You make me laugh, really!

 

I know. I'm actually a really funny person, it's one of the reasons so many people are drawn to me. Its one of my MANY FABULOUS qualities. :thumb:

 

If the game is played as currently scheduled, I'm sure we can count on you to be the first to post on this site, praising the team, the coach, and the AD for playing as hard as possible...

 

 

 

Frances

 

I would be one of the first to praise Ashland for playing them, but it wont happen.

 

If or when it gets cancelled, are you going to be the first ones on here to say I was right.

 

I have no problem with Ashland, check some of my posts on the football forums. I predicted Ashland over Belfry this past week. But I do have a problem with the Ashland AD's past Boycott of Rose Hill, along with the same problem I have with Boyd Co's Meathead AD also. It was crazy for Boyd to boycott Rose Hill as well. (Not sure whether boycotting Rose Hill in B-Ball or scheduling Bracken Co for 2 years in F-Ball was worse?)

 

I actually played at RH for one year at a younger age and took my pounding from Boyd and Ashland, and at the same point played at Boyd and pounded Rose Hill. So I have been on both sides.:thumb:

I would be one of the first to praise Ashland for playing them, but it wont happen.

 

If or when it gets cancelled, are you going to be the first ones on here to say I was right.

 

I have no problem with Ashland, check some of my posts on the football forums. I predicted Ashland over Belfry this past week. But I do have a problem with the Ashland AD's past Boycott of Rose Hill, along with the same problem I have with Boyd Co's Meathead AD also. It was crazy for Boyd to boycott Rose Hill as well. (Not sure whether boycotting Rose Hill in B-Ball or scheduling Bracken Co for 2 years in F-Ball was worse?)

 

I actually played at RH for one year at a younger age and took my pounding from Boyd and Ashland, and at the same point played at Boyd and pounded Rose Hill. So I have been on both sides.:thumb:

 

I can tell you right now for a FACT Ashland WILL NOT cancel this game.

I can tell you right now for a FACT Ashland WILL NOT cancel this game.

 

thats cool and I believe you.....But I want you to be Poster #2 if it happens....:thumb: :thumb:

 

I hope it doesnt get cancelled, I want a good local game to go watch OJ and the crew, at the same point Thomas and McDavid with the right coach is no pushover:thumb:

 

Actually I say Thomas would like his shot at OJ.

thats cool and I believe you.....But I want you to be Poster #2 if it happens....:thumb: :thumb:

 

I hope it doesnt get cancelled, I want a good local game to go watch OJ and the crew, at the same point Thomas and McDavid with the right coach is no pushover:thumb:

 

Actually I say Thomas would like his shot at OJ.

I think that the game is to be played in Huntington along with all the other Highlander home games. All local.

Now, boys, you know that I am a peacemaker. However, we are getting a little too much "holier than thou" spin.

 

There is really no distinction to be drawn between the Huntington and Rose Hill situations. In both cases, OJ was/is a resident of South Point, Ohio. The only true distinction is that he now has a guardian.

 

Ashland has no standing to claim anyone was "unethically" taking its athletes. Last year, Ashland started three former Rose Hill students. This year, it will be two. How many Ashlanders started last year or will start this year for Rose Hill? It should be mentioned that Ashland and Rose Hill share common areas for "attracting" students and, in both cases, the boundaries don't end at the Ashland city limits.

 

If you wish to be ironclad correct in what you say, you must conclude that Rose Hill and Ashland had eight encounters during the Mayo Era. On the court, Ashland won three and Rose Hill won three. However, for the 2002-2003 season (when the district was still seeded), Ashland chose to take two forfeits for seeding purposes rather than playing Rose Hill. Consequently, in truth (no spin now, boys), Rose Hill can, using sound principle (an Ashland phrase) claim two more wins over Ashland because of Ashland's allegedly "principled position".

 

Now, before anyone gets their bowels in an uproar and overreacts, lighten up and be heartened by the fact that the "less than cordial" rivalry is heating up on the front burner. Isn't it great?

the boys that played at Rose Hill then went to Ashland last year Matt, Drew and Brandon . Matt started at ashland then went to R.H. in the 6th grade . Drew came into the Ashland school system in the 7th grade for football.I believe that Brandon came to Blazer as a soph. Now lets talk about the wins and loses the to games you always talk did not toward the actual won-lose record just look at the K.H.S.A.A. website .

Ah, marooncat, I am talking principle. Of course the KHSAA site doesn't list the games because you refused to schedule them chosing to take the "paper losses" instead. The fact is that, in seeding the district, you boys were charged with two losses. Rose Hill was seeded number one with a record, for that purpose, of 6-0. Ashland was seeded number two and their record indicated the two forfeits. Gloss over whatever you want but fact is fact. Anyway, since you are a group with "principle", I would think that you would wear those forfeits as a kind of Purple Heart (so to speak).

 

I'm not faulting the transfers. I'm just stating facts. Those three boys, as well as our former basketball players at HHS (3), Russell (3), Fairview (2), and Raceland (2) have many supporters at Rose Hill. Unlike some, we keep the bridges open and in good repair. We wish them well.

 

The next six years should be interesting around here, don't you think?

...The next six years should be interesting around here, don't you think?

 

I'll leave the rest of it alone, but I'll reply to this last statement you made -

 

As long as Dakotah Euton is at Rose Hill, they will be a power (if not THE power) in the 16th Region.

 

The day after he plays his last basketball game at Rose Hill .... They'll still have talent, but nothing will replace Euton when he leaves.

 

Nothing.

 

 

Frances

If you wish to be ironclad correct in what you say, you must conclude that Rose Hill and Ashland had eight encounters during the Mayo Era. On the court, Ashland won three and Rose Hill won three. However, for the 2002-2003 season (when the district was still seeded), Ashland chose to take two forfeits for seeding purposes rather than playing Rose Hill. Consequently, in truth (no spin now, boys), Rose Hill can, using sound principle (an Ashland phrase) claim two more wins over Ashland because of Ashland's allegedly "principled position".

 

Yes you can claim the two forfeits as wins, but does it really matter? It's like claiming Helms titles as national championships in college ball, some schools do it and some don't. But when it comes down to it, it's a victory on paper, not on the court. That said, as a Rose Hill fan go ahead and claim your two 'paper' wins against Ashland. As a UK fan, I'll claim their 6 helms titles as national championships, which gives them 13 total, one more than UCLA. :sleep:

 

As far as the posts concerning Ashland playing HHS this year. I doubt HHS will try and buy out the Ashland contract and I know Ashland wont make an attempt to get out of it. Ashland could very well be HHS's biggest draw of their season, in terms of attendence. If moved to one of the 3 larger arenas in Huntington this game could draw close to 10,000 people. In my opinion the game will still be played, just not at Huntington High School.

Good post, T-CAT4LIFE. Rose Hill isn't at all interested in counting those two forfeits as victories. If you check our records, you will find no reference to them. Many feel that Ashland overreacted in that situation and that is really more material than is any win or loss. It had been posted by an Ashland partisan that the schools split their meetings. I was merely supplying an addendum of fact.

 

I believe you are correct in stating that HHS will want to keep Ashland on the schedule for, if nothing else, monetary reasons. Although Mayo will draw the crowd regardless of the opponent, local opponents will bring a few more in the door. I can't imagine 10,000 for HHS and Ashland but, then, Mayo has always been a big draw. HHS and Russell, HHS and Chesapeake, or HHS and Rose Hill would draw just as big a crowd because they would be there to see Mayo and not to see a monumental battle.

 

Frances, you are quite correct in your analysis. I would point out that Ashland's talent level decreased significantly after Larry Conley and Harold Sergent left and Wayland was never the same after King Kelly moved on. That is true everywhere. Nonetheless, from last year's results, it is fairly safe to say that Rose Hill will be in far better shape in five years than many of its neighbors.

Good post, T-CAT4LIFE. Rose Hill isn't at all interested in counting those two forfeits as victories. If you check our records, you will find no reference to them. Many feel that Ashland overreacted in that situation and that is really more material than is any win or loss. It had been posted by an Ashland partisan that the schools split their meetings. I was merely supplying an addendum of fact.

 

I believe you are correct in stating that HHS will want to keep Ashland on the schedule for, if nothing else, monetary reasons. Although Mayo will draw the crowd regardless of the opponent, local opponents will bring a few more in the door. I can't imagine 10,000 for HHS and Ashland but, then, Mayo has always been a big draw. HHS and Russell, HHS and Chesapeake, or HHS and Rose Hill would draw just as big a crowd because they would be there to see Mayo and not to see a monumental battle.

 

It's good to know that Rose Hill isn't trying to cling on to those paper victories. Just as UK doesn't go around claiming 13 championships. While yes Rose Hill had the talent to sweep Ashland that year, anything can happen once it is taken to the court. But I dont think most Ashland fans would have a problem with giving Rose Hill a 5-3 edge during the OJ era. The school's administration certainly didn't.

 

Yeah 10,000 may be a stretch. But I wasn't really basing the crowd size on people coming from all over to see a great game, odds are it will be a blowout. I was simply basing it on how well the TomcatNation has been known to travel. Not that Im saying those other schools couldn't or wouldn't bring as many fans, it just doesn't seem as likely, with maybe the exception of Russell.

I understand the origional boycott of Rose Hill and actually kinda supported it but that doesn't explain why we won't play them now, does it? OJ is gone it's time to play we did when they stunk.

It was never a big deal that we didn't play them in the regular season before OJ was there, so why is it now? Just because they have a team that can compete now doesn't mean Ashland should be forced to play them. But this is a debate that we dont really need to get started, it's not what this thread is about anyway.

It was never a big deal that we didn't play them in the regular season before OJ was there, so why is it now? Just because they have a team that can compete now doesn't mean Ashland should be forced to play them. But this is a debate that we dont really need to get started, it's not what this thread is about anyway.

 

I don't disagree but I'm just trying to look at things from every perspective. It is my understanding that in the past both schools agreed not to play because Rose Hill couldn't compete. If that is no longer the case then why not play? If it is still a principle stance then so be it. If not then I just don't get it.

 

If your looking for a good reason to play then I would suggest it would draw quite abit interest from the community. Nothing wrong with a healthy rivalry and I can't see any reason for it to be anything but that. Maybe I'm missing something or just naive (sp?). Maybe the adults on both sides should get out of the way and let the kids play a game. I don't think that is too much to ask.