PDA

View Full Version : Fairfield @ Rusk



coach
09-18-2009, 11:21 PM
THe Eagle of Rusk beat the Eagles of Fairfield 14-10 tonight

eagles_victory
09-18-2009, 11:33 PM
brutal

mwynn05
09-18-2009, 11:39 PM
at least we have crandall on the schedule

coach
09-18-2009, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by mwynn05
at least we have crandall on the schedule

actually crandal should be saying at least we have fairfield on the schedule

mwynn05
09-18-2009, 11:45 PM
we haven't been very good in a while....they still gotta give piske a couple more years you cant just give guys two years (haynes deserved to be fired from what i have heard though) and if they dont win fire them...it also doesnt help the coaching staff that they haven't had near the talent we had when we were in school

pitchdaball
09-22-2009, 10:06 AM
Fairfield has athletes out the wazoo. No way they should be 0-4 with that size and those athletes.

trojan37
09-22-2009, 10:16 AM
I remember the old Fairfield Eagles, or at least when we played against them, with the likes of Winfred Tubbs, Tony Brackens, Leaks,.....those guys were awesome.

pitchdaball
09-22-2009, 10:19 AM
Brackens Nephew is on that team and hes a beast. They also avg about 275 on the O line. They may not be as good as when you are speaking, but they should have beat rusk last week. They are to athletic to be 0-4

coach
09-22-2009, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by pitchdaball
Brackens Nephew is on that team and hes a beast. They also avg about 275 on the O line. They may not be as good as when you are speaking, but they should have beat rusk last week. They are to athletic to be 0-4

they do have a huge line but are slow as christmas...also we arent as atheletic as you think..plus our football IQ is 0. We took 6 timeouts last game because we didnt know how to line up correctly. WE USED ALL OF OUR TIMEOUTS BECAUSE WE COULDN'T LINE UP! That was one reason we lost the game. Also we don't have a true qb.

lynard_skynard
09-28-2009, 02:19 PM
I think you may be off a little on the size of the o-line. They are good sized...but nowhere near a 275 avg. I know they're in a rough patch, but things will take an up swing soon. Non-district schedule was pretty tough. All of the non-district teams have winning records and I would bet that 4 are locks for the playoffs. Much tougher schedule than some of their district counterparts.

mwynn05
09-28-2009, 05:48 PM
Originally posted by lynard_skynard
I think you may be off a little on the size of the o-line. They are good sized...but nowhere near a 275 avg. I know they're in a rough patch, but things will take an up swing soon. Non-district schedule was pretty tough. All of the non-district teams have winning records and I would bet that 4 are locks for the playoffs. Much tougher schedule than some of their district counterparts. schedule was tough???? Crandall was awful....and i hear rusk it worse.....from what i saw they have got a LONG way to go

lynard_skynard
09-29-2009, 09:19 AM
That's half the problem...people "hearing" things. Rusk was anything but bad. They play very hard, have a GOOD running back, and more than descent o and d line. They will make the playoffs. Crandall was the weakest opponent on the schedule and should have been beaten.

Originally posted by mwynn05
schedule was tough???? Crandall was awful....and i hear rusk it worse.....from what i saw they have got a LONG way to go

lynard_skynard
09-29-2009, 09:21 AM
And frankly...I'm sick of people saying how "far" the eagles have to go. Sit down and watch film with a coach and you'll see it isn't that far!

Originally posted by mwynn05
schedule was tough???? Crandall was awful....and i hear rusk it worse.....from what i saw they have got a LONG way to go

kaorder1999
09-29-2009, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by lynard_skynard
That's half the problem...people "hearing" things. Rusk was anything but bad. They play very hard, have a GOOD running back, and more than descent o and d line. They will make the playoffs. Crandall was the weakest opponent on the schedule and should have been beaten.

Should have been beaten? How do you figure? Yall gave up 330 yards through the air. Where was this game played? If in Fairfield, have no excuses...just got beat by a better team.

eagles_victory
09-29-2009, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by lynard_skynard
And frankly...I'm sick of people saying how "far" the eagles have to go. Sit down and watch film with a coach and you'll see it isn't that far! We are either not watching the same games or you are wearing some serious maroon colored sunglasses. While I believe we have some talent and potential to say we are close and ready to be a winner this year is probably a bit of a reach.

lynard_skynard
09-29-2009, 02:23 PM
Maybe "could" would be a better word. I'm not trying to look through "maroon colored glasses" although I would like to see them win. In my opinion, which with a few bucks will buy a cup of coffee, the Eagles aren't that far away. With a couple of breaks they are 3-2 or 4-1.

kaorder1999
09-29-2009, 04:48 PM
to even have the chance to go to overtime when you are outgained offensively 410-155 is a miracle.

coach
09-29-2009, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by kaorder1999
Should have been beaten? How do you figure? Yall gave up 330 yards through the air. Where was this game played? If in Fairfield, have no excuses...just got beat by a better team.

not to mention it wa homecoming

kaorder1999
09-29-2009, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by coach
not to mention it wa homecoming

ouch....gotta hate that!

kaorder1999
09-29-2009, 06:10 PM
and the fact that Crandall turned the ball over 4 times and Fairfield didnt have one turnover. Looks like to me this could have been a LOT worse for Fairfield then it was. Like someone else said...seems like they always have the talent there though!

mwynn05
09-29-2009, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by lynard_skynard
Maybe "could" would be a better word. I'm not trying to look through "maroon colored glasses" although I would like to see them win. In my opinion, which with a few bucks will buy a cup of coffee, the Eagles aren't that far away. With a couple of breaks they are 3-2 or 4-1. i would like to see them win too...when i say they have a long way to go....i know what you are trying to say when you say they are close but im talking making the playoffs....rusk and crandall arent going to be on the level of palestine westwood and crockett....no matter what the rest of the season holds they still need to give coach piske some more time hopefully that happens

lynard_skynard
09-30-2009, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by mwynn05
i would like to see them win too...when i say they have a long way to go....i know what you are trying to say when you say they are close but im talking making the playoffs....rusk and crandall arent going to be on the level of palestine westwood and crockett....no matter what the rest of the season holds they still need to give coach piske some more time hopefully that happens

I get what you're saying. I would like to see them win too. I have some friends that coach there. I know they're good guys and bust their tails with the kids. I hope they get the chance to finish what they've started. From what I hear the kids would run through a wall for them.

Brutus 1
09-30-2009, 10:25 AM
:thinking: :thinking: :thinking:
Fairfield will be fine, this year !!! District will be a pleasant surprise for the faithful of this town. Print it, post it whatever you want, they WILL BE IN THE PLAYOFFS !

pitchdaball
10-01-2009, 10:53 AM
I dunno, they are pretty undisciplined i hear. Got a buddy who's kid plays for Crandall and he said the jumped offsides like 12 times. You can't win many games doing that.

lynard_skynard
10-01-2009, 01:57 PM
He should have talked about Crandall too. They were jumping and they new the snap count. No excuses...but come on. It was more like 4 or 5 for Fairfield, but a couple were at bad times.