sportsfan82 Posted February 12, 2008 Report Posted February 12, 2008 Thomas is a great athlete and good defensive player but playing teams like Deweyville and Kountze just doesnt cut it for me.The level of competition is too low. I agree with you Texan; nobody from 2A OR 3A should ever win any awards! : ;D You have to be out of your minds that nobody from 2a or 3a should ever win any awards, Thomas can compete with any 4a or 5a school. You must of never seen this kid play. And they have alot of kids that are in 2a or 3a schools that deserve awards the same as kids in 4a or 5a schools.
dayton Posted February 12, 2008 Report Posted February 12, 2008 Thomas is a great athlete and good defensive player but playing teams like Deweyville and Kountze just doesnt cut it for me.The level of competition is too low. I agree with you Texan; nobody from 2A OR 3A should ever win any awards! : ;D You have to be out of your minds that nobody from 2a or 3a should ever win any awards, Thomas can compete with any 4a or 5a school. You must of never seen this kid play. And they have alot of kids that are in 2a or 3a schools that deserve awards the same as kids in 4a or 5a schools. Westend1's post has been brought to you by sarcasm.com
westend1 Posted February 12, 2008 Report Posted February 12, 2008 Unwad your panties sportsfan82. If you look at my earlier post, I voted for Thomas and Rhodes. I was only gigging setexan because he is such a WOS fan.
sportsfan82 Posted February 12, 2008 Report Posted February 12, 2008 If they go purely by numbers, without taking into account the level of competition, It looks like Rhodes on offense and Thomas on defense. westend1 that is why I included you previously because the same comment level of competition
westend1 Posted February 12, 2008 Report Posted February 12, 2008 And i still stand by that. Put Christine Micheal in kville instead of Rhodes, and he would have put up huge numbers as well. Do you disagree?
setexan Posted February 12, 2008 Report Posted February 12, 2008 so please give me a list of top notch players tramain played against this year on offense..i know cory bell played against dominique bailey(17 tackles)...pierce rhodes(18 tackles)..the parr brothers(13 tackles)..and he pratices against depauldrick garrett(wo-s all-time leading rusher)...level competition plays a roll.sure thomas can play in other classes but he didnt.but dont get me wrong he is a great player and good luck n the SEC.. 8)
Jasperfan Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 so please give me a list of top notch players tramain played against this year on offense..i know cory bell played against dominique bailey(17 tackles)...pierce rhodes(18 tackles)..the parr brothers(13 tackles)..and he pratices against depauldrick garrett(wo-s all-time leading rusher)...level competition plays a roll.sure thomas can play in other classes but he didnt.but dont get me wrong he is a great player and good luck n the SEC.. 8) If he's good enough to play in the SEC, then he is legit, regardless of the competition he played against.
SkandarAkbar Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 And i still stand by that. Put Christine Micheal in kville instead of Rhodes, and he would have put up huge numbers as well. Do you disagree? Let Rhodes just play 60 snaps on offense and take away the 50 snaps he played on defense and Rhodes would have put up bigger numbers. Put Rhodes on any 5A team or lower and he still puts up huge numbers.
westend1 Posted February 13, 2008 Report Posted February 13, 2008 How big is Rhodes? Where did he sign?
Guest dogs334 Posted February 14, 2008 Report Posted February 14, 2008 Rhodes signed with Kilgore. he is like 165 but a SWOLL 165. if he had the test scores to go along with his talent he could of went anywhere but its hard to go to a big school with a 12 ACT or something like that
westend1 Posted February 17, 2008 Report Posted February 17, 2008 And i still stand by that. Put Christine Micheal in kville instead of Rhodes, and he would have put up huge numbers as well. Do you disagree? Let Rhodes just play 60 snaps on offense and take away the 50 snaps he played on defense and Rhodes would have put up bigger numbers. Put Rhodes on any 5A team or lower and he still puts up huge numbers. All you have to do is look at the college teams that are trying to recruit Michael. That should tell you who is the better back.
Lefty99 Posted February 17, 2008 Report Posted February 17, 2008 And i still stand by that. Put Christine Micheal in kville instead of Rhodes, and he would have put up huge numbers as well. Do you disagree? Let Rhodes just play 60 snaps on offense and take away the 50 snaps he played on defense and Rhodes would have put up bigger numbers. Put Rhodes on any 5A team or lower and he still puts up huge numbers. All you have to do is look at the college teams that are trying to recruit Michael. That should tell you who is the better back. Not necessarily! Rhodes is close to 180lbs. You can be an all round great back, but if you don't have the test scores you won't go to big schools. There are plenty of athletes that come from this area that don't make the grades to play DI or DI-AA. Look at Kevin Everett from TJ. He played at Kilgore before getting the grades to go to Miami(With whom he committed to before signing day)! If you can prove me wrong on this this I'll pipe down! Not taking anything away from Michael, but Rhodes is a gifted athlete! One of those athletes that can make an impact at any classification!
westend1 Posted February 17, 2008 Report Posted February 17, 2008 Hmmm, Dogs says he weighs 165. Lefty says 180. Quite a discrepancy. Lefty, how do you know that Rhodes had poor test scores? Most with poor test scores get recruited by large schools, if they are good enough. It's only later when the fall back on Junior Colleges, when thy have no more options. ps---I never said Rhodes wasn't good. I simply stated that Michaels would have huge numbers if he played for a decent 2A(E Chambers) or 3A(Kville) program, so level of competition should have some bearing on post season awards. For some reason, small school supporters disagree with my opinion. It just seems that recruiters feel the same way I do. probably just coincidence :D
Lefty99 Posted February 17, 2008 Report Posted February 17, 2008 Hmmm, Dogs says he weighs 165. Lefty says 180. Quite a discrepancy. Lefty, how do you know that Rhodes had poor test scores? Most with poor test scores get recruited by large schools, if they are good enough. It's only later when the fall back on Junior Colleges, when thy have no more options. ps---I never said Rhodes wasn't good. I simply stated that Michaels would have huge numbers if he played for a decent 2A(E Chambers) or 3A(Kville) program, so level of competition should have some bearing on post season awards. For some reason, small school supporters disagree with my opinion. It just seems that recruiters feel the same way I do. probably just coincidence :D Rhodes was listed at 175 this season from the programs that I saw if I'm not mistaken. And having stood next to him he is every bit of 175-180. His size is a little deceiving! I never said; nor did I imply that Rhodes had poor test scores! Nor did I say that Michael couldn't put up big numbers in smaller classifications! It would be assinine to make a remark like that! HE PLAYS IN 5A!!! Common sense should prevail for those who have any! ;D Michael is a great back! In fact I was very happy to see that he has committed to my Ags! It is just that everybody assumes that Thomas and Rhodes don't belong on the list simply because they played in 2A and 3A! And we all know what happens when you assume!!! This award is not a 4A and 5A award only!!! It is an award that given to the best offensive and defensive player in ALL of Southeast Texas! Let me ask you this one question westend1. If Michael played for say...K-ville or EC, and put up the same numbers! Would you still be on here pleading your case that he deserves to be a nominee with athletes from 4A and 5A schools?
Bucof2010 Posted February 18, 2008 Report Posted February 18, 2008 I don't think the size of the school you play at matters as much as some people think because as they say you play at the level of your competition
kicker Posted February 18, 2008 Report Posted February 18, 2008 I don't think the size of the school you play at matters as much as some people think because as they say you play at the level of your competition i.e. Deon Beasley, Earl Thomas, Kerry Franks, Jacoby Franks, etc.............. size doesnt matter untill you get to about 1A
westend1 Posted February 18, 2008 Report Posted February 18, 2008 Hmmm, Dogs says he weighs 165. Lefty says 180. Quite a discrepancy. Lefty, how do you know that Rhodes had poor test scores? Most with poor test scores get recruited by large schools, if they are good enough. It's only later when the fall back on Junior Colleges, when thy have no more options. ps---I never said Rhodes wasn't good. I simply stated that Michaels would have huge numbers if he played for a decent 2A(E Chambers) or 3A(Kville) program, so level of competition should have some bearing on post season awards. For some reason, small school supporters disagree with my opinion. It just seems that recruiters feel the same way I do. probably just coincidence :D Lefty I probably would "plead my case". But, I would recognize that my level of competition was a little lower and give some weight to the quality of teams played against. I think the numbers are so overwhelming that Thomas and Rhodes deserve the honor. Again, those numbers are somewhat deceiving and I don't think Rhodes has that many rushing yards in 5A and I don't think Thomas has 11 or 12 picks. either could play 5A, but I think the numbers would be significantly reduced. In truth, Rhodes would have been #3 on WB's depth chart to start the season. My guess is he would have played receiver or db. Rhodes was listed at 175 this season from the programs that I saw if I'm not mistaken. And having stood next to him he is every bit of 175-180. His size is a little deceiving! I never said; nor did I imply that Rhodes had poor test scores! Nor did I say that Michael couldn't put up big numbers in smaller classifications! It would be assinine to make a remark like that! HE PLAYS IN 5A!!! Common sense should prevail for those who have any! ;D Michael is a great back! In fact I was very happy to see that he has committed to my Ags! It is just that everybody assumes that Thomas and Rhodes don't belong on the list simply because they played in 2A and 3A! And we all know what happens when you assume!!! This award is not a 4A and 5A award only!!! It is an award that given to the best offensive and defensive player in ALL of Southeast Texas! Let me ask you this one question westend1. If Michael played for say...K-ville or EC, and put up the same numbers! Would you still be on here pleading your case that he deserves to be a nominee with athletes from 4A and 5A schools?
Lefty99 Posted February 18, 2008 Report Posted February 18, 2008 Hmmm, Dogs says he weighs 165. Lefty says 180. Quite a discrepancy. Lefty, how do you know that Rhodes had poor test scores? Most with poor test scores get recruited by large schools, if they are good enough. It's only later when the fall back on Junior Colleges, when thy have no more options. ps---I never said Rhodes wasn't good. I simply stated that Michaels would have huge numbers if he played for a decent 2A(E Chambers) or 3A(Kville) program, so level of competition should have some bearing on post season awards. For some reason, small school supporters disagree with my opinion. It just seems that recruiters feel the same way I do. probably just coincidence :D Lefty I probably would "plead my case". But, I would recognize that my level of competition was a little lower and give some weight to the quality of teams played against. I think the numbers are so overwhelming that Thomas and Rhodes deserve the honor. Again, those numbers are somewhat deceiving and I don't think Rhodes has that many rushing yards in 5A and I don't think Thomas has 11 or 12 picks. either could play 5A, but I think the numbers would be significantly reduced. In truth, Rhodes would have been #3 on WB's depth chart to start the season. My guess is he would have played receiver or db. Rhodes was listed at 175 this season from the programs that I saw if I'm not mistaken. And having stood next to him he is every bit of 175-180. His size is a little deceiving! I never said; nor did I imply that Rhodes had poor test scores! Nor did I say that Michael couldn't put up big numbers in smaller classifications! It would be assinine to make a remark like that! HE PLAYS IN 5A!!! Common sense should prevail for those who have any! ;D Michael is a great back! In fact I was very happy to see that he has committed to my Ags! It is just that everybody assumes that Thomas and Rhodes don't belong on the list simply because they played in 2A and 3A! And we all know what happens when you assume!!! This award is not a 4A and 5A award only!!! It is an award that given to the best offensive and defensive player in ALL of Southeast Texas! Let me ask you this one question westend1. If Michael played for say...K-ville or EC, and put up the same numbers! Would you still be on here pleading your case that he deserves to be a nominee with athletes from 4A and 5A schools? The award isn't about who played for who, or if this person played for this school or that school! There are times where you have to give credit where credit is due! These two players put up great numbers and that is the reason they were nominated!! Reguardless of what class they played in! It isn't about, "well he couldn't have put up those numbers in 5A so he doesn't deserve to be nominated!"
westend1 Posted February 18, 2008 Report Posted February 18, 2008 I agree with you Lefty. The numbers were so large, they can't be ignored. If you look back, I picked Rhodes over Hussey as well, simply because of numbers. If the numbers were closer, I would still say give it to the guy who played against tougher competition, but the sats for Rhodes and Thomas are impressive.
Guest BIG HOUSE Posted February 18, 2008 Report Posted February 18, 2008 westend1 I wouldn't say that Rhodes played tougher competition than Hussey........
wbman Posted February 18, 2008 Report Posted February 18, 2008 why isnt blake chavis nominated for the defensive award award he is one of the top players in the nation.
westend1 Posted February 18, 2008 Report Posted February 18, 2008 westend1 I wouldn't say that Rhodes played tougher competition than Hussey........ No. I think Hussey had the tougher schedule. I must have been unclear. Rhodes had better stats than Hussey. It's the same old issue. How much does it count when you play against tougher competition?
Lefty99 Posted February 19, 2008 Report Posted February 19, 2008 Level of competition must have some bearing! Notice that the QB Nolan I believe is his name; from 2A didn't make the list and he put up better numbers than anyone in this area. In fact he was in the top five of the state in all classes in some catagories.
Bucof2010 Posted February 19, 2008 Report Posted February 19, 2008 Level of competition must have some bearing! Notice that the QB Nolan I believe is his name; from 2A didn't make the list and he put up better numbers than anyone in this area. In fact he was in the top five of the state in all classes in some catagories. he had zero rushing ability though. But as far as passing he was the best in the area IMO
setexan Posted February 20, 2008 Report Posted February 20, 2008 why isnt blake chavis nominated for the defensive award award he is one of the top players in the nation. are u serious?..this award isnt about who has the best body size..lol..and i think hussey did have a harder competition even though rhodes did have a little over a hundred on the #1 defense in 3A(WOS)
Recommended Posts