Crosby (69) @ Baytown Sterling (21) - FINAL

[Bud Kilmer]

11 minutes ago, CCRed said:

Eudy finished the game 21-27 for 411 yards and 7 TDs.  
Myles has not had a game that looks anything like last years play.  I think there is a good argument to play a healthy Eudy over a not 100% Myles against Laporte. I know someone is going to say “it’s Sterling”, but his first varsity start and he still has to complete the passes. Crosby does not have blazing speed receivers like last year to just throw the ball up so they can go get it. Eudy was hitting those receivers in stride.  Myles has numerous starts against “bad” teams the last two years, and he hasn’t thrown for 400 yards. Eudy does it on first start.  I’m not hating on Myles, just move him to receiver or DB where he can use his legs.  

Convince me different. 

I've been saying it for a year, Kirkwood made Miles look like a star last year. I hope Kirkwood got team MVP last year because Crosby misses that dude.

 

Still dont get how the Sterling coach is getting a free pass, no excuse to get blown out every game. They have enough athletes to be in games. 

[Concerned Citizen]

2 hours ago, CCRed said:

Eudy finished the game 21-27 for 411 yards and 7 TDs.  
Myles has not had a game that looks anything like last years play.  I think there is a good argument to play a healthy Eudy over a not 100% Myles against Laporte. I know someone is going to say “it’s Sterling”, but his first varsity start and he still has to complete the passes. Crosby does not have blazing speed receivers like last year to just throw the ball up so they can go get it. Eudy was hitting those receivers in stride.  Myles has numerous starts against “bad” teams the last two years, and he hasn’t thrown for 400 yards. Eudy does it on first start.  I’m not hating on Myles, just move him to receiver or DB where he can use his legs.  

Convince me different. 

You have an interesting point and the numbers look good, but we have to agree this is the easier part of the schedule. That seems like a viable option to move Cyrin to WR, but does that help the team come playoff time when Crosby at 3rd or 4th seed and they have to play the 1st or 2nd seed in the other district? Sure Eudy will do great against GCM and probably LaPorte, but does he dramatically give Crosby a better chance come round 1? I would imagine that's the team goals, to do well in the playoffs. I say let Cryin finish out his senior year because replacing him I doubt make any impact come playoffs. 

On the other hand, playing Eudy gives him some reps as a starter for next year. However the same will apply next year, Crosby don't have athletes at the WR position.  

[Justafan72]

Transfer Portal is working on the wr position for next year.Could be some surprises already there and coming .

 

 

[Bud Kilmer]

10 hours ago, Justafan72 said:

Transfer Portal is working on the wr position for next year.Could be some surprises already there and coming .

 

 

Its been covered, will be interesting to see if he will ever be eligible since he moved you know for athletic purposes within district from BH to Crosby. 

[Justafan72]

3 hours ago, kenny powers said:

Its been covered, will be interesting to see if he will ever be eligible since he moved you know for athletic purposes within district from BH to Crosby. 

You obviously don't know who I'm talking about. HA!

[Bud Kilmer]

41 minutes ago, Justafan72 said:

You obviously don't know who I'm talking about. HA!

I'm talkng about the 6'4 WR  that is playing JV right now at Crosby that quit on BH in the middle of the season.  Congrats if you have done this to more than one player I guess, something to be proud of!  

[Separation Scientist]

3 hours ago, kenny powers said:

I'm talkng about the 6'4 WR  that is playing JV right now at Crosby that quit on BH in the middle of the season.  Congrats if you have done this to more than one player I guess, something to be proud of!  

Too much drama with him, good he moved on. The recruiters can deal with it.

Absek and BH believes in the TEAM concept.   

[Cougtalk]

18 hours ago, kenny powers said:

I'm talkng about the 6'4 WR  that is playing JV right now at Crosby that quit on BH in the middle of the season.  Congrats if you have done this to more than one player I guess, something to be proud of!  

He's a Dayton superfan not sure why he would be proud of Crosby. 

[Cougtalk]

@kenny powers

@Separation Scientist

 

Just a question for yall, Is he eligible right now? or is he serving a suspension by the DC? Also, normally the penalty is a year ban. There are some instances of longer bans but those generally require faking residency. So why do you think he will be ineligible next year? I'm genuinely interested, and I'm not finding instances of complete bans on students, almost always the UIL rules ineligible for the remainder of season. 

Also anyone else that has actionable knowledge about this process would be welcome to chime in. 

 

To be clear this is what the UIL Parent Manual Says: 

"A student who changes schools for athletic purposes is not eligible to compete in varsity UIL athletic contest(s) at the school to which he or she moves for at least one calendar year, even if both parents move to the new school district attendance zone." 

 

And before you say district executive committee 

"If the District Executive Committee where the student now lives finds at any time that the change was made for athletic purposes, it shall declare that student ineligible to participate in athletic contests for one year. This may include a student who did not compete at the previous school. If the committee decides that the period of ineligibility should be longer than one year, the committee shall transfer the case to the State Executive Committee.

Subject to Section 403 (f) and 463 (2)(A), a student who has established varsity eligibility under this section at a member school but who subsequently enrolls in another member school and is found to have changed schools for athletic purposes remains eligible at the school, where eligibility was first established." 

[EagleFootball281]

26 minutes ago, Cougtalk said:

@kenny powers

@Separation Scientist

 

. So why do you think he will be ineligible next year? 

s not eligible to compete in varsity UIL athletic contest(s) at the school to which he or she moves for at least one calendar year, even if both parents move to the new school district attendance zone." 

 

You answered your own question. One calendar year is 365 days, He wont be eligible then until week 6 of next year because of when he unenrolled/enrolled.  At least that is what was explained to me. 

 

[Cougtalk]

3 minutes ago, EagleFootball281 said:

 

That would mean he'd be eligible at some point next year. 

[THS99]

47 minutes ago, Cougtalk said:

@kenny powers

@Separation Scientist

 

Just a question for yall, Is he eligible right now? or is he serving a suspension by the DC? Also, normally the penalty is a year ban. There are some instances of longer bans but those generally require faking residency. So why do you think he will be ineligible next year? I'm genuinely interested, and I'm not finding instances of complete bans on students, almost always the UIL rules ineligible for the remainder of season. 

Also anyone else that has actionable knowledge about this process would be welcome to chime in. 

 

To be clear this is what the UIL Parent Manual Says: 

"A student who changes schools for athletic purposes is not eligible to compete in varsity UIL athletic contest(s) at the school to which he or she moves for at least one calendar year, even if both parents move to the new school district attendance zone." 

 

And before you say district executive committee 

"If the District Executive Committee where the student now lives finds at any time that the change was made for athletic purposes, it shall declare that student ineligible to participate in athletic contests for one year. This may include a student who did not compete at the previous school. If the committee decides that the period of ineligibility should be longer than one year, the committee shall transfer the case to the State Executive Committee.

Subject to Section 403 (f) and 463 (2)(A), a student who has established varsity eligibility under this section at a member school but who subsequently enrolls in another member school and is found to have changed schools for athletic purposes remains eligible at the school, where eligibility was first established." 

Honest question - How is this situation different than what happened at San Marcos High School?

[Cougtalk]

6 minutes ago, THS99 said:

Honest question - How is this situation different than what happened at San Marcos High School?

As far as I'm aware no recruiting violations have been proven, or even brought to the Executive Committee. I think the difference is the level of proof. Also, San Marcos was just made playoff eligible last week. 

Also, the number of students does matter. 

[Concerned Citizen]

28 minutes ago, Cougtalk said:

That would mean he'd be eligible at some point next year. 

If he does not get approved through the normal process, yes he would be eligible 1 year from the date he "checked-in" to his new school. 

[Cougtalk]

6 minutes ago, EyePayTaxes2 said:

If he does not get approved through the normal process, yes he would be eligible 1 year from the date he "checked-in" to his new school. 

Yea, first day of enrollment. 

[THS99]

34 minutes ago, Cougtalk said:

As far as I'm aware no recruiting violations have been proven, or even brought to the Executive Committee. I think the difference is the level of proof. Also, San Marcos was just made playoff eligible last week. 

Also, the number of students does matter. 

San Marcos High School was declared eligible for the playoffs, but it is a different story for the students.  Their ineligibility was extended to a total of three years. Hopefully this doesn’t happen here. I don’t believe in being overly punitive to students, a calendar year should be fitting. However, it looks like the Executive Committee has a different approach. 

[Cougtalk]

6 minutes ago, THS99 said:

San Marcos High School was declared eligible for the playoffs, but it is a different story for the students.  Their ineligibility was extended to a total of three years. Hopefully this doesn’t happen here. I don’t believe in being overly punitive to students, a calendar year should be fitting. However, it looks like the Executive Committee has a different approach. 

Seems to have been a rather unique situation, I do not have any other instances of muilti-year bans I can point to. Also, in that particular case all of the kids were Freshman so perhaps the 3 year varsity ban was due to that, not sure why Exec when so hard in the paint. 

[Concerned Citizen]

5 minutes ago, Cougtalk said:

Seems to have been a rather unique situation, I do not have any other instances of muilti-year bans I can point to. Also, in that particular case all of the kids were Freshman so perhaps the 3 year varsity ban was due to that, not sure why Exec when so hard in the paint. 

Same here, I have not seen this type of punishment given out. Seems like UIL trying to send a message in this instance. I wonder if similar punishment was given to the adult involved i.e. coaches)?

[Cougtalk]

2 hours ago, Cougtalk said:

He's a Dayton superfan not sure why he would be proud of Crosby. 

mixed people whoopsie. 

[Separation Scientist]

14 hours ago, Cougtalk said:

Just a question for yall, Is he eligible right now? or is he serving a suspension by the DC?  

I don't know. I don't have that info, and I don't mind you asking about it but honestly I don't care. Not a BH problem anymore. 

I would think 0.142 would be on here spelling it all out since he alone knows more about all things BH than any person on earth.  

[Concerned Citizen]

On 10/15/2022 at 10:12 AM, CCRed said:

Eudy finished the game 21-27 for 411 yards and 7 TDs.  
Myles has not had a game that looks anything like last years play.  I think there is a good argument to play a healthy Eudy over a not 100% Myles against Laporte. I know someone is going to say “it’s Sterling”, but his first varsity start and he still has to complete the passes. Crosby does not have blazing speed receivers like last year to just throw the ball up so they can go get it. Eudy was hitting those receivers in stride.  Myles has numerous starts against “bad” teams the last two years, and he hasn’t thrown for 400 yards. Eudy does it on first start.  I’m not hating on Myles, just move him to receiver or DB where he can use his legs.  

Convince me different. 

CCRed, I think I must concede this argument to you. I thought you was pulling my leg with your stats🤣. I second the motion for a QB change at Crosby and move Cyrin to WR. I must say 77 or 80% completion rate is impressive. not sure whose stats are correct, nevertheless good completion percentage.

[CCRed]

5 hours ago, EyePayTaxes2 said:

CCRed, I think I must concede this argument to you. I thought you was pulling my leg with your stats🤣. I second the motion for a QB change at Crosby and move Cyrin to WR. I must say 77 or 80% completion rate is impressive. not sure whose stats are correct, nevertheless good completion percentage.

I definitely don’t try to B.S. anyone on here, because as you did, there is always somebody that will fact check you. I got my stats from a very reliable source. 😜

[Peppermint Patty]

On 10/18/2022 at 1:13 PM, EyePayTaxes2 said:

CCRed, I think I must concede this argument to you. I thought you was pulling my leg with your stats🤣. I second the motion for a QB change at Crosby and move Cyrin to WR. I must say 77 or 80% completion rate is impressive. not sure whose stats are correct, nevertheless good completion percentage.

Helps when you're still throwing every down late in a blow out win.

[Cougtalk]

7 minutes ago, Peppermint Patty said:

Helps when you're still throwing every down late in a blow out win.

We scored a single 4th quarter TD... 

We put up 62 in three quarters, if your complaining about that then get better defense.