SETEXFan Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 That is funny right there, I don't care who you are. The call has already been placed by Dayton to play Crosby next year if for some reason they are not in the same district. For some reason it has not been returned. Go figure...[quote name="westend1" post="698564" timestamp="1257481473"][quote author=liltex link=topic=61924.msg698498#msg698498 date=1257478390]PNG,Central are still in it.Dayton is the only team in this decade to come out of it.We would like to come back if it's ok?[/quote]Quit trying to duck Crosby.[/quote]
Razor Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 [quote name="Brubaker" post="698514" timestamp="1257478913"]Ned 00 was better than Ned 01. JMO... and they belong on this list.[/quote]Good point, bru...the 00 team IMO was the best Nederland has had although they did not win Region III like the 01 team...the 00 team lost that heartbreaker to Bay City after outplaying them entirely, only to see BC go on to win state...the 01 team was a bunch of overachievers who got extremely hot at the right time and played with tons of guts to win Region III
NDNTime Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 You know what, Dayton had an awesome football team for those 2 years. BUT, I'm going to have to disqualify them from this post. The topic SPECIFICALLY says best team to come out of 20-4A. Well, at the time that Dayton was in the "golden triangle" district, the district was [b]22-4A[/b], not 20-4A. Therefore, Dayton, you had an amazing team those 2 years, BUT you were never in 20-4A.Sorry about the technicality.
akifan94 Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 [quote name="NDNTime" post="698739" timestamp="1257518163"]You know what, Dayton had an awesome football team for those 2 years. BUT, I'm going to have to disqualify them from this post. The topic SPECIFICALLY says best team to come out of 20-4A. Well, at the time that Dayton was in the "golden triangle" district, the district was [b]22-4A[/b], not 20-4A. Therefore, Dayton, you had an amazing team those 2 years, BUT you were never in 20-4A.Sorry about the technicality.[/quote]good stuff. It still will not shut up the 19-4A squawkers.
NDNTime Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 [quote name="akifan94" post="698744" timestamp="1257518653"][quote author=NDNTime link=topic=61924.msg698739#msg698739 date=1257518163]You know what, Dayton had an awesome football team for those 2 years. BUT, I'm going to have to disqualify them from this post. The topic SPECIFICALLY says best team to come out of 20-4A. Well, at the time that Dayton was in the "golden triangle" district, the district was [b]22-4A[/b], not 20-4A. Therefore, Dayton, you had an amazing team those 2 years, BUT you were never in 20-4A.Sorry about the technicality.[/quote]good stuff. It still will not shut up the 19-4A squawkers.[/quote]It'll probably just irritate them more.
akifan94 Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 [quote name="NDNTime" post="698746" timestamp="1257518752"][quote author=akifan94 link=topic=61924.msg698744#msg698744 date=1257518653][quote author=NDNTime link=topic=61924.msg698739#msg698739 date=1257518163]You know what, Dayton had an awesome football team for those 2 years. BUT, I'm going to have to disqualify them from this post. The topic SPECIFICALLY says best team to come out of 20-4A. Well, at the time that Dayton was in the "golden triangle" district, the district was [b]22-4A[/b], not 20-4A. Therefore, Dayton, you had an amazing team those 2 years, BUT you were never in 20-4A.Sorry about the technicality.[/quote]good stuff. It still will not shut up the 19-4A squawkers.[/quote]It'll probably just irritate them more.[/quote]Suits me. ;D
dayton Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 [quote name="NDNTime" post="698739" timestamp="1257518163"]You know what, Dayton had an awesome football team for those 2 years. BUT, I'm going to have to disqualify them from this post. The topic SPECIFICALLY says best team to come out of 20-4A. Well, at the time that Dayton was in the "golden triangle" district, the district was [b]22-4A[/b], not 20-4A. Therefore, Dayton, you had an amazing team those 2 years, BUT you were never in 20-4A.Sorry about the technicality.[/quote]no big deal. ;)they had to add 2 because the district was that much better with dayton in there. :D
James Mosley Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 2000 Nederland Bulldogs by far one of the best
rollinac Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 [quote name="D3zii" post="698423" timestamp="1257475444"]03 Jags..That was probably the best Defense this area has seen[/quote]Better than the Dayton defense in 2007 that allowed all of 15 points in district play?
Backflipper Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 [quote name="PURPLE 4EVER" post="698394" timestamp="1257473985"]The 2009 PN-G team would get destroyed by the teams 20-4A put out in the 70's.Little Joe Washington would run at will against this team.Even the West Brook state championship team (which was in the same district) would beat this team.The team Dayton had for the two years it was in that district would demolish this team.Remember what happened the last time PN-G played Dayton with a chance to win the district championship outright...[/quote]I cant remember what happened last time PNG played Dayton.. Can someone please remind me of the score??
Guest gladiator2 Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 Yes, another Bash PNG thread, some of you are unreal and funny.
Gabe Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 One of the best defenses to come out of the district, if not the best period, was the WO-S 2000 team
raideroldtimer Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 [quote name="Thunderlicious" post="698559" timestamp="1257481078"]i dont buy it that the old 70's teams would kill everybody. You have to remember that was then..this is now...we are constantly gettin bigger, faster, stronger. heck a your average weight on your o'line back then i'd be willing to bet was 210-220. granted there were some unreal skilled players back then with guys like bergeron and little joe and those guys....todays teams would definitely out man em as far as size. Also..your offensive schemes and defensive schemes are probably more advanced then what DIV1 colleges were running at that time. [/quote]I'm with you on this Thunder, although I would call the average line back then more in the mid to upper 100's. Seems to me that a lineman tipping the scales at 200+ pounds back then was considered a monster and speed wasn't the norm. Nowadays the linemen do average over 200 pounds and have speed that would have put them in at fullback in the 70's.
Recommended Posts