Jump to content

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


jdawg03

Recommended Posts

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@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." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

3F1144EE-D1A0-4F14-8286-3AAB797BEB0F.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

3F1144EE-D1A0-4F14-8286-3AAB797BEB0F.jpeg

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. 😜

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

3F1144EE-D1A0-4F14-8286-3AAB797BEB0F.jpeg

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

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

    46,202
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    CHSFalcon
    Newest Member
    CHSFalcon
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...