"Anytime you get one of those A's...." [Archive]

Pudlugger

07-07-2004, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by WOS92
Actually, if you look again, it sounds as though he's saying we're on a level playing field now. Before, we were fighting teams that were super-deep, while we had a total of 20-something players. He's not saying we're dropping to lesser competition. He's saying we're playing against teams our own size. Port Neches-Groves and Ozen were borderline 5A teams that could field an entire second string on offense and defense. We, on the other hand, had most players playing both ways.

How can it be that WOS only can field 20 players? They have to be bigger than La Grange, and the Leps have 33-35 guys on varsity every season. Is there a reason fewer guys go out for Football at WOS? Perhaps there is a problem with coaching or the students just don't support the team? A school with 800 enrollment like WOS should have 400 boys. At La Grange (627) 1 in 3 play football , and 1 in 10 boys play on the Varsity team. WOS should have 40 players on varsity and 130 players overrall.

Sans Couth

07-07-2004, 08:47 AM

Pud,

If you remember how Old Card talked about this school eating sleeping and breathing football, you would think they would field 100 of their 400 boys on varsity. I wonder what gives? Does WOS have a 4-1 girl boy ratio?

HighSchool Fan

07-07-2004, 08:53 AM

I agree with you pudlugger, I live in a town that is a 1-A school and they have around 20-25 on the team. Something isn't adding up in WOS.

kepdawg

07-07-2004, 09:57 AM

"so I think we'll be ok now"

Yep, it sounds like Hooks has already ordered the rings! The rest of 3A should go ahead and call off the season! ;)

WOS1

07-07-2004, 10:36 AM

Well, you guys can come to whatever conclusion you want. I assure you that Dan Hooks isn't on the all time winningest coaches list by "overlooking" anyone. He does not believe that 3A is going to be a cake walk, but whether you guys want to admit it or not, it's not as tough from top to bottom as 4A and if you can't admit that then your not in touch with reality. If you need examples, look at BC, Jasper and Everman. BC hadn't made the playoffs in no telling how many years and they drop and immediately start making it. They even made a trip to the semi's. Jasper had never been farther than the Quarterfinals and in the first 2 years go twice to the semi's. Everman did not win it their first year but DID go a long way then won it the next. Guys I'm not knocking 3A but you have to realize that there is a difference and the UIL has the divisions for a reason.

His intent, in the article, is that we are now playing with people who have the same problems we do and that's having many players going both ways. Most 3A teams have several players going both ways and it's nice to be on a level playing field again.

Pudlugger- WOS has never had a lot of players, WOS92 did not say we have 20, he said we have "20 something", usually around 28 or 29. WO-S has a very tough and strict system and a lot of kids can't make it. We Usually have about 40 on the Freshman team and as they get farther into it some will quit and some get kicked off. I think that this dicipline is the heart of the WO-S success.

chaingang

07-07-2004, 11:15 AM

Sans, I do like the controversial posts. All it does with all the trashtalking shows jealousy, or even fear. We donot depict ourselves as the god of 3a or football period. What we have is something called pride(classy pride). The truth is, as said above, is that the Mustang way is too hard for some people. Disipline and the "Mustang" way are very tough at WOS but that is what makes us a very good team. The workouts and expectations make some people quit, now what this allows is a team that wants to win and not just go through the motions. There was a WOS coach that said "I would rather have 11 guys with no talent and 120% work ethic going both ways, then 30 lazy superstars." with this in mind that is why we have a smaller team, so all the hoopla that some are posting on this board(especially when they dont even know anything about Mustang football) is just lame.

Sans Couth

07-07-2004, 11:40 AM

Chain and wos1,

All I did was post what was said. You can read it yourself if you have the ten bucks for a DCTF.

I don't disagree with the coach at all about what he said. I just think it is something he should have kept closer to the vest. All he accomplished by telling a reporter those things is open himself up for unfair critisizm. And as far as the work ethic and discipline at WOS, be proud that you have it, but also realize that at least half of the football teams in Texas follow the same set of rules, so don't get to excited about it.

WOS1

07-07-2004, 12:30 PM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
Chain and wos1,

All I did was post what was said. You can read it yourself if you have the ten bucks for a DCTF.

I don't disagree with the coach at all about what he said. I just think it is something he should have kept closer to the vest. All he accomplished by telling a reporter those things is open himself up for unfair critisizm. And as far as the work ethic and discipline at WOS, be proud that you have it, but also realize that at least half of the football teams in Texas follow the same set of rules, so don't get to excited about it.

Sans, you guys were questioning why we have so few players. I gave you the reason. I really don't understand your point of "but also realize that at least half of the football teams in Texas follow the same set of rules", you weren't wondering about half the football teams in Texas, you were wondering about WO-S, correct?

As for his comments, I probably would have chose to word it a little more carefully. I'm sure that, just like on this site, there are many folks who will take what he said and run with it. But, I know this man well and he IS NOT taking anyone for granted and IS NOT taking 3A to lightly.

slpybear the bullfan

07-07-2004, 12:39 PM

One thing is for certain... anytime a reporter and coach get together, there is some chance that good might come out of it. Maybe. Some of the time.

;)

GUNHO

07-07-2004, 01:13 PM

WOS92 & WOS1 pretty much sumed it up I think.People are reading into his statment what he did not say.As for as,"I think we will be ok now" statment,Hooks says that every year.Some people just like to stir the pot from time to time.Thats cool.

Phil C

07-07-2004, 01:33 PM

I agree with WO. I am sure he didn't mean to imply he was underestimating the competition even though it might have been wiser to not have said anything or worded it different. Anyway it doesn't matter because in realignments in 3A and probably others there will always be an Everman, Forney, Burnet, Jasper, WO in a higher class that will come down and be tough and where that is unfortunate is that small Division 1 Schools like Sinton have to play them but them's the breaks.

Old Dog

07-07-2004, 04:41 PM

But now Everman, Forney, Burnet and a few others get to feel the other end of the stick.......although I feel those 3 will make reasonable transitions.

I've stated this on here before, but when Burnet moved from A to AA (now AAA) back in the late 1960's, we went 2-38 over the first 4 years. Yikes, was it miserable!

WOS92

07-07-2004, 06:32 PM

I think that if you consider the fact that we were in a nine-team 4A district with five teams that would easily make the playoffs in any other district, then the fact that we are now in a smaller 3A district, that his comments were not all that wildly cocky. Bridge City did go more than 30 years with just one winning season and no playoff appearances. Their first year in the district we are entering, they went to the semis. Seeing that, I don't think the phrase "I think we'll be ok" is worth so much fuss.
To say "something doesn't add up" because we have a small team seems silly to me. Our coaching is tough and our program is intense. Like many other programs around the state, that drives kids who don't have the heart off to other pursuits. I'm not saying that our program is any tougher or more intense than YOUR team, but if you want to know the reason our teams aren't packed with kids - there ya go. You can't really question the results of our coaching, especially considering the sheer manpower we've faced week-in, week-out on the other side of the field. I think that was the whole point of Coach Hooks' comments.

Sans Couth

07-07-2004, 07:42 PM

La Grange

07-07-2004, 07:48 PM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
I think all of the WOS fans should be happy the are getting so much press. Remember the golden rule of the Sports Media. It does not matter what they say about you, as long as they spell your name right. There are about 175 teams in 3A that would love to see their team mentioned just once or twice no matter what was said. Yall should thank your lucky stars you are so popular. Good or Bad.

I don't know sometimes people spell it LaGrange and that really gets me mad because it is spelled with a space, like La Grange :D.
That is the only time when LG press gets me unhappy.

WOS92

07-07-2004, 08:40 PM

I think all of the WOS fans should be happy the are getting so much press. Remember the golden rule of the Sports Media. It does not matter what they say about you, as long as they spell your name right. There are about 175 teams in 3A that would love to see their team mentioned just once or twice no matter what was said. Yall should thank your lucky stars you are so popular. Good or Bad.

How enlightening. I forgot that it shouldn't bother us when our coach's quotes are misconstrued in a negative way. I also forgot that it's our fault that we're getting so much press. Sorry about that. You're right, though. There's nothing better than having every team in the state gunning for you before you've played your first game. Thanks, lucky stars!
:rolleyes:

vet93

07-07-2004, 09:42 PM

I don't think that Hook's comments were all that controversial. And for the most part the WOS fans have been very sportsmanlike on this board. I don't see why some are giving them a hard time and making a big fuss out of all of this. Personally, I think that they should be ranked in the top 3 and that they very well could take the whole enchilada. I cannot fault the WOS fans for being a little excited about the prospect of playing teams that may be closer to their enrollment. I would be excited too if my team was as highly regarded as theirs. Of course....I am from the wilds of west texas and we haven't had too many championship seasons of late so maybe I should just keep my opinions to myself.;)

WOS1

07-07-2004, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by vet93
I don't think that Hook's comments were all that controversial. And for the most part the WOS fans have been very sportsmanlike on this board. I don't see why some are giving them a hard time and making a big fuss out of all of this. Personally, I think that they should be ranked in the top 3 and that they very well could take the whole enchilada. I cannot fault the WOS fans for being a little excited about the prospect of playing teams that may be closer to their enrollment. I would be excited too if my team was as highly regarded as theirs. Of course....I am from the wilds of west texas and we haven't had too many championship seasons of late so maybe I should just keep my opinions to myself.;)

Thanks Vet. Your opinion is valued by me.:D

Sans Couth

07-07-2004, 11:17 PM

I am going to say this and then I am going to leave this thread alone.

If WOS only fields 28 players this season, I will post a picture of myself doing the macarena in the buff with a mustang painted on my ass. Furthermore, if they are going to only field 28 players and play most of them "both ways" then they don't stand a chance at winning a D1 title...just ask some of the "Big School Groupies" on this board.

I have naked macarena mustang pics that say WOS fields 40+ players this year if they field 11.

WOS92

07-07-2004, 11:31 PM

That's fine. Let me say this: In 2000, with a team of fewer than 30 players, many of whom played "both ways," we made it to the 4A DII State Finals, beating out LaMarque, Friendswood, Jasper and Calallen along the way. We've spent the last 10 years fighting "the numbers game" and have done just fine. So I find it hard to put much stock into your analysis of a team you've never seen. But, by all means... I hope you use a reputable and discreet photographer.
If you're doubting the number of players we field on a typical year, then you're just disputing facts. We haven't had 40 players since the late 1980s.

Sans Couth

07-07-2004, 11:33 PM

Why don't you post us a team picture so we can count some heads.:p

WOS92

07-07-2004, 11:38 PM

If I had access to a team photo, I'd be more than happy to. This is the best I can do:
This is a shot of our entire team - including trainers and cheerleaders - at the 50 yd line in the title game in 2000 during pregame. Keep in mind, it's a distant shot and they're holding a huge WO-S flag. Does this really look like 40 people? Facts are facts. If you want to dispute them just to ruffle feathers, then go ahead. I think WO-S fans have been pretty classy on this board - defensive, because of posters like you - but classy.

http://www.wosfootball.homestead.com/files/Aut_3372.jpg

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 12:03 AM

The WOS 2000 Varsity roster had 36 players.

If you did not take ANY JV kids to the playoff games then you are not like most teams in Texas. Almost any team will carry their JV studs into the playoffs.

However 36 is not "20 something" and it is not "fewer than 30".
If we are going to argue the "facts" then we shall argue it Both ways.

WOS 2000 Rosters

Varsity 36
JV 29
Freshmen 42

Link to WOS 2000 Rosters From the WOS site (http://wosfootball.homestead.com/Roster.html)

WOS Mustang

07-08-2004, 01:39 AM

Many kids begin the season in a Mustang uniform but don't finish it for whatever reason. All the names on that roster were not in the district and playoff games, guaranteed. Does your team never have anyone quit or fail or get injured, or kicked off? We know how many players we suit up year in and year out, and it matters to none of us if you believe it or not. And before you say anything about #'s in the playoffs from years past, we suit up pretty much everyone in the program to sit on the sidelines during the playoffs, but the same 20 something kids on the original varsity still get all the playing time. If you still don't believe it's done every year, come watch us, and count for yourself. And as for Hook's comment, "we'll be ok", doesn't say we will win it all. The good part is that only he knows what was meant by it. You can take it for what you want, I'm sure Coach Hook's could care less.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 07:09 AM

All I can tell you is the number of silver-and-blue helmets we counted on the sidelines during those games, which was in stark contrast to all of our playoff (and regular season) opponents. I guess it's irrelevant that we'd already stated that many of the players who start the season - thus making up the "active roster" - don't finish the season or even suit up for the first game. If you want to make us look like some Goliath, then go right ahead. You'd know better than I would. After all, the names in the program are what win the game, not the actual players who are on the sidelines. So, although my eyes clearly counted fewer than 30 players pretty much every year for the past 10, Obviously you, 100 miles east of Dallas, know better. I'd say we look forward to meeting your team, but I don't know if "100 miles east of Dallas" will be DI or DII.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 08:53 AM

The main point that I am trying to make is this. WOS has been touted as a football giant coming down to 3A by many in the sports media. We have been told about your huge success in a tough district in 4A. Practically every sports writer in Texas has WOS listed as a top 10 team (and I personally do not have a problem with that). I also could not care less if WOS goes all the way for the next ten years. More power to them. But here is a simple FACT. WOS is going to play in 3A in Division 1. They turned in a 884 ADM. That puts them up against teams like Jasper, Gainesville, and many other big teams with deep rosters. Now the "quotes" that started this thread were pretty much about how your coach talked about moving "down" and "dropping on of those "A's" and not having to face deep rosters. Well you have not had much success dominating teams like Jasper in the past, so I am going to have to wait and see if you do now. But whether or not some of the "big school groupies" want to chime in on this thread or not has yet to be seen. But I would love for those same folks who talk about "depth charts" making the difference in playoff runs tell me why WOS and their "20-something players" are going to make a deep run in D-1. Because if it is true that you are going to field 20-something players that play both ways, then here is another fact. You are not making a transition from a small fish in a big pond to a big fish in a small pond. You are just a small fish that is switching ponds.

NewStang

07-08-2004, 09:06 AM

Is the pond not smaller, though, Sans? Can you honestly tell me that the “big schools” in 3A field the same depth as the “big schools” in 4A? Therefore, would it not be a reasonable statement that if you’ve done well with 20-something players vs. 60-something players, that it would be less strenuous against teams with 30-40 players?

But I would love for those same folks who talk about "depth charts" making the difference in playoff runs tell me why WOS and their "20-something players" are going to make a deep run in D-1.
We AREN'T making that point! That's not AT ALL why we think we'll do well!

So we’re facing teams with equal numbers to ours, but we’ve been up against teams with DOUBLE our enrollment. Bay City? I’m not sure I’m getting your point.
How is a 14-4 record against Jasper not relatively "dominating?"

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 09:28 AM

...Therefore, would it not be a reasonable statement that if you’ve done well with 20-something players vs. 60-something players, that it would be less strenuous against teams with 30-40 players?...

In my opinion...NO. There are only 11 players on the field at any given time. So what would the difference be playing teams with 40 players versus teams with 60 if you only have 20? Absolutley NONE. You can't have it both ways. Either depth makes a difference or it doesn't. But if you are going to say that YOUR team does not have depth, then you can't say that the oposing teams depth factors in. If dropping down a classification is going to make a difference in your success because of depth, then you are in for a rude awakening if you field 20 players. You need to drop down to A ball if you want depth to make a difference with those numbers. There are D2 schools in 3A with less than 400 ADM that field 40 players.

WOS1

07-08-2004, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
The main point that I am trying to make is this. WOS has been touted as a football giant coming down to 3A by many in the sports media. We have been told about your huge success in a tough district in 4A. Practically every sports writer in Texas has WOS listed as a top 10 team (and I personally do not have a problem with that). I also could not care less if WOS goes all the way for the next ten years. More power to them. But here is a simple FACT. WOS is going to play in 3A in Division 1. They turned in a 884 ADM. That puts them up against teams like Jasper, Gainesville, and many other big teams with deep rosters. Now the "quotes" that started this thread were pretty much about how your coach talked about moving "down" and "dropping on of those "A's" and not having to face deep rosters. Well you have not had much success dominating teams like Jasper in the past, so I am going to have to wait and see if you do now. But whether or not some of the "big school groupies" want to chime in on this thread or not has yet to be seen. But I would love for those same folks who talk about "depth charts" making the difference in playoff runs tell me why WOS and their "20-something players" are going to make a deep run in D-1. Because if it is true that you are going to field 20-something players that play both ways, then here is another fact. You are not making a transition from a small fish in a big pond to a big fish in a small pond. You are just a small fish that is switching ponds.

First of all, I would like to know how the heck you got that roster because I no longer have it published. What are you, some kind of hacker?

Second, exactly what benefit would it be for us to make up having small teams?

Also, your not going to suck us into knocking Jasper with your, "Well you have not had much success dominating teams like Jasper in the past", comments. We have much respect for Jasper and they have a solid program. If you want to know, you can see how the series stands on my website. Obviously, you are well versed in navigating around sites.

Another thing, you can say what you want about G'ville, I will not dispute you and make uneducated comments about teams I know nothing about :thinking:, but I do know about Jasper, and I know they do usually have kids that go both ways.

As for whether or not we'll be successful in DI, we are OK with waiting for the battles start on the field, why can't you be? I really don't see your beef with us, sitting 100 miles East of Dallas.

HighSchool Fan

07-08-2004, 09:39 AM

It seems to me that WOS fans are laying the foundation for excuses in case they don't win the state champonship.

NewStang

07-08-2004, 09:40 AM

I guess when you're used to seeing teams who are able to plug in fresh offensive lineman — who are still huge and could start on most teams — against your linemen who basically are on the field all night, you start to see how depth can be an advantage. Our point is that we've done well in 4A DESPITE being at a big disadvantage in depth. Regardless whether the team on the other side of the field fields 40 players, we won't be at AS BIG a disadvantage as we were before. We are not saying we're going to be deeper than anyone. We're saying we won't be AS SHALLOW compared to our opponents.
We're not looking for a difference in our level of success. Our level of success has been just fine. Again - you say we haven't been able to "dominate" teams like Jasper, but, no offense to the dawgs, we have a 78% winning percentage against them.
Dropping to 3A certainly made a difference for Jasper and Bridge City.
I have yet to see a Mustang fan come on this board and predict that we'll win it all. You even say that you think we'll do very well in 3A. I'm not sure I get your point. "I think we'll be ok" doesn't sound like "3A is in for a world of hurt," either.

NewStang

07-08-2004, 09:43 AM

It seems to me that WOS fans are laying the foundation for excuses in case they don't win the state champonship.

Umm... Actually we're just trying to put our coach's comments in the proper context. Read again. Concentrate.

If you'll go back to the DCTF post, most WO-S fans even agreed that Gainesville should be #1. I don't see why we would be making "excuses." We do think we'll be a force in 3A. That's all.

WOS1

07-08-2004, 09:44 AM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
In my opinion...NO. There are only 11 players on the field at any given time. So what would the difference be playing teams with 40 players versus teams with 60 if you only have 20? Absolutley NONE. You can't have it both ways. Either depth makes a difference or it doesn't. But if you are going to say that YOUR team does not have depth, then you can't say that the oposing teams depth factors in. If dropping down a classification is going to make a difference in your success because of depth, then you are in for a rude awakening if you field 20 players. You need to drop down to A ball if you want depth to make a difference with those numbers. There are D2 schools in 3A with less than 400 ADM that field 40 players.

Quit trying to twist what he is saying. Bottom line is that we've been competing with much larger enrollments for years with 20 something kids and now we are playing teams with similar enrollments and similar problems. We'll see in a couple of months whether or not the drop will help. Stir on Brother...

WOS1

07-08-2004, 09:46 AM

Originally posted by HighSchool Fan
It seems to me that WOS fans are laying the foundation for excuses in case they don't win the state champonship.

I don't see any WO-S people making excuses, I see Sans making excuses for us.

NewStang

07-08-2004, 10:39 AM

GUNHO

07-08-2004, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by NewStang
Hey sans, I see you've learned a bit from good ol' Mike Moore. In re-reading the article to which you refer, I see how, as in Fahrenheit 9/11, the truth can be twisted without actually telling a lie. One way is to cut a quote short. Here's the full quote:

"I thought we would have been competitive in 4A, so I think we'll be OK now," Hooks said. "On paper, I'm looking forward to it. Unfortunately, the game is played on grass."

I'd think that means we aren't taking anyone for granted.

Enough said.:clap:

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 11:00 AM

"I really don't see your beef with us, sitting 100 miles East of Dallas."

I challenge you to find a post where I have a beef with WOS or disrepect them in any manner. I am only here for spirited debate, and I can choose which ever side of the debate I wish. I have not posted anything but opinions and a few facts that I looked up myself without the help of anyone here. If you want to try and goat me into something less by comparing me to Michael Moore you won't get far with me.

Show me one single post where I was disrespectful to WOS, or any of their fans. If you guys cant take some spirited discussion, maybe you should log into powderpuff.com

NewStang

07-08-2004, 11:06 AM

Michael Moore takes facts that support his argument and omits facts that dispute it. You took a quote and cut it in half, omitting the part that made it clear that Hooks is not taking any team for granted. I did not do that for you. I simply pointed out the similarity. I think that falls under the realm of engaging in spirited debate. If you can't take it, see the end of your last post.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 12:18 PM

First of all, I took several quotes from DCTF and posted them at the beginning of this thread. I encouraged the readers to spend the ten bucks and read the whole article. My debate in this thread has had nothing to do with my posts that began this thread. My debate has been with the statement that WOS only fields 20-something players, which was mentioned by someone else. Don't accuse me of misquoting or turning anything around, because my debate has absolutley nothing to do with the way this thread began.

NewStang

07-08-2004, 12:27 PM

I didn’t accuse you of misquoting. I accused you of slicing a not-so-controversial quote to read in a controversial way.
As far as your argument regarding WO-S’s roster size, anyone who has played us can attest that we field a small team every year - especially by 4A standards. In looking back, I’m not sure WHAT your argument actually is. We know depth doesn’t define a team. We’ve fought and won that battle for years. However, it DOES give the coach distinct advantages. What exactly is your point?

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 12:41 PM

My point is that I believe most eveyone that ranked WOS so high in a classification they have never played in is because of their size. And if they claim to only field 20 players then I don't see the advantage for them in 3A. To me they are just another team until they prove themselves, and someone like DCTF ranking them number one, and ranking a team like Gainesville 24th that has already proven themselves in 3A is a mistake. WOS should garner plenty of respect because of their drop. However my money says that had you told nine out of ten folks on this board six months ago that WOS only fields 20 something players that play both ways, their opinion of how well WOS will fare would have been different.

chaingang

07-08-2004, 01:44 PM

NewStang

07-08-2004, 01:46 PM

And MY point is that with that same number of players, we've fared just fine in 4A. No one from WO-S has been among those giving us any trophies prematurely. We've just said we're excited to finally be playing teams our own size. Among local people, at least, people are giving WO-S a lot of respect in 3A because we've earned it in 4A - not because we're going to outnumber anyone. That's not our MO, nor has it ever been. But to say that the numbers game hasn't hurt us over the past few years would be wrong. Even the teams that have beaten us over the past two years would tell you that.
Anyone who expected us to be a strong team in 3A because of our size just doesn't know much about us. They were making false assumptions.
Maybe, just maybe, we're getting SOME respect because we're a traditionally strong program - not a boundless army. Why is it perfectly acceptable for people to say "Newton is going to destroy 2A," then get riled up when a program dropping to 3A gets some measure of the same reaction? Newton was very successful in 3A, now they should continue to be successful in 2A. What's the difference?

chaingang

07-08-2004, 01:52 PM

With all the above said, I have to say something. Sans, no disrespect but your facts are horrible. I dont know if you are trying to start trash or if you really think you are correct about us. If you did know about us then you would act like us(class and respect) but you dont. Now, as for the Jasper comment, check you records and for the little fish story what does the size of the fish matter if it is a pirranah. That probably was the worst analogie i have ever heard. I dont know how you people 100miles east of Dallas are, but we here 90 miles east of Houston DONT TALK TRASH WE PROVE OURSELVES ON THE FIELD.

This in reference to the earlier page 3 post.

NewStang

07-08-2004, 01:53 PM

And why did you trim that quote, by the way? It did seem awfully selective. You didn't address that.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 01:59 PM

Hey sans, I see you've learned a bit from good ol' Mike Moore. In re-reading the article to which you refer, I see how, as in Fahrenheit 9/11, the truth can be twisted without actually telling a lie. One way is to cut a quote short. Here's the full quote:
"I thought we would have been competitive in 4A, so I think we'll be OK now," Hooks said. "On paper, I'm looking forward to it. Unfortunately, the game is played on grass."

First of all, I took several quotes from DCTF and posted them at the beginning of this thread. I encouraged the readers to spend the ten bucks and read the whole article. My debate in this thread has had nothing to do with my posts that began this thread. My debate has been with the statement that WOS only fields 20-something players, which was mentioned by someone else. Don't accuse me of misquoting or turning anything around, because my debate has absolutley nothing to do with the way this thread began.

http://studentweb.tulane.edu/~jboston/crawfish.gif

;) :p

chaingang

07-08-2004, 02:13 PM

WOS92- I couldnt have summed it up better.
As for Sans- This is getting rediculous, You are on a desperate whim to prove your pasts posts are true. I donot mean to disrespect or mock you. We dont do that here. We love heated discussions, when they are correct, not when facts are made up. If you really think you know who we are, you are sadly mistaken. I can figure that out by the misconscrewed so called"facts". With the comments on us not being good because of low numbers, Have you ever heard of a team just being good? Have you ever heard of effort overcoming size? Personally i could give a rats........ about what you post. I am worried about the other readers who dont know about WOS and you making them think we are a bunch of arrogant AH's. Well, we are not and we do know how to be classy.

Just get the facts right before you post thats it

WOS1

07-08-2004, 02:19 PM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
My point is that I believe most eveyone that ranked WOS so high in a classification they have never played in is because of their size. And if they claim to only field 20 players then I don't see the advantage for them in 3A. To me they are just another team until they prove themselves, and someone like DCTF ranking them number one, and ranking a team like Gainesville 24th that has already proven themselves in 3A is a mistake. WOS should garner plenty of respect because of their drop. However my money says that had you told nine out of ten folks on this board six months ago that WOS only fields 20 something players that play both ways, their opinion of how well WOS will fare would have been different.

If you'll go back and look, most of the people ranking us so high are people who actually know WO-S and respect us for the quality of our program and not our number of athletes. These people are aware of the battles we have won facing overwhelming odds. I don't disagree with your assessment of the DCTF magazine. As I've said before, I think they definitely disrespected Gainesville. On the other hand, we may not have proved anything yet in 3A, but we have in 4A for many years and that respect naturally carries over. The same goes for Newton in 2A, I guess you don't feel like they deserve to be ranked #2 since they've not played in that division.

GS#17

07-08-2004, 04:05 PM

However my money says that had you told nine out of ten folks on this board six months ago that WOS only fields 20 something players that play both ways, their opinion of how well WOS will fare would have been different.

Sans, I doubt it. I'd guess at least 90% of the people here have followed HS football and would still rank a traditionally powerful team (one of the most successful programs in the state, regardless of classification) pretty high, despite the number of players on our sidelines. WOS has historically had good talent and great coaching. There is a solid program in place -- a program that is respected statewide. We enjoy a strong team year in and year out, and this year will be no different. Sure, there have been down years, but remember, you're talking about a team that has fielded 20 to 30 something players for at least 20 years, and has only seen one losing season in its 25-year history. Despite whatever disadvantages one could claim we have, the team has still posted wins in almost 80% of all games played. Let's just agree, this is a team that has been strong for a long time and will probably continue to be a force -- I don't see how anyone could argue the drop to 3A will cause the Mustangs to lose their stride.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 04:11 PM

Please show me which "facts" that I typed are not true. I only made reference to a couple of "facts" and I can prove them all. Also please point out where I did any "trash talking".

You guys are way to sensitive. But if you are going to try and make ME out to be some kind of trash talking idiot, then you are going to have to show me where.

Please point me in the direction of my "horrible facts" and "trash talking".

GS#17

07-08-2004, 04:30 PM

I'm not going to review the entire thread, but one "fact" I remember distinctly is your statement that we have not had much success dominating teams like Jasper. Prove that statement.

Here is our record against Jasper: 14-4

Good luck.

BTW, I'm not calling you a trash talker, but I really haven't been able to follow this thread from square one -- you've went on rabbit trail after rabbit trail. First, you claimed to be just quoting DCTF; then it was a dispute about our roster size; then it was about how we can't compete with a less than a 40-man roster... Who knows where it's going next? The only avenue I have left is to reason all you really wanted to do was stir the pot (for what reason, I don't know). Please answer: Do you have a point, and if so, what is it?

chaingang

07-08-2004, 04:31 PM

IT IS A WASTE OF MY TIME TO ARGUE WITH YOU ANYMORE. You have got your opinions and so do we. Mustang football is in 3a wether you like it or not so buckle your chinstrap. YOU WILL SEE!

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 05:45 PM

Originally posted by chaingang
WOS92- I couldnt have summed it up better.
As for Sans- This is getting rediculous, You are on a desperate whim to prove your pasts posts are true. I donot mean to disrespect or mock you. We dont do that here. We love heated discussions, when they are correct, not when facts are made up. If you really think you know who we are, you are sadly mistaken. I can figure that out by the misconscrewed so called"facts". With the comments on us not being good because of low numbers, Have you ever heard of a team just being good? Have you ever heard of effort overcoming size? Personally i could give a rats........ about what you post. I am worried about the other readers who dont know about WOS and you making them think we are a bunch of arrogant AH's. Well, we are not and we do know how to be classy.

Just get the facts right before you post thats it

I never said you were not a good team. And I never said you guys didn't have any class but your posts are starting to speak for themselves.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by GS#17
I'm not going to review the entire thread, but one "fact" I remember distinctly is your statement that we have not had much success dominating teams like Jasper. Prove that statement.

Here is our record against Jasper: 14-4

Good luck.

BTW, I'm not calling you a trash talker, but I really haven't been able to follow this thread from square one -- you've went on rabbit trail after rabbit trail. First, you claimed to be just quoting DCTF; then it was a dispute about our roster size; then it was about how we can't compete with a less than a 40-man roster... Who knows where it's going next? The only avenue I have left is to reason all you really wanted to do was stir the pot (for what reason, I don't know). Please answer: Do you have a point, and if so, what is it?

I guess I owe you an apology for saying you have not "Dominated Jasper"

I only went back and looked at the last 10 years when I made my comment.

Since 1994 WOS has a 4-2 record against Jasper but the points are 128 Points Scored and 122 Points Allowed. I guess domination is a matter of opinion and if you want to call me on that "fact" then I will concede it.

By the way.

In your last 4 games against Jasper here are the scores

2001
WOS 26...Jasper 42

2000
WOS 20...Jasper 9

1997 WOS 17...Jasper 16

1996 WOS 0...Jasper 41

NEXT "FACT" I got wrong please.

WOS1

07-08-2004, 06:33 PM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
I guess I owe you an apology for saying you have not "Dominated Jasper"

I only went back and looked at the last 10 years when I made my comment.

Since 1994 WOS has a 4-2 record against Jasper but the points are 128 Points Scored and 122 Points Allowed. I guess domination is a matter of opinion and if you want to call me on that "fact" then I will concede it.

By the way.

In your last 4 games against Jasper here are the scores

2001
WOS 26...Jasper 42

2000
WOS 20...Jasper 9

1997 WOS 17...Jasper 16

1996 WOS 0...Jasper 41

NEXT "FACT" I got wrong please.

The next "FACT" you've got wrong is right here in your last post. We played Jasper twice in 2000, the scores were 20-9 and 23-0. So the only "FACT" you have right is the number of points Jasper has scored since 1994. Again, you obviously know NOTHING about us so why keep this up? Are you now changing this into a history of WO-S vs Jasper debate?

BTW- you still haven't answered my question on how you accessed my roster page. What are you up to?

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 06:37 PM

Originally posted by WOS1
The next "FACT" you've got wrong is right here in your last post. We played Jasper twice in 2000, the scores were 20-9 and 23-0. So the only "FACT" you have right is the number of points Jasper has scored since 1994. Again, you obviously know NOTHING about us so why keep this up?

So are you saying because I missed that game in my research that game is the difference in "Domination" which is the original "Fact" you challenged me on?

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 06:43 PM

BTW- you still haven't answered my question on how you accessed my roster page. What are you up to?

I did a google search and typed in the words WOS Mustang Roster.

The link is the first selection in the google search results.

Here is the link spelled out for you.

FBRecords

http://fbrecords.homestead.com/

WOS1

07-08-2004, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
So are you saying because I missed that game in my research that game is the difference in "Domination" which is the original "Fact" you challenged me on?

No, I'm saying what you are calling "FACT" isn't that at all. You, again, are trying to cut the real facts up to try and support your argument but your research is flawed thus ruining your whole argument. You know, crap in, crap out.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 06:49 PM

Here is a picture if you cant figure it out.

http://img49.exs.cx/img49/7471/wosroster.jpg

WOS92

07-08-2004, 06:50 PM

No, Sans, you missed another one. WO-S beat Jasper twice in 1997, too. 17-16 and 27-12. You really should be a bit more thorough. So that would be a 6-2 record. That sounds dominating enough for me.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 06:53 PM

Originally posted by WOS1
No, I'm saying what you are calling "FACT" isn't that at all. You, again, are trying to cut the real facts up to try and support your argument but your research is flawed thus ruining your whole argument. You know, crap in, crap out.

Crap in Crap out?

Ok lets add in the crap I missed.

Last "Five Games" instead of "Last 4"

WOS vs Jasper

WOS Points FOR 86

WOS Points Allowed 108

Your right, WOS has Dominated Jasper. Again I apologize for being wrong.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 06:56 PM

Make it two games missed.
You're right, though, Sans. I'd much rather have one game with a ton of points than several wins. I forgot that it's the point total - not the Ws - that count.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by WOS92
Make it two games missed.
You're right, though, Sans. I'd much rather have one game with a ton of points than several wins. I forgot that it's the point total - not the Ws - that count.

The point is whether or not WOS has dominated Jasper. Somebody said they were calling me on a "fact" like I was just making them up as I go along. Well I have admited to missing the games in my research, but the accusation that my "facts" are in my own mind is unfair. In my opinion WOS has not dominated Jasper. Now if you want to talk about Bridge City being on the short end of some WOS domination, I will jump in your corner.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 07:05 PM

So if we're going by the last five, as you chose, I count 113 for WO-S and 79 for Jasper.

WOS 17, Jasper 16
WOS 27, Jasper 12
WOS 20, Jasper 9
WOS 23, Jasper 0
Jasper 42, WOS 26

WOS1

07-08-2004, 07:06 PM

"Here is a picture if you cant figure it out."

Oh... I can figure out plenty. I've already figured out that you are merely someone looking for an argument and have no REAL point at all. You're throwing crap against the wall to see if something sticks.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 07:07 PM

Then if we're talking about a difference in perception of the word "domination," it's a pretty stupid thing to argue about. I consider a 14-4 record pretty dominating. Of course, someone 100 miles east of Dallas probably has a much clearer perspective on the rivalry than we do here in West Orange.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by WOS1
"Here is a picture if you cant figure it out."

Oh... I can figure out plenty. I've already figured out that you are merely someone looking for an argument and have no REAL point at all. You're throwing crap against the wall to see if something sticks.

The only "argument" was whether or not WOS fielded more than 28 players. I did some digging because my curiosity got the best of me. My reasearch showed 36 on the 2000 roster. You guys are the ones that have turned this thread into something personal. I think you should go back to the beginning and read the whole thing.

I am still waiting for someone to point out where I talked trash, or "made up my facts" or said that WOS was not a good team, or made fun of someones momma.

WOS1

07-08-2004, 07:16 PM

T- he's trying to bate us into a mele with some Jasper folks. Don't go for it anymore.

I think Jasper has an outstanding program and I feel very lucky that we are 6-2 against them since 94 or whatever period of time Sans chooses to use. WO-S fans have a TON of respect for Jasper. There are VERY FEW teams in the state of Texas that can even say that they have a winning record against them and for that I'm very proud.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 07:20 PM

The point is whether or not WOS has dominated Jasper.

The only "argument" was whether or not WOS fielded more than 28 players.

Seems like a contradiction. So what are we talking about? The "point" or the "argument?"

I can go back and re-read and see where the problem comes in immediately - a partial post (which you still haven't addressed) that changes the context of what our coach said. THAT is why I initially had a problem with you. Over the course of this thread, that has just managed to build. You've come off as someone who just wants an argument. I'm more than happy to oblige, but my perception of you has certainly changed.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 07:24 PM

If I just wanted an argument I would go spend my time on the pig. I think there is a big difference between a topic to debate and an argument. I obviously cannot change your perception of myself, and quite frankly I don't care what you think about me. But I will tell you this. When the season gets here and its time to start picking winners, betting against me would not be in your best judgement.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 07:32 PM

Well. That is IMPRESSIVE. I'll take that into account when I'm in Vegas betting on Hardin-Jefferson vs. Hamshire-Fannett.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 07:33 PM

LOL, Mock me if you wish. But Betting does not have to mean money and you know it.

Look at the bright side WOS92, thanks to me, you will have 500 posts before you know it. You have already made ten just today.

WOS1

07-08-2004, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
The only "argument" was whether or not WOS fielded more than 28 players. I did some digging because my curiosity got the best of me. My reasearch showed 36 on the 2000 roster. You guys are the ones that have turned this thread into something personal. I think you should go back to the beginning and read the whole thing.

I am still waiting for someone to point out where I talked trash, or "made up my facts" or said that WOS was not a good team, or made fun of someones momma.

OK... there is only one person who wrote those things and you'll have to excuse him (he's a youngster). What the rest of us have a problem with are your "selective" use of facts in order to create a certain perception. The problem is that, when you do not use all of the facts, your hypothesis is flawed.

Example:

1. In your opening, you posted some quotes from Hooks, but not ALL of them. You only used the ones that were advantageous to the perception you were trying to create.

2. You argued against the fact that we have 20 something kids on the team every year and used the roster from the beginning of the 2000 campaign as your proof though that roster, as many do, changed drastically over the course of the year. Some of those kids even played JV.

3. You stated the we, "have not had much luck dominating teams like Jasper", when our record against them is 14-4.

4. To try and prove your "domination" theory you selectively try to use 94 until the present because you thought that it would, again, be to your advantage, but you didn't do all of your homework.

Again, the reason I say you have some kind of beef with us is because you are twisting the truth. If you didn't then why would you go through all the trouble?

GS#17

07-08-2004, 07:44 PM

Sans, while it's interesting to cut quotes, find a roster, put up a picture, selectively pick games to prove who is or isn't "dominating," argue semantics, etc., I really think you've taken the thread in complete 360s. Hence, I will ask again, since you never answered my questions: Do you have a point in this thread? If so, what is it?

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 08:00 PM

1. As I have said already. I just posted some quotes that I thought were bold. Yall are the ones that tried to twist them into being nothing. I even said that I AGREED with Coach Hooks, but I thought that he should have kept them to himself.

2. The 2000 team was the one that was picked by one of YOUR fans as having less than 30 kids. He tried to make it look as though I just made up my numbers, so I went and dug up your roster. It showed 36. Maybe you lost a full third of your roster to injury and the JV team, and didn't bring anyone up to replace them, but the roster said 36, and I was on the defensive because I "make up" my facts.

3. I still don't think you have "Dominated Jasper" regardless of the record. They have hung more than 40 points on you twice in the past 5-6 games. You will have to tell me when the last time WOS hung 40 on Jasper, because I am tired of having my research nit picked.

4. I told you that I only went back 10 years before I made my post about the domination. I guess had I gone back a quarter of a century I would have found your 14-4 "Domination" of Jasper.

Finaly...I don't have a beef with WOS. I have already posted that I don't care if they win it all for the next ten years. This thread began as a topic to discuss whether or not Coach Hook's may have made a mistake by letting a reporter quote him on a touchy subject...and later fell apart because a few folks got their feelings hurt. If you insist that I have a problem with WOS then that is your perogative, but I can assure you, I wish their team no malice, I just think they are getting a smidgen more respect than they have earned in a new conference. One thing is for sure, in about 3 months, we will all know how good or not so good the Mustangs are.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by GS#17
Sans, while it's interesting to cut quotes, find a roster, put up a picture, selectively pick games to prove who is or isn't "dominating," argue semantics, etc., I really think you've taken the thread in complete 360s. Hence, I will ask again, since you never answered my questions: Do you have a point in this thread? If so, what is it?

Each and every time I post on a thread, I have a point. It is not my fault that this thread has taken fifteen turns. Go back to the beginning and you will see that I only went the way of the thread ahead of me. The only original post I made in this thread was the first one. All of the others have been more of a re-action, than action. Go and read the posts in chronogical order and you will see what I mean.

WOS1

07-08-2004, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
1. As I have said already. I just posted some quotes that I thought were bold. Yall are the ones that tried to twist them into being nothing. I even said that I AGREED with Coach Hooks, but I thought that he should have kept them to himself.

2. The 2000 team was the one that was picked by one of YOUR fans as having less than 30 kids. He tried to make it look as though I just made up my numbers, so I went and dug up your roster. It showed 36. Maybe you lost a full third of your roster to injury and the JV team, and didn't bring anyone up to replace them, but the roster said 36, and I was on the defensive because I "make up" my facts.

3. I still don't think you have "Dominated Jasper" regardless of the record. They have hung more than 40 points on you twice in the past 5-6 games. You will have to tell me when the last time WOS hung 40 on Jasper, because I am tired of having my research nit picked.

4. I told you that I only went back 10 years before I made my post about the domination. I guess had I gone back a quarter of a century I would have found your 14-4 "Domination" of Jasper.

Finaly...I don't have a beef with WOS. I have already posted that I don't care if they win it all for the next ten years. This thread began as a topic to discuss whether or not Coach Hook's may have made a mistake by letting a reporter quote him on a touchy subject...and later fell apart because a few folks got their feelings hurt. If you insist that I have a problem with WOS then that is your perogative, but I can assure you, I wish their team no malice, I just think they are getting a smidgen more respect than they have earned in a new conference. One thing is for sure, in about 3 months, we will all know how good or not so good the Mustangs are.

"smidgen more respect than they have earned"

There it is... the beef. Thank you. As I've said before, I think we are ranked a little high myself...

WOS1

07-08-2004, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
Each and every time I post on a thread, I have a point. It is not my fault that this thread has taken fifteen turns. Go back to the beginning and you will see that I only went the way of the thread ahead of me. The only original post I made in this thread was the first one. All of the others have been more of a re-action, than action. Go and read the posts in chronogical order and you will see what I mean.

... if you've got about an hour!!

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 08:13 PM

Well slap my butt and call me a homo....I guess I DO have a beef with WOS.:p

WOS92

07-08-2004, 08:14 PM

Since when is 18 years a quarter of a century? It's not even a fifth. Over the last 10 years, our record is 7-2 against Jasper. That's exactly half of 14-4. If a team owned that record against us, I'd call it a dominating record. LaMarque is 3-1 against us and never beat us by more than 17. I would say they have dominated us.

It's one thing to post quotes that are bold. It's another thing to post parts of quotes that are only bold when taken out of context. If you worked at a newspaper and did that in a story, you'd be in pretty deep - at least with any reputable paper.

Who is your team, by the way? Please don't crawfish. I would like to know.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 08:18 PM

You're right, Sans. We haven't done anything to earn respect in 3A. Conversely, we haven't done anything to earn disrespect. We shouldn't be at #1, but should probably be top four.

In 4A, we've done plenty to earn respect. Earning the top overall winning percentage in that classification is nothing to sneeze at.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 08:20 PM

I will follow Mount Venon this year, but I will go watch 60-75 games. They will probably make the playoffs and maybe win another game or two. I don't have any wild fantasies about them doing more than that this year. Since I will only see Mt. Vernon play 10-12 games, and I will watch 50-65 more, I don't guess I really have a "Team" but if you are looking for someone to dig up something on, I guess you can start there.

As far as the other thing about Jasper, I have already made my point. If you want to keep telling me I "make up my facts" so be it. But I am tired of listening to you try and make me look like an idiot. I will put my football knowledge up against any poster on this board. If you want to pick teams with me all season, bring it on, otherwise let it go.

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 08:23 PM

Since when is 18 years a quarter of a century? It's not even a fifth.

Again, I didn't go back that far. Somone said in a previous post that WOS had been playing football for 26 years. I just assumed I would have to go back that far to find your entire win loss record with Jasper.

Again, I beg your forgiveness for being an idiot.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 08:26 PM

I thought the issue here was the number of players on our roster?
I can't make you look like anything. You control that.
As far as the Jasper thing goes - if we agree that our perception of the term "domination" is different, then you really can't make a point. We'll just have to agree to disagree. You'll have to agree that winning 78% of your games against a team with a strong tradition is not bad.
I certainly wouldn't try to dig anything up on Mount Vernon. I'm a football fan. I have no reason to make your team look bad. Why would I want to do that?
I would, however, love to run into them in the postseason now :D
Good luck this year. I hope things work out with all of that picking 100-some-odd games. Maybe you'll end up undefeated and WO-S will win state. Then we'll all be happy. Right?

WOS92

07-08-2004, 08:27 PM

Again, I beg your forgiveness for being an idiot.

I never said you were an idiot. You're just misguided. You're forgiven.

:D

GS#17

07-08-2004, 08:27 PM

Again, what's the point of this thread (a definite answer would be nice)? As I said earlier, I've followed this thread, but I've not seen any point to anything you've posted.

1) Your witty alternative to being showcased in a feature article in a premier HS football magazine is for Coach Hooks to say something along the lines of, "We aren't going to do any good. We suck. We're overrated. I hope Sinton doesn't make us their whipping boy..." I'll pass that along. I'm sure coaches across Texas will appreciate that bit of wisdom. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the head coach of the #1 3A football team in Texas to say he feels good about his chances or that he's happy to be playing teams closer to his school's size.

2) I'm not sure how the exact number of people on the roster is of issue to this thread. The point, if I remember correctly, was WOS fields teams with small rosters and several people often playing offense, defense, and special teams.

3) 93 - WOS beat Jasper 42-7 and 41-17. In 95, they beat Jasper 37-0 (I know it's not 40, but I think it goes along with your point). BTW, the first game in the history of the two schools occurred in 1986, not 25 years ago. Since then, WOS has posted three shutouts over the Bulldogs to Jasper's 1 over WOS, and has amassed a 14-4 win-loss record over Jasper. WOS football scores (http://fbrecords.homestead.com/index.html)

4) See above.

Finally (not "finaly"), you post something on which we can all agree "One thing is for sure, in about 3 months, we will all know how good or not so good the Mustangs are." With that said, hopefully, this thread can go gentle into that good night.

Ranger Mom

07-08-2004, 08:41 PM

If I was a mean moderator I would just lock this whole thread down....(just because).... but I won't!!

For some reason, every post is funnier to me than the last!

This thing has taken more twists and turns - I am thoroughly enjoying myself!!
:D :D

Sans Couth

07-08-2004, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by chaingang
With all the above said, I have to say something. Sans, no disrespect but your facts are horrible. I dont know if you are trying to start trash or if you really think you are correct about us. If you did know about us then you would act like us(class and respect) but you dont.Now, as for the Jasper comment, check you records and for the little fish story what does the size of the fish matter if it is a pirranah. That probably was the worst analogie i have ever heard. I dont know how you people 100miles east of Dallas are, but we here 90 miles east of Houston DONT TALK TRASH WE PROVE OURSELVES ON THE FIELD.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by chaingang
WOS92- I couldnt have summed it up better.
As for Sans- This is getting rediculous, You are on a desperate whim to prove your pasts posts are true. I donot mean to disrespect or mock you. We dont do that here. We love heated discussions, when they are correct, not when facts are made up. If you really think you know who we are, you are sadly mistaken. I can figure that out by the misconscrewed so called"facts". With the comments on us not being good because of low numbers, Have you ever heard of a team just being good? Have you ever heard of effort overcoming size? Personally i could give a rats........ about what you post. I am worried about the other readers who dont know about WOS and you making them think we are a bunch of arrogant AH's. Well, we are not and we do know how to be classy.

Just get the facts right before you post thats it

Yep,

I talk trash, and chain gang is full of class.

Why don't one of you truly classy WOS posters put this guy in his place for me. I don't think a single comment he made about me was warranted. If anyone can show one post on this thread where I lacked "class" and then show me how chaingang is dripping with it, I will apologize again. Please point out where I am lacking in the class department.

WOS92

07-08-2004, 09:21 PM

Please point out where I am lacking in the class department.

Here is a picture if you cant figure it out.

Gosh, Sans. It doesn't really look like chain gang has slandered you. Maybe he was a bit less tactful than some, but yeah, you seem to have tried to make us (through our coach) look like cocky "AHs." You did it in your first post. What can I say?

chaingang

07-09-2004, 08:28 AM

I want to defend myself, but I have run out of nasty, unclassy words to say. I also dont want WOS1 to hurt me because I am a youngster. :p :kiss:

WOS1

07-09-2004, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by chaingang
I want to defend myself, but I have run out of nasty, unclassy words to say. I also dont want WOS1 to hurt me because I am a youngster. :p :kiss:

Now you're learning... just listen to your elders.:p You just make sure you bring your stick tomorrow!!:D

WOS1

07-09-2004, 09:38 AM

Originally posted by WOS1
Now you're learning... just listen to your elders.:p You just make sure you bring your stick tomorrow!!:D

OK.. that just doesn't sound right. "Stick"= bat...

X Man

07-10-2004, 01:44 AM

Hey sans, I have not seen 36 kids suited out on a WOS sideline in like I don't remember when. I think the most I ever saw in 2000 was 30. I can't help what you read where ever, that is the facts. You said that things just don't add up at WOS, well, you are right. No where else has anyone done so much, so consistantly, with so few participants. When I was in high school (West Orange, not WOS), we were 3A, and I think we had more kids suited out then, than now. But guess what, we didn't win near as many games. There have been many talented players that can't cut the mustard, some of it over really silly stuff. Such as not being able to wear their hair the way they want it, or having the coaches come down on them for not getting their work done in English class. Bottom line is, the football team ends up with about 28 totally devoted and focused players. These guys get together 5 days a wek, on their own, in the summer, to pump iron or hit the track. Not too many other schools can say that. Of these 28 players, most are playing both ways, and know they have a hard road ahead, and work to be tough enough for it.

X Man

07-10-2004, 01:47 AM

Hey Ranger Mom, why would you even think of locking this thread down? At least these guys are talking about something football related.

SintonFan

07-10-2004, 03:00 AM

Originally posted by GS#17
Again, what's the point of this thread (a definite answer would be nice)? As I said earlier, I've followed this thread, but I've not seen any point to anything you've posted.

1) Your witty alternative to being showcased in a feature article in a premier HS football magazine is for Coach Hooks to say something along the lines of, "We aren't going to do any good. We suck. We're overrated. I hope Sinton doesn't make us their whipping boy..." I'll pass that along. I'm sure coaches across Texas will appreciate that bit of wisdom. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the head coach of the #1 3A football team in Texas to say he feels good about his chances or that he's happy to be playing teams closer to his school's size.

2) I'm not sure how the exact number of people on the roster is of issue to this thread. The point, if I remember correctly, was WOS fields teams with small rosters and several people often playing offense, defense, and special teams.

3) 93 - WOS beat Jasper 42-7 and 41-17. In 95, they beat Jasper 37-0 (I know it's not 40, but I think it goes along with your point). BTW, the first game in the history of the two schools occurred in 1986, not 25 years ago. Since then, WOS has posted three shutouts over the Bulldogs to Jasper's 1 over WOS, and has amassed a 14-4 win-loss record over Jasper. WOS football scores (http://fbrecords.homestead.com/index.html)

4) See above.

Finally (not "finaly"), you post something on which we can all agree "One thing is for sure, in about 3 months, we will all know how good or not so good the Mustangs are." With that said, hopefully, this thread can go gentle into that good night.
.

"We aren't going to do any good. We suck. We're overrated. I hope Sinton doesn't make us their whipping boy..."
.
Goodness, this WILL make the Sinton bulletin board, I'm sure...:D
.
Look, you guys from WOS don't take irony very well IMHO. Stop pushing one of the good guys. We all know WOS will be a great 3A team... We all agree on that!
.
One thing I do worry about is the whole
"gang tackle"syndrom from WOS. Obviously your defensive system has creeped into the mind of your fans.
.
Goodness you got rid of Old Card, who else will yall trample on??????:eek:

WOS1

07-10-2004, 03:56 AM

Originally posted by SintonFan
.

.
Goodness, this WILL make the Sinton bulletin board, I'm sure...:D
.
Look, you guys from WOS don't take irony very well IMHO. Stop pushing one of the good guys. We all know WOS will be a great 3A team... We all agree on that!
.
One thing I do worry about is the whole
"gang tackle"syndrom from WOS. Obviously your defensive system has creeped into the mind of your fans.
.
Goodness you got rid of Old Card, who else will yall trample on??????:eek:

Lord Sinfan, not you too...:confused: Everything you've seen from us has been re-active. If folks will not be offensive then they will not get "gang tackled".

As for the comment he posted, you do realize he was being facetious, don't you? Please don't be a truth twister.

SintonFan

07-10-2004, 04:35 AM

There is truth to both sides of the arguments, I agree. I do get just so tired of folks defending themselves when I believe some take things a tad too much seriously(I've read many reasons why yall do, et. etc)...
.
Lord, I am tired............
of all this "defensiveness"
I happen to agree with much of Sans' beginning statements. I also know of his topics and they were not intended to pi$$ you guys off. Goodness liven up a little.:) I do see many from WOS trying to paint a "red corner" for him and will say what I think, period. As do many from WOS, Sinton, Rockdale, Bandera, Jasper, BC, PI,
Midland, Libety Hill and on and on and on... :p
.
It almost seems Old Card has been run off. That is my opinion. I'm sure someone will draw a distinction here...

SintonFan

07-10-2004, 04:48 AM

Don't take offense WOS1. This is the offseason. It's a time many of us have fun with. :D

Sans Couth

07-10-2004, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by X Man
Hey sans, I have not seen 36 kids suited out on a WOS sideline in like I don't remember when. I think the most I ever saw in 2000 was 30. I can't help what you read where ever, that is the facts. You said that things just don't add up at WOS, well, you are right. No where else has anyone done so much, so consistantly, with so few participants. When I was in high school (West Orange, not WOS), we were 3A, and I think we had more kids suited out then, than now. But guess what, we didn't win near as many games. There have been many talented players that can't cut the mustard, some of it over really silly stuff. Such as not being able to wear their hair the way they want it, or having the coaches come down on them for not getting their work done in English class. Bottom line is, the football team ends up with about 28 totally devoted and focused players. These guys get together 5 days a wek, on their own, in the summer, to pump iron or hit the track. Not too many other schools can say that. Of these 28 players, most are playing both ways, and know they have a hard road ahead, and work to be tough enough for it.

I appreciate your remarks. I really do. But I find it laughable that you think WOS has some kind of monopoly on discipline, over-achievment, and dedication. This has been one of my complaints in the entire thread. There have been more than a couple of posters make these kind of comments, when in reality all they are doing is describing Texas HS Football, not WOS HS Football.

GS#17

07-10-2004, 09:52 AM

Sans, I'm not going to stir this thread up again, but just remember, you're making comments to a WOS fan (X Man) on what he feels about his team. There is no winning a battle of subjectivity. We have had limited participation over the years, but have had a very successful program -- more successful than the majority of programs in the state, bar none. That is an objective point, and it cannot be debated. Wouldn't it be best just to move on? There are really no points being made on either side. :)

Sans Couth

07-10-2004, 10:02 AM

I thought we HAD moved on. But then I have to keep reading this stuff that starts out with my name as the first part of the thread.

If you and the rest of the fine folks from WOS dont want to read my reactions, then tell the whol board your "objective" opinions, instead of begining them with my name being the first word you type.

GS#17

07-10-2004, 10:46 AM

LOL... I wonder if SintonFan will respond now. We all know he gets so tired of folks defending themselves when they take things a tad too serious. We also know how tired he is of people getting "defensive." Perhaps, you'll be as lucky as me, Sans, and your last post will end up on a locker room bulletin board, also. ;)

SintonFan

07-10-2004, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by GS#17
LOL... I wonder if SintonFan will respond now. We all know he gets so tired of folks defending themselves when they take things a tad too serious. We also know how tired he is of people getting "defensive." Perhaps, you'll be as lucky as me, Sans, and your last post will end up on a locker room bulletin board, also. ;)
.
I will not defend myself. just to be consistent... :p :D :p

GS#17

07-10-2004, 05:44 PM

LOL... That's a very good response. :)

JasperDog94

07-10-2004, 08:46 PM

Man, I'm gone for a week and look at all the fun I missed.:)

Gobbla2001

07-10-2004, 09:11 PM

Cuero had a group of boys come up that just wanted to be 'different' from their fathers, uncles, cousins, brothers etc... so they didn't wanna play football... They prided themselves in being in offseason and would play Golf or baseball etc (did dang good though)... It just happens, it has nothing to do with school pride and spirit... Most of the guys who were part of the big O this past year created a group called "The Bleacher Bums", around 100 high school students decked out in schools spirit from the clothes they would wear to the how they backed the team...

Stuff happens, we didn't field as much players the last couple of years on varsity as we did in my high school days (My senior season, '00, we fielded 65 on Varsity)...

Stuff happens, football just isn't everyone's cup of tea...

I'm sure they like it that way in WO-S, though... A school with that many boys only fielding 20? I bet every single one of 'em really, truely wanted to be there not because of the popularity, but because of that pigskin that we happen to revolve around ourselves...

X Man

07-10-2004, 09:14 PM

You have to keep reading the replies because people like me only come over here every 10 days or so, and then read the bs that is being dropped. If you don't want to have to be "subjected" to response, don't drop that bs out there to begin with. WOS "GANG TACKLES" on more than just the football field, or maybe you noticed.

JasperDog94

07-10-2004, 09:35 PM

Originally posted by X Man
You have to keep reading the replies because people like me only come over here every 10 days or so, and then read the bs that is being dropped. If you don't want to have to be "subjected" to response, don't drop that bs out there to begin with. WOS "GANG TACKLES" on more than just the football field, or maybe you noticed. Trust me, we noticed...

GS#17

07-10-2004, 10:51 PM

Gobbla, excellent point. We had a saying when I was in school: "Those who stay will be champions." It is something I've lived by since my high school days. True, the coaches have a manageable number of players (the roster size is generally around 30), but the real reason for our success is just as you said: "...every single one of 'em really, truely wanted to be there....." We had a love for the game, our teammates, and our school, and we put forth a 100% effort because of it.

pngfan93

07-14-2004, 12:46 AM

I didn't even take the time to read all of these posts. But I will say two things:

1. If number of players on the team didn't matter, then the state would only have one classification, and Katy would be the only state champs. I don't think anyone in 3A actually believes in the hearts that their team could have taken Katy last year. Why is this so? Larger schools have more players to select from, and they don't have to play their players all game long.

2. Back to Coach Hooks' comment about "I think we'll be ok now." I've been on the bad end of WO-S games for longer than I care to admit. There have been many years when everyone knew that WO-S was going to take the district crown without a loss (actually without a game even coming close). Yet, how did Coach Hooks answer the media's questions about how his team would fare in district? He simply said, "I think we'll be ok." This is not Coach Hooks saying that the drop will guarantee them anything. It is his traditional answer that contains class.

As you can tell from my user name, I am not from WO-S. I consider them a friendly rivalry that always brought out the best of both squads. I will say this, and you can take it from an objective third party. WO-S won state the second they dropped down to 3A. Now they have their defensive coordinator back. Games will not even be close until deep into the playoffs. With him back, they are a 4A district title contender in what was one of the toughest 4A districts in the state last year. Watch some WO-S games from 2000 and before. This is the defense you will see this year. Couple that with their high power offense, and you will see blow outs. The only thing that might save these blowouts is that Coach Hooks tends to pull the dogs off the hurt animal. I hope he lets his team run lose just to show you what its like to step on the field with them.

WO-S isn't arrogant. They have earned the respect of everyone that has played them. I'm a much greater fan of theirs now that my playoff hopes don't hinge on playing them. Play them, and they will make a believer out of you.

Sans Couth

07-14-2004, 12:49 AM

:rolleyes:

The only thing I see when I look at your username is the number of posts below it.

WOS won state the second they dropped down to 3A?

Now that is funny.

Old Tiger

07-14-2004, 01:02 AM

Originally posted by pngfan93
I didn't even take the time to read all of these posts. But I will say two things:

1. If number of players on the team didn't matter, then the state would only have one classification, and Katy would be the only state champs. I don't think anyone in 3A actually believes in the hearts that their team could have taken Katy last year. Why is this so? Larger schools have more players to select from, and they don't have to play their players all game long.

2. Back to Coach Hooks' comment about "I think we'll be ok now." I've been on the bad end of WO-S games for longer than I care to admit. There have been many years when everyone knew that WO-S was going to take the district crown without a loss (actually without a game even coming close). Yet, how did Coach Hooks answer the media's questions about how his team would fare in district? He simply said, "I think we'll be ok." This is not Coach Hooks saying that the drop will guarantee them anything. It is his traditional answer that contains class.

As you can tell from my user name, I am not from WO-S. I consider them a friendly rivalry that always brought out the best of both squads. I will say this, and you can take it from an objective third party. WO-S won state the second they dropped down to 3A. Now they have their defensive coordinator back. Games will not even be close until deep into the playoffs. With him back, they are a 4A district title contender in what was one of the toughest 4A districts in the state last year. Watch some WO-S games from 2000 and before. This is the defense you will see this year. Couple that with their high power offense, and you will see blow outs. The only thing that might save these blowouts is that Coach Hooks tends to pull the dogs off the hurt animal. I hope he lets his team run lose just to show you what its like to step on the field with them.

WO-S isn't arrogant. They have earned the respect of everyone that has played them. I'm a much greater fan of theirs now that my playoff hopes don't hinge on playing them. Play them, and they will make a believer out of you. You sound just like Old Cardinal :D

SintonFan

07-14-2004, 01:33 AM

Old Card is MIA here. Don't say that WR, because he's not here to defend himself...:o

Old Tiger

07-14-2004, 01:36 AM

sorry! where is he? :thinking: :confused:

SintonFan

07-14-2004, 01:53 AM

I don't know Tiger but he rarely goes without this long posting. Sorry to bring it up this way and don't take offense.:(
I hope he is OK...
Pm me later Tiger WR...

Ranger Mom

07-14-2004, 07:39 AM

Originally posted by SintonFan
I don't know Tiger but he rarely goes without this long posting. Sorry to bring it up this way and don't take offense.:(
I hope he is OK...
Pm me later Tiger WR...

Now I'm worried about Old Cardinal!!

If you hear from him, please let me know!

WOS1

07-14-2004, 08:19 AM

I think Sinton Fan believes we ran OC off for his "History of WO-S" post. I would hope that it takes more than that to make him leave. Hopefully, he's not having any sort of health problems. He hasn't posted much on the BC board either. When I first came here in Feb. he was posting all the time.

Sans, what I think the fellow from PNG meant was that we immediately won 4A when we dropped.

Sans Couth

07-14-2004, 09:29 AM

HMMM,

Well I wonder what he meant by.."every game will be a blowout till deep in the playoffs":D

I think he is just a loose cannon. I know that his opinions do not necessarily reflect those of most WOS fans.

chaingang

07-14-2004, 09:57 AM

Sans, are you planning to attend any WOS games? Maybe WOS- Jasper?

WOS1

07-14-2004, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by Sans Couth
HMMM,

Well I wonder what he meant by.."every game will be a blowout till deep in the playoffs":D

I think he is just a loose cannon. I know that his opinions do not necessarily reflect those of most WOS fans.

I guess that's what he believes, I'm glad you realize that it's HIS opinion.

WOS92

07-14-2004, 12:24 PM

In case some of you guys are unfamiliar, PNG stands for Port Neches-Groves, one of the more storied programs in Texas HS football. They've been one of our big rivals for a few decades now and, although we hold a considerable edge in wins, there have been countless games decided in the waning moments. It's been an amazing rivalry.
I think that any time you build a tradition between two programs like that and, suddenly, there is no reason for rivalry, you get this overwhelming sense of respect. I think png's post is mostly an expression of that.
I also can understand his potential overestimation of our future prowess. He won't have to eat the crow ;)
Thanks for the respect, though, png :D
Believe me, it's mutual.

Sans Couth

07-14-2004, 01:11 PM

Originally posted by chaingang
Sans, are you planning to attend any WOS games? Maybe WOS- Jasper?

I plan on watching WOS in round two or three if they make it that far:D

sinton66

07-14-2004, 07:37 PM

Old Cardinal's fine, I'd bet. He does this all the time. He'll post something like that then disappear for a while. I'm sure his son would let us know if anything had happened to him.;)

SintonFan

07-17-2004, 04:22 AM

Originally posted by WOS1
I think Sinton Fan believes we ran OC off for his "History of WO-S" post. I would hope that it takes more than that to make him leave. Hopefully, he's not having any sort of health problems. He hasn't posted much on the BC board either. When I first came here in Feb. he was posting all the time.

Sans, what I think the fellow from PNG meant was that we immediately won 4A when we dropped.
.

I think Sinton Fan believes we ran OC off for his "History of WO-S" post.
.
I don't believe that and only gave it a moment's thought. It was a light infer-ment...:D j/k
.
.

Sans, what I think the fellow from PNG meant was that we immediately won 4A when we dropped.
.
Please don't be a truth twister.:p :D
.
.
WOS1, have you seen the 'QGrill'? It's the perfect grill at www.qgrill.com.
I have a 'Fire and Ice' from Thermos and love it! But that QGrill is the newest thing on the block. It's all the rage!
:clap: :thinking: :D

j_dog

07-18-2004, 11:10 PM

Originally posted by WOS1
...
But, I know this man well and he IS NOT taking anyone for granted and IS NOT taking 3A to lightly.
WOS1, I for one believe you. Most WOS and Jasper fans well remember WOS's first 4a game when you dropped down from 5a and were ranked to take it all, (which you eventually did). But WOS did not win its first 4a game. If they needed a wake up call, they got it in that game. This time around, I know WOS will be ready for all comers. I think you can bank on that.

BullFrog Dad

07-19-2004, 09:58 AM

Originally posted by j_dog
WOS1, I for one believe you. Most WOS and Jasper fans well remember WOS's first 4a game when you dropped down from 5a and were ranked to take it all, (which you eventually did). But WOS did not win its first 4a game. If they needed a wake up call, they got it in that game. This time around, I know WOS will be ready for all comers. I think you can bank on that. Being in North Texas I'm not really up on WO-S but what's happening to cause a school to go from 5A to 4A to 3A?

chaingang

07-19-2004, 10:09 AM

There is a decline in industry. We have many chemical plants and manufacturing plants that have declined employment over the years. Also, the other schools around the area are improving facilities and overall quality. Bridge City, and Deweyville are building brand new schools as we speak. The area is widening with people moving out to more rural areas of the city like Orangefield and LC-M. I know I am leaving out many reasons, but if you were to ask one of the older Stangs they could tell you more. I am sure if GS17 reads this he will give you a more detailed explanation. These are just a couple that come to mind.