Tarkington Open

[bullets13]

18 hours ago, Reagan said:

My friend, wrong again!  Never said Tarkington will hire an Elite coach.  I said staying the long term could EVENTUALLY  make this individual an Elite coach.  Just like Aldo made Buchanan an Elite coach and Carthage made Surratt an Elite coach.  Argyle was 1-9 when Rodgers took over.  He was NOT an Elite when he arrived.  He became an Elite because of his ability and staying the long term.

I didn't say you said they'd hire an elite coach.  I said you said that all that's keeping them from eventually winning a state championship is having an elite coach.  and you've said that over and over.

[bullets13]

9 hours ago, PrairieMan said:

All I'm saying is if you're only looking at record that's a pretty unfair way to judge a high school football coach coming up through the ranks. 

For instance, Carpenter was handed a mess of a program for his first head coaching gig at Tarkington. Not only was he fighting the normal talent issues but there was also a total lack of discipline and mindset from everyone involved. He cleaned house and there were some tough years. Once he got it back up on its feet, he then took a decently talented team, beat a bigger school, took them to playoffs, beat Mexia and lost in the second round. Then you want to mock his 6-6 record at KO. Did you even bother to look at the schedule? Did you happen to notice the ringer of schools that they ran through before district even started? It included the state champions who they scored more points on than anyone else did all year long. Also they played the only team that beat North Shore all year and they played a really good Spring team without their QB. I'm just saying, lets stop looking at everything as if it's in vacuum. Different situations for everyone. 

Coach Bass is young and will be the HC somewhere and will win football games, I guarantee you that much. His attitude and leadership here at Tarkington were very impressive. He was handed a similar mess with the previous regime running off some of the talent.

and finally if you don't respect Coach Snelson for the football coach that he is, then that's all I need to know about you. Ask any Texas football coach about the man that he is and the coach that he is. 

That's why reagan is impossible to talk to.  He has it in his head that winning state is the only acceptable outcome to a football season, and that records and championships are the only thing that matter.  He also thinks that having a good coach is the only thing any program needs to become a powerhouse.  All this despite dozens of people disagreeing with him over the course of several different threads about several different teams.  I'd advise you not to waste your time trying to explain it to him, seeing that this is an issue that you obviously care about.  I just do it for fun.

[Reagan]

2 hours ago, bullets13 said:

That's why reagan is impossible to talk to.  He has it in his head that winning state is the only acceptable outcome to a football season, and that records and championships are the only thing that matter.  He also thinks that having a good coach is the only thing any program needs to become a powerhouse.  All this despite dozens of people disagreeing with him over the course of several different threads about several different teams.  I'd advise you not to waste your time trying to explain it to him, seeing that this is an issue that you obviously care about.  I just do it for fun.

1)  What's your expertise in football to make such a statement?  

2)  So, just because the majority, of which 98%-99% or more here do not have the actual knowledge of the subject to make a qualified statement, agree on something just because it "sounds good", makes them right?  I'll leave it at that because I think people here are smart enough to understand how silly that sounds!

[oldschool2]

57 minutes ago, Reagan said:

1)  What's your expertise in football to make such a statement?  

2)  So, just because the majority, of which 98%-99% or more here do not have the actual knowledge of the subject to make a qualified statement, agree on something just because it "sounds good", makes them right?  I'll leave it that because I think people here are smart enough to understand how silly that sounds!

People believing that a state championship doesn't make you a good coach doesn't require expertise.  It requires common sense. 

[Reagan]

1 hour ago, oldschool2 said:

People believing that a state championship doesn't make you a good coach doesn't require expertise.  It requires common sense. 

This I can agree on.  Just like a coach going 0-50.  Not hard to tell this is not a very good coach.  But these are easy based on results you see.  The debate here has always been what does it take to turn a losing program around.  Or what turns a decent program into State Champions?  

Oh, BTW, recently you made a comment on Westerburg only being able to win State Titles at Allen with that great QB he had.  Well, at the time I really never checked Allen and Westerburg.  I just took ya'lls word for it.  But -- I finally looked at the facts.  I responded to your post with Allen's records while Westerburg was HC.  Mighty impressive record WITHOUT that QB!  Plus 1 or 2 Titles WITHOUT that QB.  It's strange how that never gets added or mentioned.  Since you didn't respond when it was posted, care to look back over it and respond now?!

[bullets13]

2 hours ago, Reagan said:

1)  What's your expertise in football to make such a statement?  

2)  So, just because the majority, of which 98%-99% or more here do not have the actual knowledge of the subject to make a qualified statement, agree on something just because it "sounds good", makes them right?  I'll leave it at that because I think people here are smart enough to understand how silly that sounds!

This is a sports site.  The people who come to this site do so because they love sports.  While they may not be football coaches or current players, your average poster on Setxsports has an above average knowledge of how sports work, and basically every poster on here disagrees with your take on this.  There's a 0% chance that you're right, and everyone else on here is wrong, because everyone in the argument knows at least as much or more than you about high school football, and none of them agree with you.  the actual silly part is that 100+ posts by 30+ users have refuted your argument over the course of several threads, and essentially nobody has agreed with you, yet you keep making the same argument over and over again.  People are certainly smart enough to understand how silly that is.  

[BEARCPA]

26 minutes ago, Reagan said:

This I can agree on.  Just like a coach going 0-50.  Not hard to tell this is not a very good coach.  But these are easy based on results you see.  The debate here has always been what does it take to turn a losing program around.  Or what turns a decent program into State Champions?  

Oh, BTW, recently you made a comment on Westerburg only being able to win State Titles at Allen with that great QB had.  Well, at the time I really never check Allen and Westerburg.  I just took ya'lls word for it.  But -- I finally looked at the facts.  I responded to your post with Allen's records while Westerburg was HC.  Mighty impressive record WITHOUT that QB!  Plus 1 or 2 Titles WITHOUT that QB.  It's strange how that never gets added or mentioned.  Since you didn't respond when it was posted, care to look back over it and respond now!

Those non-Kyler teams still had tons of D-1 talent on both sides of the ball. How much D-1 talent did Westerburg coach at BH?

[Reagan]

1 minute ago, bullets13 said:

This is a sports site.  The people who come to this site do so because they love sports.  While they may not be football coaches or current players, your average poster on Setxsports has an above average knowledge of how sports work, and basically every poster on here disagrees with your take on this.  There's a 0% chance that you're right, and everyone else on here is wrong, because everyone in the argument knows at least as much or more than you about high school football, and none of them agree with you.  the actual silly part is that 100+ posts by 30+ users have refuted your argument over the course of several threads, and essentially nobody has agreed with you, yet you keep making the same argument over and over again.  People are certainly smart enough to understand how silly that is.  

Thanks for the reply.  So your opinion, as well as others that have no actual expertise, are no more right or wrong when it comes to other people's opinions!  But making statements like you did, "That's why reagan is impossible to talk to." is saying your opinion is actually better than others.  

You:  "your average poster on Setxsports has an above average knowledge of how sports work."  That's, again, your opinion.  May or may not be true.  But, nothing qualifies you to make this statement.  On this "sports site", unless one has the expertise in a certain sport -- then every statement you or anyone else makes is an opinion!  

PS -- A lot of times I'll say ,"my opinion" when stating something.  A lot of times i'll try to back with what I think are facts and post them.  It's funny how I don't recall you ever saying it's "my opinion!"  

[89Falcon]

1 hour ago, Reagan said:

This I can agree on.  Just like a coach going 0-50.  Not hard to tell this is not a very good coach.  But these are easy based on results you see.  The debate here has always been what does it take to turn a losing program around.  Or what turns a decent program into State Champions?  

Oh, BTW, recently you made a comment on Westerburg only being able to win State Titles at Allen with that great QB he had.  Well, at the time I really never checked Allen and Westerburg.  I just took ya'lls word for it.  But -- I finally looked at the facts.  I responded to your post with Allen's records while Westerburg was HC.  Mighty impressive record WITHOUT that QB!  Plus 1 or 2 Titles WITHOUT that QB.  It's strange how that never gets added or mentioned.  Since you didn't respond when it was posted, care to look back over it and respond now?!

Definitely impressive "without that QB". Just curious, do you suppose the single largest high school in the state had a significant access to talent? Or do you believe he won the title with average players? 

[Reagan]

59 minutes ago, BEARCPA said:

Those non-Kyler teams still had tons of D-1 talent on both sides of the ball. How much D-1 talent did Westerburg coach at BH?

Well, it's good to have someone actually knowledgeable in Allen football.  Tell us who these D-1 player are that played during the Westerburg years.  I'm sure we would all like to know to help our knowledge.  

I'm made many comments concerning Westerburg at BH.  I'll copy and past the latest:  " 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." 

BTW, it took Westerburg 5 years to implement his program at Allen and win his 1st Title.  Unfortunately we'll never know, but he may have needed a little longer at BH.  As always -- just my opnion!

[AggiesAreWe]

Because I'm sorta of "in the know" about who some of the posters are on this site, I'll just say that some of these comments (not Reagan's) are from actual high school coaches. So actually some of the posters here do have expertise in the subject. At least more than most here.

[Reagan]

5 minutes ago, 89Falcon said:

Definitely impressive "without that QB". Just curious, do you suppose the single largest high school in the state had a significant access to talent? Or do you believe he won the title with average players? 

Not sure.  That's why I asked BEARCPA to help us out with the answer.  

But, on the other hand, do you think "any coach" could have done at Allen what Westerburg did when he was there?  Or does it take a potential Elite coach to put the pieces together?  Westerburg was an assistant before Allen.  Therefore he did not have the Elite status.  He earned it.  

The bold part:  All I can say concerning this is, for 67 years prior to Westerburg's arrival there were not any State Titles.  I'll ask you:  Did this "significant access to talent" just show up when Westerburg did?   I guess anything is possible.  The previous coaches had about 6 decent seasons.  But that's all.  Out of the previous 4 or 5 coaches I looked at, only 1 had won a Title at another school.  What's your opinion on this?

[89Falcon]

2 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Not sure.  That's why I asked BEARCPA to help us out with the answer.  

But, on the other hand, do you think "any coach" could have done at Allen what Westerburg did when he was there?  Or does it take a potential Elite coach to put the pieces together?  Westerburg was an assistant before Allen.  Therefore he did not have the Elite status.  He earned it.  

The bold part:  All I can say concerning this is, for 67 years prior to Westerburg's arrival there were not any State Titles.  I'll ask you:  Did this "significant access to talent" just show up when Westerburg did?   I guess anything is possible.  The previous coaches had about 6 decent seasons.  But that's all.  Out of the previous 4 or 5 coaches I looked at, only 1 had won a Title at another school.  What's your opinion on this?

I will help you, "Allen had as much/more talent than any school in the state". And based upon your logic, Westerberg lost "elite status" as he was not able do any better than all of the previous "bad" coaches at BH.   

[Reagan]

36 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Because I'm sorta of "in the know" about who some of the posters are on this site, I'll just say that some of these comments (not Reagan's) are from actual high school coaches. So actually some of the posters here do have expertise in the subject. At least more than most here.

Excellent!  Those are the one's that we should defer to.  That's why when something silly is said (not by Reagan) , like "your clueless", I ask what's their expertise in making such a silly statement.   But, anyway,  one can usually tell those that only know football as a stand dweller.  But, these are the ones that think (not Reagan) their opinions are worth more than others.  

[Reagan]

Just now, 89Falcon said:

I will help you, "Allen had as much/more talent than any school in the state". And based upon your logic, Westerberg lost "elite status" as he was not able do any better than all of the previous "bad" coaches at BH.   

No, one does not "lose" Elite status.  Just like one does not lose Hall Of Fame status.  Personally, and my opinion, I just don't think he had enough time to get a Title.  It, again, took him 5 years to get the Title at Allen.  He was at BH for only 5 years.  I think it would have eventually come.  We'll see at his new job! 

First bold:  So, again, If this is the case, why no Titles in the 67 years prior to Westerburg showing up?!

[Reagan]

41 minutes ago, AggiesAreWe said:

Because I'm sorta of "in the know" about who some of the posters are on this site, I'll just say that some of these comments (not Reagan's) are from actual high school coaches. So actually some of the posters here do have expertise in the subject. At least more than most here.

I thought you "retired" from being "in the know"?!    JK!!   

[AggiesAreWe]

41 minutes ago, Reagan said:

I thought you "retired" from being "in the know"?!    JK!!   

Retired as an admin but still will be around some.

I just know who some of the members are from the past. Got a pretty good relationship with area coaches. That I am not retired from.

[Guest mrtomcat]

hey wall.  how are you wall ? wall, why wont you talk back wall ?  you sure are a rude wall.

[BEARCPA]

1 hour ago, Reagan said:

Well, it's good to have someone actually knowledgeable in Allen football.  Tell us who these D-1 player are that played during the Westerburg years.  I'm sure we would all like to know to help our knowledge.  

I'm made many comments concerning Westerburg at BH.  I'll copy and past the latest:  " 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." 

BTW, it took Westerburg 5 years to implement his program at Allen and win his 1st Title.  Unfortunately we'll never know, but he may have needed a little longer at BH.  As always -- just my opnion!

A quick search of 247's recruiting database will tell you that at least 50 players went D-1 while Westerberg was at Allen, but shows only one guy going D-1 while he was at BH. Real shame he forgot how to develop talent when he moved to Mont Belvieu. 

[Reagan]

55 minutes ago, BEARCPA said:

A quick search of 247's recruiting database will tell you that at least 50 players went D-1 while Westerberg was at Allen, but shows only one guy going D-1 while he was at BH. Real shame he forgot how to develop talent when he moved to Mont Belvieu. 

That's impressive for sure.  But it's ironic that they only showed up when he got there!  Or -- there was this type of talent there before him and those previous coaches couldn't do anything with them.   Very interesting!

As for BH, there are no guarantees.  We'll see what happens at his new gig.

[Matthew328]

1 hour ago, Reagan said:

That's impressive for sure.  But it's ironic that they only showed up when he got there!  Or -- there was this type of talent there before him and those previous coaches couldn't do anything with them.   Very interesting!

As for BH, there are no guarantees.  We'll see what happens at his new gig.

Westerberg took over at Allen at the perfect time.....they were growing at an incredible rate and talent was arriving by the boatload as Allen became the largest school in the country...he's a very good coach and he had a very good staff with multiple head coaches on there.....but like I said very good coaches still cant win with mediocre talent (ie Barbers Hill)

[oldschool2]

19 hours ago, Reagan said:

This I can agree on.  Just like a coach going 0-50.  Not hard to tell this is not a very good coach.  But these are easy based on results you see.  The debate here has always been what does it take to turn a losing program around.  Or what turns a decent program into State Champions?  

Oh, BTW, recently you made a comment on Westerburg only being able to win State Titles at Allen with that great QB he had.  Well, at the time I really never checked Allen and Westerburg.  I just took ya'lls word for it.  But -- I finally looked at the facts.  I responded to your post with Allen's records while Westerburg was HC.  Mighty impressive record WITHOUT that QB!  Plus 1 or 2 Titles WITHOUT that QB.  It's strange how that never gets added or mentioned.  Since you didn't respond when it was posted, care to look back over it and respond now?!

No.. the debate is whether or not an "elite coach" can make a school like Tarkington (with zero relative success in their past) into an elite program.  Then the debate turned into what makes a coach an elite coach.  Your opinion, as stated multiple times, is that having won a state title or more makes you an elite coach.  It is argued by me.. and everyone else in this thread.. that it takes much more than just being a good coach to win a state title.  It is also argued that not Art Briles.. nor Scott Surrat.. nor Buchanan.. nor Tom Westerberg could go to Tarkington and win a state title in the relative future without a substantial influx of above average ability.  I'd bet every dollar I have that they couldn't go there at the same time and win it all within 6 years with the kids Tarkington ISD has right now.  Will they get tremendously better? No question.. Will they improve?  Without a doubt?  But I'll bet on Tarkington's football history over those coaches' histories every time.  It makes no difference to me what your opinion is regarding that.  If a person believes that ANY coach can go to ANY school with ANY level of talent and win a state championship then they're an idiot.  If you fall into that category.. it is what it is.

Now for the Westerberg comment.  He won 3 consecutive state titles with the most prolific high school quarterback that the state of Texas has ever had, along with countless other very highly skilled football players, plus the best overall support staff that money could buy (at the high school level), plus arguably one of the biggest pools of players to choose from in the country, and finally the nicest high school facilities in the state of Texas (at that time).  Someone commented above that there were around 50 D1 football players from Allen during his coaching tenure..  Know what?  Maybe he should've won a state championship every year that he was there.  And the fact that he didn't .. might mean that he's not as good a coach as you're arguing.

If it was only about coaching.. then the same exact coach would have the same exact results every year.  Every single year. 

[Separation Scientist]

2 hours ago, oldschool2 said:

If it was only about coaching.. then the same exact coach would have the same exact results every year.  Every single year. 

If and only if his competition would NEVER change, which is absolutely impossible because talent fluctuates in every opponents school every year, due to graduations, injuries, etc. 

So, rethink that statement. 

[oldschool2]

23 minutes ago, Separation Scientist said:

If and only if his competition would NEVER change, which is absolutely impossible because talent fluctuates in every opponents school every year, due to graduations, injuries, etc. 

So, rethink that statement. 

You're actually proving my point... that because of fluctuating talent in every opponent (even one's own school), due to graduations, injuries, etc.  can and will impact the results of a season.  How many coaches out there could have had a state championship if not for losing kids for whatever reason and/or reclassification?  Or visa versa.  Tell the guy I'm arguing with that there are other factors at play.. other than who the coach is.

[Separation Scientist]

I speak and comment but I don't want to argue. 

IMO, this whole long running debate of "is it the coach, or the facilities, or the talent, or the size, or recruiting, or whatever else can be neatly summed up by this: 

It's a combination of ALL the above. They are ALL factors. If people could really understand that, this whole debate would end once and for all.