the fourth year in the system. Our first three drives resulted in a 3 and out and three fumbles. You’re not going to beat anybody if you tee them up like that. We played better in the second half, with the long drive and some better defensive efforts. Our secondary is...... not good defending the pass. We don’t tackle. It’s the smallest BC team I can remember in both size and numbers. 

And we’re having kind of season that leads to decreased future participation. It’s a sad time in Cardinal Country. 

I agree with you. The coaching strategy was off.    Do you think there will be a new coach in a few years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, LC-M said:

I agree with you. The coaching strategy was off.    Do you think there will be a new coach in a few years?

I don’t know... I’m not calling for the guy’s head... he honestly doesn’t have a lot to work with. 

Bc isn’t a football school.. we play baseball. We made some real strides in that direction and outdid ourselves with the Dubois hire. We honestly wouldn’t have gotten him if he wasn’t a hometown guy who wanted to come home. I think we’ll settle back down and play good baseball and lose 8-9 football games per year going forward. 

Its not just a coaching issue. It’s a community issue. The kids don’t care enough about the game to put in their time. Heck, the stands are full of kids that should be playing. If you can turn out 170 kids for the band, but only dress 32 to actually play the game, that tells you what the kids and the community want. 

One of the line coaches has a son that would seem to be a natural line player. He’s huge. You can see him on the sideline tossing balls around. He doesn’t play football... he’s a baseball man. Not trying to single the kid out, but that’s how it goes down in BC. Kids would normally play and spend the offseason lifting and improving aren’t involved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

I don’t know... I’m not calling for the guy’s head... he honestly doesn’t have a lot to work with. 

Bc isn’t a football school.. we play baseball. We made some real strides in that direction and outdid ourselves with the Dubois hire. We honestly wouldn’t have gotten him if he wasn’t a hometown guy who wanted to come home. I think we’ll settle back down and play good baseball and lose 8-9 football games per year going forward. 

Its not just a coaching issue. It’s a community issue. The kids don’t care enough about the game to put in their time. Heck, the stands are full of kids that should be playing. If you can turn out 170 kids for the band, but only dress 32 to actually play the game, that tells you what the kids and the community want. 

One of the line coaches has a son that would seem to be a natural line player. He’s huge. You can see him on the sideline tossing balls around. He doesn’t play football... he’s a baseball man. Not trying to single the kid out, but that’s how it goes down in BC. Kids would normally play and spend the offseason lifting and improving aren’t involved. 

Bridge City plays good baseball. But i thought with Dubois y’all played good competitive football. Last year y’all a had ton of injuries and still played us a close game. Why did Dubois walk away from BC? It couldn’t be a money issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

Yeah... the whole thing was puzzling. We had a lot of key players playing both ways, but trying to run a hurry-up offense in the first half... then we started chewing clock once we got down by 20+. New strategy I guess. 

I think we can beat Livingston, but it’s a meaningless win. I don’t see us beating anybody else in the district, no offense. I mean that... we have no offense. We didn’t look this inept the first year we implemented the Slot T, and this is the fourth year in the system. Our first three drives resulted in a 3 and out and three fumbles. You’re not going to beat anybody if you tee them up like that. We played better in the second half, with the long drive and some better defensive efforts. Our secondary is...... not good defending the pass. We don’t tackle. It’s the smallest BC team I can remember in both size and numbers. 

And we’re having kind of season that leads to decreased future participation. It’s a sad time in Cardinal Country. 

6 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

I don’t know... I’m not calling for the guy’s head... he honestly doesn’t have a lot to work with. 

Bc isn’t a football school.. we play baseball. We made some real strides in that direction and outdid ourselves with the Dubois hire. We honestly wouldn’t have gotten him if he wasn’t a hometown guy who wanted to come home. I think we’ll settle back down and play good baseball and lose 8-9 football games per year going forward. 

Its not just a coaching issue. It’s a community issue. The kids don’t care enough about the game to put in their time. Heck, the stands are full of kids that should be playing. If you can turn out 170 kids for the band, but only dress 32 to actually play the game, that tells you what the kids and the community want. 

One of the line coaches has a son that would seem to be a natural line player. He’s huge. You can see him on the sideline tossing balls around. He doesn’t play football... he’s a baseball man. Not trying to single the kid out, but that’s how it goes down in BC. Kids would normally play and spend the offseason lifting and improving aren’t involved. 

I hear BC has a nice little group coming up. Anybody have information on them? Might be something positive in the near future! 

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...