How much does it cost to draft a letter? 42 cents now for a stamp?

As I have said to some I have no dog in this fight BUT since its here for discussion I'll put my 2 cents in on the matter.

 

Questions and thoughts...

 

Why would the Fort Thomas Board of Education spend money on re-opening this can of worms??? Do they not have anything better to do with their money? Surely money can be better spent on something else?? I believe in standing your ground if you were not treated fairly but is this truly the case??

 

The way I see it was some people were not happy how things were playing out at a school so they decide to leave and go some place else. I understand this as a parent and why someone might do this!!! BUT the fact in the matter is SOMETIMES the cards are not dealt in your favor. No matter how good of an athlete someone may be....rules are put in place for a reason.

 

Could you imagine if everytime a kid/person that was not happy how things were playing out that they decide to go some place else?? (Heck..I'll be real honest and say once upon a time I wish I could have given someone this opportunity but the fact in the matter is I wouldn't and couldn't do that!!!) We would have exits in every program/school. I believe that you need to sleep in the bed that you made.

 

Don't expect people to agree....just my thoughts....but I truly hope that FTBE thinks about this??? Is it in fact money well spent to bring all this all back up??

 

How much does it cost to draft a letter? 42 cents now for a stamp?

 

Sorry TD, I agree with Gryche11, it's just a letter.:idunno:

I'm not sure I get what you mean by your opening line.

 

The KHSAA was ruled to have set their guidelines and regulations above the state's laws by refusing to accept the Campbell County Circuit Court's decision to let Mitchell play. Despite your preference for or against Highlands (as well as mine), there is no way that the state athletic association should have the power to stand above the law.

 

So, which body's rules do you want to place at the top of the pecking order, the KY State Legislature, or the KHSAA?

 

The KHSAA has little interest in Highlands winning, Campbell Co. Circuit Court may. It's all a waste of time. KHSAA called Highlands out on what they had been doing for years and now the Birds are trying to get the ruling rescinded. That is a JOKE. They are just going to figure out a way to not get caught in the future. Nothing has changed at the school near the Fort.

How much does it cost to draft a letter? 42 cents now for a stamp?

 

And the lawyer fees to either proofread or compose the letter.

And from my understanding, so is his older brother Chris.

 

Not saying that he isn't now but he wasn't when the season started.

Good for Highlands.

 

If they think they are in the right and have the law on their side, pursue it all the way to the end.

 

I always felt the compromise solution with allowing Highlands to play in the finals w/o Mitchell was a cop out. Either he was eligible all along and should have played in the championship game or he was inelgible and Highlands should have forfeited the semi-final game to Bell and Bobcats should have played in the finals.

 

It was my understanding after an email response to me by the Commissioner that the Appellate Court ruled....on Monday following the Bell game and prior to the weekend championship game....Mitchell ineligible and could not play. The timing was always suspect by the Bobcat faithful....it secured a win at the semi level and putting Highlands in the Championship game....which they could probably...and would win...without Mitchell. I know there are those on here who have said that someone would have stepped up in his place...but he was a special player as his NFL credentials note. His theft from the Bell running back at the end of the game....ran back for a touchdown was an unbelievable play for a high school player. Followed by his last minute score to pull out the victory. Mitchell does not play...Bell wins on the field. Too bad this whole situation happened. I have since watched as several Southeastern Kentucky kids have tried to move in much the same manner....but were denied eligibility.

I still do not see how anyone can claim this rule has been equally enforced.

 

I agree with this statement.

Oh for the love of God....not this again!!!! :ohbrother::ohbrother::ohbrother:

 

:thumb:

Oh for the love of God....not this again!!!! :ohbrother::ohbrother::ohbrother:

 

:thumb::deadhorse:

Question:

 

Of all the people posting in this thread, how many have actually read the letter provided in the link of the opening post?

 

I ask this because I too had questions when I first saw the blog title on Ryan Ernst page, but once I read the letter, things seemed to make more sense.

It was my understanding after an email response to me by the Commissioner that the Appellate Court ruled....on Monday following the Bell game and prior to the weekend championship game....Mitchell ineligible and could not play. The timing was always suspect by the Bobcat faithful....it secured a win at the semi level and putting Highlands in the Championship game....which they could probably...and would win...without Mitchell. I know there are those on here who have said that someone would have stepped up in his place...but he was a special player as his NFL credentials note. His theft from the Bell running back at the end of the game....ran back for a touchdown was an unbelievable play for a high school player. Followed by his last minute score to pull out the victory. Mitchell does not play...Bell wins on the field. Too bad this whole situation happened. I have since watched as several Southeastern Kentucky kids have tried to move in much the same manner....but were denied eligibility.

 

For those that feel the same as Tom, if Mike would not of been eligible to play in this game it would of been Jamie Hubbard running the ball against Bell County. Hubbard would have had the same results, if you don't think so ask Bowling Green, Hubbard was the MVP of the State game as the running back.

(Not taking anything away from Mike, just my opinion)

Mitchell was at my house when he heard the ruling after practice one day. That means it was during a weekday of the state championship game and post Bell County... Lets put that to rest

 

It was my understanding after an email response to me by the Commissioner that the Appellate Court ruled....on Monday following the Bell game and prior to the weekend championship game....Mitchell ineligible and could not play. The timing was always suspect by the Bobcat faithful....it secured a win at the semi level and putting Highlands in the Championship game....which they could probably...and would win...without Mitchell. I know there are those on here who have said that someone would have stepped up in his place...but he was a special player as his NFL credentials note. His theft from the Bell running back at the end of the game....ran back for a touchdown was an unbelievable play for a high school player. Followed by his last minute score to pull out the victory. Mitchell does not play...Bell wins on the field. Too bad this whole situation happened. I have since watched as several Southeastern Kentucky kids have tried to move in much the same manner....but were denied eligibility.

For those that feel the same as Tom, if Mike would not of been eligible to play in this game it would of been Jamie Hubbard running the ball against Bell County. Hubbard would have had the same results, if you don't think so ask Bowling Green, Hubbard was the MVP of the State game as the running back.

(Not taking anything away from Mike, just my opinion)

 

Highlands played Boyle in the championship game not Bowling Green.

Highlands played Boyle in the championship game not Bowling Green.

 

Thanks, your right

I am not involved in this case at all, but I did follow it pretty closely at the time. I am not choosing sides or condemning anyone, but I am still interested in this case because it does have some long-term effect on the way the rules are enforced and I want to see how it turns out. A lot of misconceptions are floating around and I think we should nail down the particulars before we get the facts all messed up.

 

It has been a while and I could be wrong on some points and I hope I will be corrected if I am. Here is how the whole thing played out, according to my limited memory...

 

 

• According to KHSAA bylaws, all transfers must sit out a year unless they qualify for a waiver of this rule by meeting one of the exceptions to the bylaw. (a bonafide change of address is one of them and was a point of contention)
  

• Mitchell transferred to HHS, and they applied to the KHSAA for a waiver of the rule that requires all transfers to sit out a year.
  

• The KHSAA denied the waiver and Dale sat Mitchell for the first game of the year.
  

• The Mitchell family appealed the ruling to the KHSAA.
  

• Prior to the 2nd game of the year, a Campbell Co judge ruled that HHS could play Mitchell in the meantime while they await the decision of the KHSAA appeal. The court didn't "overrule" the KHSAA or declare Mitchell eligible, they simply said he could play while the whole thing was being appealed.
  

• The KHSAA's stance is that if you play a player after they have been ruled ineligible while you wait appeal, and if you ultimately lose that appeal, then you have to forfeit those games the player played in because ultimately, they were ineligible the whole time.
  

• At some point in the season, the Mitchells lost the appeal and the KHSAA ruling of ineligibility was upheld. (I can't remember if this was directly after the Bell Co game in the semifinals or if it was earlier in the year and the Mitchells went back to court, only to lose this time and that was right after the Bell Co game.) I think this came directly after the Bell Co game and this is what Tom Landry was referring to in his post.
  

• After this ruling, HHS did not play Mitchell in the finals against Boyle, a game they won without him, giving them another championship. The timing was terrible and the KHSAA received a lot of criticism for not getting a ruling on this prior to the playoffs.
  

• The KHSAA then retroactively penalized HHS for the infraction, including taking away 12 wins they gained while playing Mitchell during the appeal process.
  

• HHS feels justified in playing Mitchell during that time because they had the Campbell Co court ruling that said they could. KHSAA feels justified because they upheld their position and HHS lost the appeal, and in their minds played an ineligible player during those 12 wins.
  

This is where my memory runs out on the subject. I seem to remember someone from HHS telling me that there was some more developments after the fact in the case, but I am not sure what they were.

 

If I have misstated any material facts above, please someone who knows kindly point it out as I want to be accurate.