Tarkington Open

[Reagan]

4 hours ago, oldschool2 said:

Are you going to reply to my earlier comment?.. or just ignore it because it makes you argument dumb?

By the way.. nobody is saying that coaching doesn't matter.  But even "elite coaches" as you say have to have some talent.  They have to have big time talent to win titles (future college athletes) and you're comparing the talent at Tarkington to that of.. let's see.. Aledo, Carthage, Stephenville, Southlake Carrol, Austin Westlake.. um.. are you seriously that clueless?

Not a single coach to have ever won a state championship is going to Tarkington High School and winning a state championship in the relative future without some serious transfers.  

2004      R              9-3-0         390-253         Tom Westerberg
2005      R              9-3-0         304-247         Tom Westerberg
2006      C--          13-2-0         510-353         Tom Westerberg
2007      C--          10-1-0         436-299         Tom Westerberg
2008      C--          15-1-0         548-268         Tom Westerberg
2009      C--          10-2-0         490-214         Tom Westerberg
2010      C--          10-2-0         466-270         Tom Westerberg
2011      C--          11-1-0         476-253         Tom Westerberg
2012      C--          15-1-0         702-301         Tom Westerberg
2013      C--          16-0-0         807-298         Tom Westerberg
2014      C--          16-0-0         791-417         Tom Westerberg
2015      C--          14-1-0         710-247         Tom Westerberg

Hummm, let's see -- was Murrey there for all of these wins and all of these State Titles?  If so, then he would have had to fail and they forged his grades!  LOL!!  So, Murrey could have been responsible for possibly 3 Titles or maybe just 2.  Did he start at QB as a Sophomore for one of the Titles?  Westerburg's total record was 148-24.  All these because of Murrey?  It's interesting how you people just happen to leave out Westerburg's record and State Title (s) without Murrey!! 

I have answered many times about Westerburg at BH.  But i'll be glad to do it again.  There are no guarantees.  It took him 5 years to win the Title and he left after the fifth year at BH.  He had them going in the right direction.  And I think, in time, that he would have had a Title.  Of course this is my opinion and presumption.  I understand he is the new HC at Salado.  

I would like to bring up an interesting correlation concerning what was recently discussed.  Back when we discussing BF at PNG, I said if he couldn't win a Title in 12 then probably wasn't going to happen.  Then I brought up the point then even with one of the best QB's in the state, if not the nation, BF couldn't couldn't bring a Title.  And guess what the BF apologist said: " You can't do it with just a great QB."   But wait a minute, that all you have been saying about Westerburg and Murrey.  So, which is true?   I would lean towards it takes more than a great QB.  You have to build the team around him to gain a Title.  Something BF was not able to do.  And something Westerburg was able to do.

Oh, BTW:   For 67 years and 8 coaches prior -- Allan did not have any State Titles before Westerburg got there.  What, the talent only showed up when Westerburg got there?!  

 

[JaspD55]

We can argue this to death, but hiring a great coach is just part of a big puzzle. If most of the other pieces are not there , you will not be going to Jerry World, plain and simple. 

[Matthew328]

Well the Tarkington job literally just made it onto THSCA today...lol 

[Reagan]

3 hours ago, oldschool2 said:

I already told you.. it's the lack of faith I have in what Tarkington has had on the field over what Briles would be able to do.  I also told you.. Stephenville won AT LEAST 8 games in a season... ten different seasons before Briles took the job.  Tarkington has never won more than 7 games in a season.  Not even once.  It takes an extreme level of ignorance to believe that coaches can just win championships no matter the level of talent they have to work with.  You, my guy, are displaying that level of ignorance.

I'm also waiting on a response about my question concerning Westerberg.  Did he win the state championships because of his ability to coach?.. or because Kyler Murray was taking snaps?  Or a combination of the two?.. which is what literally everyone in this conversation thinks except you.  My opinion.. Murray had more to do with Westerberg's titles than Westerberg did.  But I believe players > coaches.. Countless examples of subpar coaches winning championships with great players but very few (if any) great coaches winning championships with subpar players.

I swear.. I'm halfway starting to believe that you believe that Art Briles could win a state championship with a junior high team.

Getting back to Tarkington for moment, it's interesting that, according to Dave Campbell this past year, Tarkenton had the largest enrollment in the district.  So why would East Chambers always have the advantage?  It's not like Tarkington is always at an enrollment disadvantage.  Could it be the coaching?!

[bullets13]

35 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Getting back to Tarkington for moment, it's interesting that, according to Dave Campbell this past year, Tarkenton had the largest enrollment in the district.  So why would East Chambers always have the advantage?  It's not like Tarkington is always at an enrollment disadvantage.  Could it be the coaching?!

Nope, it's the athletes (or lack there of).  Yes, EC has a better coach, but I assure you if they swap coaches tomorrow, Tarkington still won't beat EC over the next 7 years (unless Tarkington finds a new source of players).  For that matter, if Briles took over Tarkington tomorrow, HE isn't good enough to bridge that gap without finding some extra players.  Now, to be fair, he might get some transfers based on his name.  There's zero doubt that if you had a 6'6'', 325 lb 15yo son who ran a 4.8 forty,  you'd uproot and move to tarkington next week for your son to play there if Briles took the job.  I'm sure there are others that are just as fanatic about him, which is a weird dynamic of his being ostracized (fairly, in most folks' opinion).  I could definitely see some of the better players from the immediate surrounding area moving in, which would certainly help, but nowhere near enough to make them a serious contender for anything much further than a bi-district win.  

[Reagan]

32 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

Nope, it's the athletes (or lack there of).  Yes, EC has a better coach, but I assure you if they swap coaches tomorrow, Tarkington still won't beat EC over the next 7 years (unless Tarkington finds a new source of players).  For that matter, if Briles took over Tarkington tomorrow, HE isn't good enough to bridge that gap without finding some extra players.  Now, to be fair, he might get some transfers based on his name.  There's zero doubt that if you had a 6'6'', 325 lb 15yo son who ran a 4.8 forty,  you'd uproot and move to tarkington next week for your son to play there if Briles took the job.  I'm sure there are others that are just as fanatic about him, which is a weird dynamic of his being ostracized (fairly, in most folks' opinion).  I could definitely see some of the better players from the immediate surrounding area moving in, which would certainly help, but nowhere near enough to make them a serious contender for anything much further than a bi-district win.  

Plus, if they start winning, there are probably athletes walking the halls that would come out to be a part of the winning team.  Winning solves a whole lot of problems.  

PS:  Why would East Chambers always have the "athletes" and none at Tarkington?  

[Matthew328]

1 hour ago, Reagan said:

Getting back to Tarkington for moment, it's interesting that, according to Dave Campbell this past year, Tarkenton had the largest enrollment in the district.  So why would East Chambers always have the advantage?  It's not like Tarkington is always at an enrollment disadvantage.  Could it be the coaching?!

or better DNA in East Chambers when it comes to football and apparently other sports..isnt East Chambers really good at basketball and soccer as well? 

[bullets13]

5 minutes ago, Matthew328 said:

or better DNA in East Chambers when it comes to football and apparently other sports..isnt East Chambers really good at basketball and soccer as well? 

Yes.  Their soccer team is 23-0-1, and at the regional tournament right now, despite having to compete against a higher classification.  That team is so talented they can basically coach themselves.  

[bullets13]

13 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Plus, if they start winning, there are probably athletes walking the halls that would come out to be a part of the winning team.  Winning solves a whole lot of problems.  

PS:  Why would East Chambers always have the "athletes" and none at Tarkington?  

It's a lack of diversity combined with a lack of community interest/support.  A good coach could improve the interest and support, but not the diversity.  

[SherriffReesie]

21 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Getting back to Tarkington for moment, it's interesting that, according to Dave Campbell this past year, Tarkenton had the largest enrollment in the district.  So why would East Chambers always have the advantage?  It's not like Tarkington is always at an enrollment disadvantage.  Could it be the coaching?!

It is athletes. Stan Howard was the head coach at both East Chambers and Tarkington. At EC he won, I believe 9 games in his only year there. At Tarkington, he didn't win 9 games in his 3 seasons combined. 

[Reagan]

13 minutes ago, SherriffReesie said:

It is athletes. Stan Howard was the head coach at both East Chambers and Tarkington. At EC he won, I believe 9 games in his only year there. At Tarkington, he didn't win 9 games in his 3 seasons combined. 

Look, I agree, things are bad at Tarkington.  I'm sure losing is entrenched in everything they do.  3 years is not long enough to break that strangle hold.  Maybe 7, or maybe 10 years is what is needed!  That's if a coach is willing to stay that long.  East Chambers has that winning attitude that Tarkington will eventually need.  Ol' Stan just didn't want to stay longer.  Plus -- ol' Stan was out of football for 9 years when he went to Tarkington.  I don't think he's a HC any more.

[SherriffReesie]

3 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Look, I agree, things are bad at Tarkington.  I'm sure losing is entrenched in everything they do.  3 years is not long enough to break that straggle hold.  Maybe 7, or maybe 10 years is what is needed!  That's if a coach is willing to stay that long.  East Chambers has that winning attitude that Tarkington will eventually need.  Ol' Stan just didn't want to stay longer.  Plus -- ol' Stan was out of football for 9 years when he went to Tarkington.  I don't think he's a HC any more.

He wasn't out of football. Just wasn't a head coach. He was at Bellville for the 5 years as the assistant HC before he took the Tarkington job. But that tells you that it isn't all coaching. 90% of high school football coaches can/will tell you this saying, "Jimmie's and Joe's not X's and O's". 

[bullets13]

Speaking of the difference athletes can make: Dwayne Dubois is a pretty good example.  Took the program over at HJ and went 8-5 the first year, 11-2 the next, then went to bridge city.  The next year HJ went 2-9, and had a record of 14-36 the next 5 seasons without Dubois.  It would be easy to think that it was all Dubois.  But he had a special group of players for those two years at HJ, and he left the year several graduated, and also took his son, the starting QB with him to Bridge City who coincidentally, or not, had a pretty special group of athletes coming through at the time.  The year before he took over they were 2-8, but in his first two years at BC they went 7-5 and 9-3.  So again, Dubois resurrected a program with his ability, right?  Obviously he's a solid coach, but his third year at BC, after most of his good athletes graduated, he went 1-9.  He then went to HJ were he went 5-5 and then 1-9.  If he was solely responsible for those programs winning, or even a bigger factor than the athletes, there's no way either of those programs would've ever gone 1-9, yet they did when he lost his athletes.  

[Reagan]

1 hour ago, SherriffReesie said:

He wasn't out of football. Just wasn't a head coach. He was at Bellville for the 5 years as the assistant HC before he took the Tarkington job. But that tells you that it isn't all coaching. 90% of high school football coaches can/will tell you this saying, "Jimmie's and Joe's not X's and O's". 

Thanks for the info on Howard.

The bold is the battle cry of coaches with the need to justify their losing records and No State Titles.  You know, it can't be them.  So it has to be the kids!  It also helps fans that wants to defend their coaches.  Like the PNG apologist for BF.  Said he never had the talent to win a Title.  

[Matthew328]

2 hours ago, Reagan said:

Thanks for the info on Howard.

The bold is the battle cry of coaches with the need to justify their losing records and No State Titles.  You know, it can't be them.  So it has to be the kids!  It also helps fans that wants to defend their coaches.  Like the PNG apologist for BF.  Said he never had the talent to win a Title.  

In the times I've seen PNG I never thought Faircloth had the talent to win a title.....

[89Falcon]

For the folks who believe that "Tarkington has talent to win" and that "all they need is a good coach to win a State Title", please remember this prophesy 40 years from now: "Tarkington is/will be tragically slow and weak with no quantifiable football talent. They will never win a championship in football".  

[Hupernikomen]

I have lived in Tarkington quite a while.  My kids played ball here.  There is talent, but it isn't an every year talent like  when I in high school at Jasper.  The talent is spread out with a few in each class, and once every 5 or 6 years there is a group of solid players that do pretty good.  For many years Tarkington was at the bottom of the classification and being outgunned and outmanned was not a good combination.   I expected them to fair better in 3A than they have for sure.

Never have understood what inspires people to put down another community on a message board.  Just not in my character.

Regardless, I hope Tarkington finds a good man who will teach our kids what it means to be a man, and will teach them to give everything they have while on the field with class.

Success breeds excitement and success.  It also brings players to the field who just play this sport or that sport.  In a town like Tarkington it has to be all hands on deck to be competitive.  We have been that before and I believe we can be again.   

Go Horns.

[89Falcon]

8 hours ago, Hupernikomen said:

I have lived in Tarkington quite a while.  My kids played ball here.  There is talent, but it isn't an every year talent like  when I in high school at Jasper.  The talent is spread out with a few in each class, and once every 5 or 6 years there is a group of solid players that do pretty good.  For many years Tarkington was at the bottom of the classification and being outgunned and outmanned was not a good combination.   I expected them to fair better in 3A than they have for sure.

Never have understood what inspires people to put down another community on a message board.  Just not in my character.

Regardless, I hope Tarkington finds a good man who will teach our kids what it means to be a man, and will teach them to give everything they have while on the field with class.

Success breeds excitement and success.  It also brings players to the field who just play this sport or that sport.  In a town like Tarkington it has to be all hands on deck to be competitive.  We have been that before and I believe we can be again.   

Go Horns.

Tarkington kids may very well learn "what it means to be a man", that we be something the community can hang their hat on. But they will be losing in football due to "no talent". 

[Guest mrtomcat]

18 hours ago, bullets13 said:

Nope, it's the athletes (or lack there of).  Yes, EC has a better coach, but I assure you if they swap coaches tomorrow, Tarkington still won't beat EC over the next 7 years (unless Tarkington finds a new source of players).  For that matter, if Briles took over Tarkington tomorrow, HE isn't good enough to bridge that gap without finding some extra players.  Now, to be fair, he might get some transfers based on his name.  There's zero doubt that if you had a 6'6'', 325 lb 15yo son who ran a 4.8 forty,  you'd uproot and move to tarkington next week for your son to play there if Briles took the job.  I'm sure there are others that are just as fanatic about him, which is a weird dynamic of his being ostracized (fairly, in most folks' opinion).  I could definitely see some of the better players from the immediate surrounding area moving in, which would certainly help, but nowhere near enough to make them a serious contender for anything much further than a bi-district win.  

careful what you say here.  sutherland (in tarkington) will still convince about 3 families from beaumont to move to tarkington !!!

lets not pretend all the talent thats came thru EC in the past 20 years has been home grown winnie boys.

i'm not knocking it for a second. sutherland is the greatest recruiter / coach in the history of east chambers and will continue to win until he retires

but lets stop dreaming.  tarkington will never be EC and will never be able to lure in a coach with credentials like RS.

[bullets13]

37 minutes ago, mrtomcat said:

careful what you say here.  sutherland (in tarkington) will still convince about 3 families from beaumont to move to tarkington !!!

lets not pretend all the talent thats came thru EC in the past 20 years has been home grown winnie boys.

i'm not knocking it for a second. sutherland is the greatest recruiter / coach in the history of east chambers and will continue to win until he retires

but lets stop dreaming.  tarkington will never be EC and will never be able to lure in a coach with credentials like RS.

I think he brings in a few players maybe, but the talent pool is still immensely greater year in and year out in EC, Sutherland or no.  EC was winning 9-11 games most years under Valastro before the Sutherlands showed up.  

[bullets13]

19 hours ago, 89Falcon said:

For the folks who believe that "Tarkington has talent to win" and that "all they need is a good coach to win a State Title", please remember this prophesy 40 years from now: "Tarkington is/will be tragically slow and weak with no quantifiable football talent. They will never win a championship in football".  

You've made more than a couple of these comments on here.  It's pretty easy to discuss a team's shortcomings without being a jerk about it.  enough already.  

[Sugarbear]

46 minutes ago, mrtomcat said:

careful what you say here.  sutherland (in tarkington) will still convince about 3 families from beaumont to move to tarkington !!!

lets not pretend all the talent thats came thru EC in the past 20 years has been home grown winnie boys.

i'm not knocking it for a second. sutherland is the greatest recruiter / coach in the history of east chambers and will continue to win until he retires

but lets stop dreaming.  tarkington will never be EC and will never be able to lure in a coach with credentials like RS.

I would say that money talks.   

[SherriffReesie]

55 minutes ago, mrtomcat said:

careful what you say here.  sutherland (in tarkington) will still convince about 3 families from beaumont to move to tarkington !!!

lets not pretend all the talent thats came thru EC in the past 20 years has been home grown winnie boys.

i'm not knocking it for a second. sutherland is the greatest recruiter / coach in the history of east chambers and will continue to win until he retires

but lets stop dreaming.  tarkington will never be EC and will never be able to lure in a coach with credentials like RS.

Tarkington is definitely not a prime location for move ins. There are like 15 rent houses that surround the school and no apartments at all. Everything else is pretty much a house with a couple acres of land. Not many options for people to move in randomly. 

I looked into buying some land in Tarkington and it was well out of my price range. They are very proud of their prairie land. I found cheaper elsewhere. 

[BEARCPA]

13 minutes ago, SherriffReesie said:

Tarkington is definitely not a prime location for move ins. There are like 15 rent houses that surround the school and no apartments at all. Everything else is pretty much a house with a couple acres of land. Not many options for people to move in randomly. 

I looked into buying some land in Tarkington and it was well out of my price range. They are very proud of their prairie land. I found cheaper elsewhere. 

From what I understand this is also why Orangefield's population/enrollment numbers remain stagnant. Its a very desirable school district that people want to move to, and there is tons of acreage that could be developed into neighborhoods and businesses. The property owners just do not want to part ways with their land though, which is totally understandable.

[Hupernikomen]

4 hours ago, 89Falcon said:

Tarkington kids may very well learn "what it means to be a man", that we be something the community can hang their hat on. But they will be losing in football due to "no talent". 

I am proud of both of my young men that I raised here in Tarkington.   The one that stayed in the program learned plenty from good coaches, including x's and o's.   Go find another school to bash for a while and give it a rest.