GatorGrad84

Why, it is with the highest of admiration that I use the term "Tiggers". Tiggers are bouncy, fun-loving and full of life. What more could you want from a LSU football team?

Maybe ESPN is making LSU their darlings this year, and pushing them into the #1 spot. #1's get alot of viewers when they play. ESPN has been known to push a SEC team, be it Auburn last year, or Alabama and Florida in years past. I'm just wondering who ESPN will pick off LSU for the Heisman! Will this be the year it goes to a defensive player?

Trap game for the Tiggers. WVU is good enough to win IF the Tiggers are a little sluggish. LSU has started with a bang, they better fight off the blahs of WVU this week, and Kentucky next week.

Funny thing.......I've set here today and watched the entire game twice, once in tight view, once in wide view, I saw two very, very marginal chop blocks (only one of which was on a LB). I wouldn't call them chops but for the sake of argument I will this time. I missed all the others that you speak of. I really don't buy into all the punching and grabbing you talk about because most of the tackles we made were open field tackles which would make it hard to hide a punch. As far as cut-blocking, I don't like it either, but until the UIL makes it against the rules we are going to practice it, and we are going to do it. I'm pretty sure what decided this game was the total lack of offense by the Bearcats, and the inability of Beckville's defense to stop the big plays by the Pirate offense. It was not decided by the refs or by uncalled penalties. The refs could have called every minor infraction on both teams and Beckville still would not have scored and Bowie would have. Just, instead of a 30 yard pass play it would have been 45.

Hard for me to put the crown on LSU based on this game. LSU looked awesome on defense, below average on offense. Beating Oregon just isn't a good barometer for telling how good they are. Since 2003, Oregon is 3-7 vs. ranked teams outside the PAC-10(12) so they are usually not as good as perceived by the poll voters.

I think the difference between MLB and HS is the number of innings those guys will throw in a season. I agree with the other post that pitch count is overrated as a barometer for pulling a pitcher. The night I'm talking about with Reace, I could tell he was OK because he was still hitting his spots. He didn't get wild and he wasn't trying to "over-throw". If a kid pitches 40 or 140 pitches, to me, doesn't matter. If he is still has control then his arm is not fatigued beyond his limit.

My son threw 204 pitches vs. Cayuga in game 2 of their series. He ended up on the losing end 9-8. I'll disagree with your blanket statement that he shouldn't be pitching if he throws that many. Cayuga did an excellent job of taking him deep into counts; not swinging at ####, fouling off good strike pitches, etc. I think mature kids can throw a high number of pitches if you can trust them. Reace is a brutal competitor, but he also knows when his arm is past it's limit. I had no problem with our coach sending him back out there as long as Reace was saying he could.

Your right. Everyone is accountable to someone. This accountability usually comes to light when a person does not do his/her job. I know how the world works. I've also been in the school business long enough to know that the best school districts are ones where the board hires a supt. to run the school and allows him to do so. In turn the supt. hires principals to run the different campuses and allows them to do so. The supt. hires an AD and allows him to run the athletics program. Thompson was trying to do his job. Even you have stated that Hooker is a very good AD prospect. I'll ask again, WHAT MORE DOES HOOKS WANT? They may find another AD that does a fine job, but the hiring will based on the same credentials that Hooker presented. It seems the community has thrown away a potentially good thing to teach the new supt. a lesson based on some good old boy things that have happened in the past. I know how the world works. I know every single person wants to have the support of the company/group that hired them to do a job. How does Thompson go about doing his job now? Don't be surprised come this time next year if Hooks has a mediocre AD (hope not, I hope they find a good one) and are looking for a new supt. I've never met either Thompson or Hooker. I've only heard good things about Hooker. I've heard varying things about Thompson.This episode, from the outside looking in, looks like a good hire by Thompson, shot down by the board/community. Here's a question, Thompson now recommends someone else and they are hired. The new AD turns out to be a really bad choice. Who gets the blame?

So, basically you are saying Thompson has learned that the school board runs the day to day business of the school and he is just supposed to be a follower and not a leader or decision maker. Yes, this is how the school district is supposed to be run. Which goes along with how the Hooks school board should run every decision past the community first, that way everything will run smoothly. Whoever gets the AD job better buy about 1,000 head sets. There is no way the community will allow the person hired to call the plays, to actually call the plays. That just would not follow the operating model now in place. I guess I will never understand how hiring a relative that is the most qualified for the job is immoral.

If the relationship is all that is wrong then THAT is wrong! I was born and raised in a small town. I have lived in a small community my entire adult life. And I know this, you can't throw a stick and not hit a relative of some kind. In small communities hiring a relative cannot be this big of an issue. It's more likely it was just not a relative in the RIGHT family.

The only thing I'm bashing is the reason for the community's stance. The only reason Hooker did not get the job is his relationship to Thompson. He is being excluded despite his qualifications for the job. Whatever the reasons Thompson recommended Hooker, the man is qualified for the job, and is respected in his profession. What more is Hooks looking for in a coach? Someone please explain to me what being related to the superintendent has to do with Hooker being a good coach and AD for the Hooks community. How is it detrimental to the school or community for him to be hired? All I've seen is Thompson was wrong for wanting to hire his Brother-in-law. Why? Is he looking to change the name to Thompson ISD, and this will make it easier? Maybe if he can get Hooker in place it will clear the way for Hooks to secede from Texas and Thompson will take the mantle of czar of Hooks. Does Hooks pay the AD position so well that this will be a great financial gain for Hooker? What benefit does either gain if Hooker was hired? Please tell me why it's wrong, without mentioning their relationship.

#1 - Don't know Hooker, never met the man. #2 - James Bowie has been in the playoffs in football for 5 years in a row. What about Hooks? We are proud of our Ag program AND our athletics. #3 - You don't be an idiot! THIS IS ALL ABOUT HOOKER! He's the only one affected by this process. Super still has his job! Board members still on the board! The community busy bodies are still out there trying to stir things up. HOOKER is the only one losing something. So please don't say it is not about Hooker. If Jon Gruden was the brother-in-law would it be a problem? Your post shows what happens when assumptions are made. You assume Hooker was picked because he is a relative not because he may be the best for the job. You assume I'm friends with the man and not that I see a school district being run by petty people, who want to be the BMOC.

Two equally qualified people for the job. I know one really well. I've probably seen how one handles good situations and bad situations. I'll pick the guy I know over the guy I don't know every time. I understand the perceived wrong but I still say this is an over reaction to the situation. I think the super did his job. The search committee recommended two guys the super's job is to make a recommendation to the board. He did that. NOT giving the job to this guy BECAUSE he is the super's brother-in-law is just as wrong as giving him the job BECAUSE he is the super's brother-in-law. If this was a 28 year old junior high coach being selected to be the AD I would understand. But this is a seasoned, experienced coach that is recognized as a very good candidate for an AD's position. I think Hooks has passed on a good coach and will miss out on the other qualified candidate because anyone with any sense will not get into the middle of this situation. The Hooks community is going feel stupid when this guy goes on to be an excellent head coach and they are stuck with a guy who was foolish enough to take the job after this.

Let me try to understand this debate. Point A: the Hooks super is wrong for trying to hire an AD that happens to be his brother-in-law. Point B: everyone seems to agree that said AD candidate would be a great AD and head coach. His single flaw is he is the super's brother-in-law. What IF the super wanted to hire this guy because he would make a great AD and head coach and he just happened to be his brother-in-law. A guy he probably knows well and knows the kind of man he is. From outside looking in it seems the "community" has allowed the family relationship overshadow the qualifications of the man. It all sounds very petty to me.

And how many years has it been since the "community" (parents) ran the softball coach out of town? Two maybe?