1-29-07 Polls

by **NBE2007** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:25 pm

Beulah won over Killdeer

by **Indians Alumni** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:39 am

toughregion2 wrote:I do believe Region 2 is pressing the polls. Park River 10th who knows why but they deserve it for now. North Border votes Midway Minto votes Mpg votes and Grafton should be listed. As far as Mr Know it all from FW'S polls can be determined by who you play look at MPGG they are 8-4 and getting votes. I have one question for you besides Wells county in which you trailed the whole game....who have you played???? Your record is great but its against Who????

Just goes to show you that the polls are not picking the best, they are picking their favorite! Why should a team 8-4 get votes? Of what they did last year? Today's sailboats don't sail on yesterday's winds!!! So you showed me what? MPGG can get beat 4 times and still be a favorite? They should be dropped from the poll!

They had a pretty impressive win last night. 105 - 56 over Warwick! They almost doubled their opponents points! This was a big game for FW, it was a district and also bragging rights on the same reservation.

by **nativegolfer** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:06 am

Indians Alumni wrote:
toughregion2 wrote:I do believe Region 2 is pressing the polls. Park River 10th who knows why but they deserve it for now. North Border votes Midway Minto votes Mpg votes and Grafton should be listed. As far as Mr Know it all from FW'S polls can be determined by who you play look at MPGG they are 8-4 and getting votes. I have one question for you besides Wells county in which you trailed the whole game....who have you played???? Your record is great but its against Who????

Just goes to show you that the polls are not picking the best, they are picking their favorite! Why should a team 8-4 get votes? Of what they did last year? Today's sailboats don't sail on yesterday's winds!!! So you showed me what? MPGG can get beat 4 times and still be a favorite? They should be dropped from the poll!

They had a pretty impressive win last night. 105 - 56 over Warwick! They almost doubled their opponents points! This was a big game for FW, it was a district and also bragging rights on the same reservation.

FW's top opponents have been SR, WC, Dunseith and Harvey. Alot of things will be settled tomorrow. Just don't be surprised if NB gets run outta the gym.

by **ClassBballa** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:10 am

You always talk about FW's running game. Not that it isn't good, but its not as dominant as you say it is. I've seen a couple of their games and they didn't win because of their running game. I think against WC, WC actually did more running than did FW. They are a good team, but i don't think they need to run to win anything.

by **nativegolfer** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:32 am

baseball wrote:standing rock...there only loss agaisnt the only elite team they played. WC is above average but not in the elite group.

Just curious, in your expert opinion is FW an elite team?

by **Indians Alumni** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:35 am

I would also like to piggy back of that question! What Elite Group are you talking about?

by **Flyer** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:39 am

Indians Alumni wrote:
toughregion2 wrote:I do believe Region 2 is pressing the polls. Park River 10th who knows why but they deserve it for now. North Border votes Midway Minto votes Mpg votes and Grafton should be listed. As far as Mr Know it all from FW'S polls can be determined by who you play look at MPGG they are 8-4 and getting votes. I have one question for you besides Wells county in which you trailed the whole game....who have you played???? Your record is great but its against Who????

Just goes to show you that the polls are not picking the best, they are picking their favorite! Why should a team 8-4 get votes? Of what they did last year? Today's sailboats don't sail on yesterday's winds!!! So you showed me what? MPGG can get beat 4 times and still be a favorite? They should be dropped from the poll!

They had a pretty impressive win last night. 105 - 56 over Warwick! They almost doubled their opponents points! This was a big game for FW, it was a district and also bragging rights on the same reservation.

Not that puting up 105 pts is not impressive but Warwick my just be the worse team in the whole state. I would say that giving up 56 points to them is not very good..

by **Indians Alumni** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:42 am

They almost doubled their (Warwick) score. You are telling me that is not impressive. I am sure this was with the JV or most of the bench in the fourth quarter

by **WildWarrior** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:44 am

Flyer wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:
toughregion2 wrote:I do believe Region 2 is pressing the polls. Park River 10th who knows why but they deserve it for now. North Border votes Midway Minto votes Mpg votes and Grafton should be listed. As far as Mr Know it all from FW'S polls can be determined by who you play look at MPGG they are 8-4 and getting votes. I have one question for you besides Wells county in which you trailed the whole game....who have you played???? Your record is great but its against Who????

Just goes to show you that the polls are not picking the best, they are picking their favorite! Why should a team 8-4 get votes? Of what they did last year? Today's sailboats don't sail on yesterday's winds!!! So you showed me what? MPGG can get beat 4 times and still be a favorite? They should be dropped from the poll!

They had a pretty impressive win last night. 105 - 56 over Warwick! They almost doubled their opponents points! This was a big game for FW, it was a district and also bragging rights on the same reservation.

Not that puting up 105 pts is not impressive but Warwick my just be the worse team in the whole state. I would say that giving up 56 points to them is not very good..

It was 66 not 56, so Mr. Alumni, that is not quite as close to doubling the score!!! According to yesterdays standings in the GF Herald there must be at least 6 teams worse than Warwick, as their overall record is 6-8. I seem to recall they played Leeds-Minnewaukan to their closest game in the Ramsey County Tournament (not all year). Don't get me wrong, I am not saying Warwick is close to the team Leeds-Minnewaukan but, to say they my, your words not mine, be the worst team in the whole state is ridiculous. They have beaten 6 teams in this part of the state alone, including one in the district. Study up then talk!!!

by **bballer2** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:50 am

Indians Alumni wrote:They almost doubled their (Warwick) score. You are telling me that is not impressive. I am sure this was with the JV or most of the bench in the fourth quarter

no it is not impressive... so you can beat a poor team by a lot... proves arrogance and thats about it... good teams will win close games... i dont consider that proving someoen to be a great team or impressive...

by **Indians Alumni** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:55 am

bballer2 wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:They almost doubled their (Warwick) score. You are telling me that is not impressive. I am sure this was with the JV or most of the bench in the fourth quarter

no it is not impressive... so you can beat a poor team by a lot... proves arrogance and thats about it... good teams will win close games... i dont consider that proving someoen to be a great team or impressive...

They aren't a poor team. They aren't as bad as you think they are, just cause they get beat like that, Warwick is a poor team? No respect once again! If we win by a lot you say that the other team was poor, we win by a smaller margin, we had no running game?! What gives?

by **bballer2** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 4:58 am

Indians Alumni wrote:
bballer2 wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:They almost doubled their (Warwick) score. You are telling me that is not impressive. I am sure this was with the JV or most of the bench in the fourth quarter

no it is not impressive... so you can beat a poor team by a lot... proves arrogance and thats about it... good teams will win close games... i dont consider that proving someoen to be a great team or impressive...

They aren't a poor team. They aren't as bad as you think they are, just cause they get beat like that, Warwick is a poor team? No respect once again! If we win by a lot you say that the other team was poor, we win by a smaller margin, we had no running game?! What gives?

try look back and see where i siad they had no running game..... look there wil be nothing.... as for me thinkin there a poor team ur wrong again... they are a solid team... i jut dont believe winning by 50 shows a solid team which everyone on here will agree with me because it doesnt...

by **Indians Alumni** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:04 am

bballer2 wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:
bballer2 wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:They almost doubled their (Warwick) score. You are telling me that is not impressive. I am sure this was with the JV or most of the bench in the fourth quarter

no it is not impressive... so you can beat a poor team by a lot... proves arrogance and thats about it... good teams will win close games... i dont consider that proving someoen to be a great team or impressive...

They aren't a poor team. They aren't as bad as you think they are, just cause they get beat like that, Warwick is a poor team? No respect once again! If we win by a lot you say that the other team was poor, we win by a smaller margin, we had no running game?! What gives?

try look back and see where i siad they had no running game..... look there wil be nothing.... as for me thinkin there a poor team ur wrong again... they are a solid team... i jut dont believe winning by 50 shows a solid team which everyone on here will agree with me because it doesnt...

The kids are going to have open shots, they should take them. They still have to run an offense and they still have to run through their scheme. They are not taught to be passive. They are coached to be aggressive. So you are telling me if you team has a fast break to have your kid pull it out when he has an easy layup? I would disagree with that, I have coached and will keep coaching my team to be aggressive, I will put in my subs for the varsity, but I will not tell these kids to let up! I will have them run the offense like they are supposed to!!! Beside this is a district game!

So what do you want the team to do, slow it down and win by 10?

by **bballer2** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:09 am

Indians Alumni wrote:
bballer2 wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:
bballer2 wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:They almost doubled their (Warwick) score. You are telling me that is not impressive. I am sure this was with the JV or most of the bench in the fourth quarter

no it is not impressive... so you can beat a poor team by a lot... proves arrogance and thats about it... good teams will win close games... i dont consider that proving someoen to be a great team or impressive...

They aren't a poor team. They aren't as bad as you think they are, just cause they get beat like that, Warwick is a poor team? No respect once again! If we win by a lot you say that the other team was poor, we win by a smaller margin, we had no running game?! What gives?

try look back and see where i siad they had no running game..... look there wil be nothing.... as for me thinkin there a poor team ur wrong again... they are a solid team... i jut dont believe winning by 50 shows a solid team which everyone on here will agree with me because it doesnt...

The kids are going to have open shots, they should take them. They still have to run an offense and they still have to run through their scheme. They are not taught to be passive. They are coached to be aggressive. So you are telling me if you team has a fast break to have your kid pull it out when he has an easy layup? I would disagree with that, I have coached and will keep coaching my team to be aggressive, I will put in my subs for the varsity, but I will not tell these kids to let up! I will have them run the offense like they are supposed to!!! Beside this is a district game!

So what do you want the team to do, slow it down and win by 10?

open lay up... deffinatly not... but when you run the floor and run the floor and run the floor again... i dont agree with that... if you get a steal and shoot a lay up great... but there is a point where you should run an offense and get a lay up by running an offense... just my opinion...

by **bballer2** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:09 am

Indians Alumni wrote:
bballer2 wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:
bballer2 wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:They almost doubled their (Warwick) score. You are telling me that is not impressive. I am sure this was with the JV or most of the bench in the fourth quarter

no it is not impressive... so you can beat a poor team by a lot... proves arrogance and thats about it... good teams will win close games... i dont consider that proving someoen to be a great team or impressive...

They aren't a poor team. They aren't as bad as you think they are, just cause they get beat like that, Warwick is a poor team? No respect once again! If we win by a lot you say that the other team was poor, we win by a smaller margin, we had no running game?! What gives?

try look back and see where i siad they had no running game..... look there wil be nothing.... as for me thinkin there a poor team ur wrong again... they are a solid team... i jut dont believe winning by 50 shows a solid team which everyone on here will agree with me because it doesnt...

The kids are going to have open shots, they should take them. They still have to run an offense and they still have to run through their scheme. They are not taught to be passive. They are coached to be aggressive. So you are telling me if you team has a fast break to have your kid pull it out when he has an easy layup? I would disagree with that, I have coached and will keep coaching my team to be aggressive, I will put in my subs for the varsity, but I will not tell these kids to let up! I will have them run the offense like they are supposed to!!! Beside this is a district game!

So what do you want the team to do, slow it down and win by 10?

open lay up... deffinatly not... but when you run the floor and run the floor and run the floor again... i dont agree with that... if you get a steal and shoot a lay up great... but there is a point where you should run an offense and get a lay up by running an offense... just my opinion...

by **baseball** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:11 am

Indians Alumni wrote:I would also like to piggy back of that question! What Elite Group are you talking about?

the Lintons, the Killdeers, the Hazens, the Parshalls.....your competition is Harvey and Wells County. the one team that was expected to be close you lost. it just goes to show that you can run the score up on lower teams but when its a good team maybe they cant handle the pressure.

by **pacod** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:16 am

I'm sorry but parshal got ripped apart by NT, and linton has a loss to a not so good HMB, as well Hazen with their loss to Trinity. Whats your point?

by **Indians Alumni** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:20 am

baseball wrote:
Indians Alumni wrote:I would also like to piggy back of that question! What Elite Group are you talking about?

the Lintons, the Killdeers, the Hazens, the Parshalls.....your competition is Harvey and Wells County. the one team that was expected to be close you lost. it just goes to show that you can run the score up on lower teams but when its a good team maybe they cant handle the pressure.

Your Leeds-Minn lost to them too, so they can't handle the pressure?

FW lost by one point that rimmed out after IH took the shot! So don't say they can't handle the pressure!

by **bballer2** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:21 am

pacod wrote:I'm sorry but parshal got ripped apart by NT, and linton has a loss to a not so good HMB, as well Hazen with their loss to Trinity. Whats your point?

linton JV!!!

by **Indians Alumni** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:22 am

Bballer2, I would agree with you to not run it up like that, I don't think FW did run it up like that, they got a comfortable lead and the bench was put in. That is also a big rivalry on the Reservation. That is bragging rights for the year. They are two teams within the same reservation!

by **baller01** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:11 am

bballer2 wrote:
pacod wrote:I'm sorry but parshal got ripped apart by NT, and linton has a loss to a not so good HMB, as well Hazen with their loss to Trinity. Whats your point?

linton JV!!!

Bballer2 is right. Linton only has two losses, to #3 Hazen and #7 Beulah. That loss to HMB was Linton's JV team. Linton is 13-2.

by **pacod** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:17 am

But what's the point of his post? I didn't get it.

by **The Schwab** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:20 am

he was clearing up the fact that Linton's JV lost to HMB, not their varsity.

by **pacod** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:21 am

If that was their JV, why did they have their varsity players playing.

by **pacod** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:22 am

the Lintons, the Killdeers, the Hazens, the Parshalls.....your competition is Harvey and Wells County. the one team that was expected to be close you lost. it just goes to show that you can run the score up on lower teams but when its a good team maybe they cant handle the pressure.

I was talking about this post. Buddy!!!!

1-29-07 Polls

Who is online