Are Highlands' forfeits from 2004 a done deal???

[Birdsfan]

I hope this poor sportsmanship isn't instilled upon your teams. Face the facts, your team cheated, was caught and punished. To look at it any other way is an insult to all the teams that play by the rules.

LSURock - You are the last person I should have to educate on this matter. The facts are well known. And I will not take offense at your insult...considering the source.

[Birdsfan]

LSU, I am not the authority here but I thought the final legal ruling on this had Highlands and Mitchell as winners and the KHSAA as losers thus I always wondered if HHS would get the wins back too. I assume (I know I shouldn't assume) even if Highlands is eligible to get the wins back they decided not to do it to let the KHSAA save face.

I agree. This is played out and common knowledge....:sleep:

[stickymitts]

I hope this poor sportsmanship isn't instilled upon your teams. Face the facts, your team cheated, was caught and punished. To look at it any other way is an insult to all the teams that play by the rules.

 

MAKE IT STOP!!!

:rolleyes:

[AverageJoesGym]

It is the same thing that happened when Bell Co. won and had to forfeit its victories. The result is the same, if the transgressions had been great enough to make a difference the championship would have been vacated. Claim the wins against Highlands if you want, they earned their rings.

[Sandman32]

MAKE IT STOP!!!

:rolleyes:

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

No offense JB, bit I think your the only one who cares.

 

I know I don't. and BTW- I still count that one as a loss, HHS earned it IMO with him or without him.

[leatherneck]

LSU, I am not the authority here but I thought the final legal ruling on this had Highlands and Mitchell as winners and the KHSAA as losers thus I always wondered if HHS would get the wins back too. I assume (I know I shouldn't assume) even if Highlands is eligible to get the wins back they decided not to do it to let the KHSAA save face. Again, I could be way off here and would like to hear from someone in the know?

 

You got it right my friend. Some members of the BOC had planned on making Highlands reimburse the KHSAA for the legal fees the KHSAA had expended if the KHSAA prevailed in court on the Mitchell matter. When the Ct of Appeals refused to overturn the last Circuit Ct. order ruling Mitchell eligible, the KHSAA decided not to appeal it to the Supreme Ct. and just dropped the matter. Thus the KHSAA could not demand reimbursement for the legal fees. Highlands decided to let the thing drop also and not demand reinstatement of the games. Highlands has always been a model member of the KHSAA according to the Commish herself and inspite of what some think was not trying to pick a fight with the KHSAA. Highlands didn't file the suit against the KHSAA in the Mitchell case to begin with and only became a party when it was added as a defendant to the lawsuit by the Mitchells. They thought they did the right thing by playing the kid during the period that the judicial system said he was eligible to play. When the court system said he was ineligible, they did not play him (in the most important game of the year against a team that had become a bitter rival to the Birds I might add to those of you who like to throw around the cheating word recklessly). I know there were some people who thought and advocated that Highlands was going to play him in the State game, but I knew Highlands would not as the principal told me that they always had planned on following whatever the judicial system directed them to do as they felt the judicial system in this country is the body that has the final say on legal matters (a concept set forth not only in the constitution, but the KHSAA's own due process procedures). Highlands understood the risk in playing Mitchell when they did, but felt it was the right thing to do, not only because of the belief that the judicial system decisions were supreme over an executive branch's rulings because to not play him when the courts had ruled him eligible to play would have been wrong. Sure they could have said they were going to ignore the court's order and not played him (although I think the Courts would have ruled Highlands in contempt of the court order) and placed what some felt was the school's best self interest in front of the interest of Mitchell's (and would have in effect, wiped out his senior year of playing football). Frankly, I believe that if Highlands had not played him when the courts had said he was eligible would have been cowardly on Highlands behalf and would have been contrary to what every high schools civics teacher is supposed to be teaching in their classes. But I'm sure that some people who have never met Dr. Stinson, Elgin Emmons and Dale Mueller in their lives will still make baseless accusations against their character. Folks on here like to falsely accuse the private schools of illegal recruiting without any facts or first hand knowledge, and the accusations against Highlands are just more of the same.

 

Nonetheless, up to this issue and the soccer game limitation issue, they have had no runs in with the KHSAA. Rather than let their pride get involved and create more animosity with the KHSAA by taking them to court to get the wins reinstated, Highlands decided it would be best for all involved to just let it drop. I agree with that logic.

 

And I do agree that I thought this subject was old news. JB what were you thinking when you started this thread:banana: