Brownwood, 88 points, et al...

[Ernest T Bass]

Very stupid move on Shipley's part. I won't question the morality of such an act b/c I have been known to do similar things on occassion(but never to such an extent to score 88 points), but I will question the intelligence. You have a team who is cheapshoting your players, which obviously hightens your chances of sustaining injuries, and then you leave your starters in? You have a very realistic shot at a state championship(which every coach will tell you, staying healthy is probably the most important aspect of, especially at the lower levels), you're playing a team that is outmatched and has nothing to lose, they're attempting to hurt your kids, and you leave them in?
Like I said, I dont blame him for running it up. Ive done the same thing. But, Brownwood is just one injury away from an early exit. Statement was made once you reached 50. Pull the starters at that point.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
Very stupid move on Shipley's part. I won't question the morality of such an act b/c I have been known to do similar things on occassion(but never to such an extent to score 88 points), but I will question the intelligence. You have a team who is cheapshoting your players, which obviously hightens your chances of sustaining injuries, and then you leave your starters in? You have a very realistic shot at a state championship(which every coach will tell you, staying healthy is probably the most important aspect of, especially at the lower levels), you're playing a team that is outmatched and has nothing to lose, they're attempting to hurt your kids, and you leave them in?
Like I said, I dont blame him for running it up. Ive done the same thing. But, Brownwood is just one injury away from an early exit. Statement was made once you reached 50. Pull the starters at that point. I said that at the very beginning of the 88 points thread. Just seems like an unnecessary risk at some point.

[hollywood]

Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
Very stupid move on Shipley's part. I won't question the morality of such an act b/c I have been known to do similar things on occassion(but never to such an extent to score 88 points), but I will question the intelligence. You have a team who is cheapshoting your players, which obviously hightens your chances of sustaining injuries, and then you leave your starters in? You have a very realistic shot at a state championship(which every coach will tell you, staying healthy is probably the most important aspect of, especially at the lower levels), you're playing a team that is outmatched and has nothing to lose, they're attempting to hurt your kids, and you leave them in?
Like I said, I dont blame him for running it up. Ive done the same thing. But, Brownwood is just one injury away from an early exit. Statement was made once you reached 50. Pull the starters at that point.

You have your opinion from reading the posts, but have no clue if you were not there. I agree to play your kids hard. Less chance of injury. If you back off, then you increase the chance. Who else would you put in there? 2nd teamers that come in cold? NO.

Why in the world is it okay in every other sport to score as many points as you can, but in football, it's viewed as classless?:thinking:

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by hollywood
You have your opinion from reading the posts, but have no clue if you were not there. I agree to play your kids hard. Less chance of injury. Why in the world is it okay in every other sport to score as many points as you can, but in football, it's viewed as classless?:thinking: You read his post right? He didn't question the "morality" of it. Just the common sense of it.

[Ernest T Bass]

Originally posted by hollywood
You have your opinion from reading the posts, but have no clue if you were not there. I agree to play your kids hard. Less chance of injury. If you back off, then you increase the chance. Who else would you put in there? 2nd teamers that come in cold? NO.

Why in the world is it okay in every other sport to score as many points as you can, but in football, it's viewed as classless?:thinking:

Reading comprehension is your friend.

[wimbo_pro]

There is also the other side of the equation...Shipley needed somethin gto keep the fire alive in the boys, who have not been challenged to any real degree this year (not saying their opponents were terrible, saying their opponents werent in their class). He was given a gift last night...a gift of a rallying cry, a gift of having something to bond the boys together...this doesnt bode well for the future opponents. I think Shipley made a wise move, albeit risky. It paid off.

[hollywood]

I can see from outside looking in you risk your starters getting injured. Common sense in most cases says to pull starters in the 3rd quarter. But why not play the starters into the fourth quarter to prepare them for games down the road? One could argue until the end of time on both strategies.

I feel he did the right thing from witnessing the entire game.

[Tin Cup]

Originally posted by wimbo_pro
There is also the other side of the equation...Shipley needed somethin gto keep the fire alive in the boys, who have not been challenged to any real degree this year (not saying their opponents were terrible, saying their opponents werent in their class). He was given a gift last night...a gift of a rallying cry, a gift of having something to bond the boys together...this doesnt bode well for the future opponents. I think Shipley made a wise move, albeit risky. It paid off.

Could not agree more. IP woke a sleeping GIANT. Not that we were really sleeping but you get the idea.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by hollywood
I can see from outside looking in you risk your starters getting injured. Common sense in most cases says to pull starters in the 3rd quarter. But why not play the starters into the fourth quarter to prepare them for games down the road? One could argue until the end of time on both strategies.
In a game absent of hostilities, absolutely. When you have people intentionally trying to hurt your stud players, giving them more opportunities to do so makes sense how? And I'm really just playing the devil's advocate. I could care less and defend you guys more often than not on here. Just would have sucked if bravado would have cost you a few good players.

[Ernest T Bass]

Risk not worth the reward. Better reward is getting your 2nd teamers some time so that if you DO sustain an injury, you're not putting in kids who have never played in a playoff atmosphere.
One IP kid decides to "Romo" Brownwood's QB, and the state championship season possibly becomes an regional semifinalist season. That doesn't look nearly as good on a letterman's jacket or on a resume.

[Eagle 1]

Do we really need another thread about this?

[wimbo_pro]

Originally posted by DDBooger
In a game absent of hostilities, absolutely. When you have people intentionally trying to hurt your stud players, giving them more opportunities to do so makes sense how? And I'm really just playing the devil's advocate. I could care less and defend you guys more often than not on here. Just would have sucked if bravado would have cost you a few good players.

True DBooger...but it apparently didnt cost them...and they now reap the benefit of it. I am on Brownwoods<bows head> side on this one.

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by wimbo_pro
True DBooger...but it apparently didnt cost them...and they now reap the benefit of it. I am on Brownwoods<bows head> side on this one. I really don't see a benefit from it. Those kids knew they weren't going to win, so they tried their best to leave their mark. Mistakes not resulting in consequences doesn't mean they're not mistakes. They can often lead to larger consequences down the road. I have a feeling Brownwood may see some more shenanigans the rest of the way.

[hollywood]

Originally posted by DDBooger
In a game absent of hostilities, absolutely. When you have people intentionally trying to hurt your stud players, giving them more opportunities to do so makes sense how? And I'm really just playing the devil's advocate. I could care less and defend you guys more often than not on here. Just would have sucked if bravado would have cost you a few good players.

And I welcome your view and question. But, if you have the superior athletes and want to challenge them to play the other opponent as hard and to the best of their abilities, is there anything wrong with that? A player takes a risk as soon as he steps onto the playing field. I think he did what he felt was right at the time. I would also think that after it was all over and Pondered on what had transpired over 3 1/2 hours of sloppy football, he might have done a few things differently. ;)

[wimbo_pro]

Originally posted by DDBooger
I really don't see a benefit from it. Those kids knew they weren't going to win, so they tried their best to leave their mark. Mistakes not resulting in consequences doesn't mean they're not mistakes. They can often lead to larger consequences down the road. I have a feeling Brownwood may see some more shenanigans the rest of the way.

Well, who knows? But I got a feeling the team (and town) are ramped up now far more than they would of otherwise been. They needed something to make them unite and rally around...IP gave it to them. As far as other teams "coming after them", well...if they do ina less-than-sportsmanship manner, they will pay a heavy price.

[RoyceTTU]

Originally posted by RoyceTTU
Waterboy, you bring up a valid question and it had been brought up before. I don't really know the correct answer for this but want to ask you a question in return.

If cheap shots are going on, and it's dangerous on the field, who should you put in?

1. Do you put your 2nd team in who is less capable of defending?
2. maybe put in the JV players who have been called up for playoffs even though they are less capable of defending them selves.

Are 1 and 2 any less/more expendable the starters. Keep in mind we are talking about kids, not soldiers/ cattle etc......

Maybe you can't think about who is going to get hurt and focus more about the task at hand.

As I said before, I don't know the answer, thats why I focus running Hardware Stores 5 days a week and not coaching


This was my post on another thread. It hold merit in some areas.

[Tin Cup]

Every time we've faced adversity this season, we have responded in a huge way. See stephenville, Snyder, and IP

[hollywood]

Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
Risk not worth the reward. Better reward is getting your 2nd teamers some time so that if you DO sustain an injury, you're not putting in kids who have never played in a playoff atmosphere.
One IP kid decides to "Romo" Brownwood's QB, and the state championship season possibly becomes an regional semifinalist season. That doesn't look nearly as good on a letterman's jacket or on a resume.

I have one more thing to say on this thread...


SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST!

[Ernest T Bass]

Originally posted by hollywood
I have one more thing to say on this thread...


SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST!


LOL, ok :rolleyes:

[HeavyD]

Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
Very stupid move on Shipley's part. I won't question the morality of such an act b/c I have been known to do similar things on occassion(but never to such an extent to score 88 points), but I will question the intelligence. You have a team who is cheapshoting your players, which obviously hightens your chances of sustaining injuries, and then you leave your starters in? You have a very realistic shot at a state championship(which every coach will tell you, staying healthy is probably the most important aspect of, especially at the lower levels), you're playing a team that is outmatched and has nothing to lose, they're attempting to hurt your kids, and you leave them in?
Like I said, I dont blame him for running it up. Ive done the same thing. But, Brownwood is just one injury away from an early exit. Statement was made once you reached 50. Pull the starters at that point.
So in the first quarter when it was obvious that they were trying to intentionally injur a couple of our players, should we have gone ahead and sat them for the rest of the 3.5 quarters of the game. You know, our starters deserve to finally get to play a whole game, sooner or later.

[marler1972]

My two cents, from what i have read they were cheapshots why not pull your starters in the middle of the 3rd qtr and at the end of the night send your game film to the UIL and file a complaint save the kids from any risk of injury.

[Ernest T Bass]

Originally posted by HeavyD
So in the first quarter when it was obvious that they were trying to intentionally injur a couple of our players, should we have gone ahead and sat them for the rest of the 3.5 quarters of the game. You know, our starters deserve to finally get to play a whole game, sooner or later.

But once you've made your point and the game is obviously out of reach, then go ahead and pull them. Probably around halftime from the way the box score looks. Get a key player injured for the season and watch how fast the morale of the team drops and how fast the community turns on you.
Obviously, it worked out ok. But if the QB had sustained a torn ACL in the 3rd quarter with a 40 point lead, you'd all be singing a very different song.

[wimbo_pro]

Originally posted by marler1972
My two cents, from what i have read they were cheapshots why not pull your starters in the middle of the 3rd qtr and at the end of the night send your game film to the UIL and file a complaint save the kids from any risk of injury.

Because it was a great opportunity to rally the kids, make a statement, get starters to play a whole game, and retaliate on IP. All in all, it was the thing to do. And I am no fan of running up scores...but it seems that, in this case, it was the thing to do. Too many posters that I trust (who were there) have said it was blatant and intentional...the number of flags back that up.

[bwdlionfan]

Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
Reading comprehension is your friend.

You're right, reading comprehension is your friend.

So why start a thread that's already been started?

[marler1972]

Originally posted by wimbo_pro
Because it was a great opportunity to rally the kids, make a statement, get starters to play a whole game, and retaliate on IP. All in all, it was the thing to do. And I am no fan of running up scores...but it seems that, in this case, it was the thing to do. Too many posters that I trust (who were there) have said it was blatant and intentional...the number of flags back that up.
What would have been even better is the 2nd and 3rd team playing and continuing to score at will and that sends even a bigger message that they could not stop the 2nd and 3rd team and rallied the kids even more.

[bwdlionfan]

Originally posted by marler1972
What would have been even better is the 2nd and 3rd team playing and continuing to score at will and that sends even a bigger message that they could not stop the 2nd and 3rd team and rallied the kids even more.

Our second D did stuff their first O at our 10 in the 4th