rjs4470
Premium Members-
Posts
10,274 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Everything posted by rjs4470
-
Boone County Hires Dan Court as next Head Coach
rjs4470 replied to Hydration-coach83's topic in KY Football (High School)
Dan Court is a good dude. Glad to see him get an opportunity to be a head coach. -
Remember, it's not all on Ticketmaster. Over half of the fees they collect go back to the venue/artist/promoters of the events, who are the real clients of Ticketmaster (and other ticketing companies). The venues actually make more money selling tickets through TM than they would if they sold through their own box office, without the added hassle and expense of managing their own ticket sales. I hate the fees too, but the venues are just as much to blame as TM.
-
Like I said, it's not the right decision for every team that is struggling. And the things you mention like kids leaving for other schools or choosing not to play, are already happening to those teams. You said it before...kids and parents aren't stupid. The teams that are or would be considering this option already are struggling to find something to play for (at least how you define "something to play for")
-
You are absolutely right that kids play sports for "something". And those somethings could be anything and as I mentioned, for most kids it isn't about wins, playoffs, etc. They aren't limited to the things you mentioned that are centered around wins (although many are). I come from a large school (almost 3k students) and we had a roster of nearly 100 guys, some of which didn't get more than a handful of snaps in 4 years. Their success was measured way differently than the starters. It's up to the HC and his staff to figure out what those "somethings" are and put their kids and team in the best possible position to accomplish those goals. And for some teams, pulling out of district play may be exactly what does that. Just because you won't get a chance to get a district win or make the playoffs, doesn't mean that you are playing that season for nothing. There are far more "somethings" in the game of football than just district wins, playoffs, or state titles. For many, that "something" is just the love of the game and your teammates.
-
I completely get it. While I'm all for teams opting to drop out if they wish, it would be tough for me to make that call for my team. Here's the thing.....like you said kids aren't dumb. And just like they recognize that dropping out of district is a sign that your leaders don't think you can compete, they also are just as likely to have recognized that well before the decision to drop out was made. Most kids already know if their team is "good enough" to have something to play for after game 10 or 11 well before the season starts. And those that don't sure as heck mostly know it by mid season. And guess what....most stick around anyway. 99% of players will never ever sniff a state title, many will never experience multiple playoff wins, and many will never win a playoff game....in essence they are from the get go starting off with nothing to play for. And they still come out and stick around. Playing a non district schedule probably won't get any of the teams that opt to do so to even a .500 season. But pulling a couple (or more) teams off your schedule that will curb stomp you will make the season more enjoyable and safer. And they in reality won't be missing any opportunities or playing for any less. Most high school kids aren't playing for state titles, playoff wins or a college scholarship because for some no matter how hard the work, how hard they try or how much they want it, it's just not going to happen. They are playing because the enjoy the game and everything that comes with it. If guys didn't play because they didn't think they had a chance to win, there would be an awful lot of schools that wouldn't have football teams.
-
I agree. It's not an easy call.
-
Using Boone as an example, if they were to pull out of district they could still play Scott and Conner if they wanted to. But them playing Cooper, Highlands and Dixie aren't games that are going to help them, at least in this cycle. This is all about having better control over your schedule and trying to build.
-
Again, the schools who would make this move aren't really playing for anything now. If getting thrashed in district games year after year hasn't wiped the program out, how will pulling out of those games lead to the demise of the program? Is getting running clocked in district games and not making the playoffs really a better look than playing more competitive games and not making the playoffs?
-
That's why you don't want to make this decision hastily. Basically those in charge need to have a high level of self awareness. And this shouldn't be considered by most schools that are playing football in the state. But there are more than a few programs (maybe a dozen or so) where this is a serious option that should absolutely be considered. I won't mention schools, but you really don't have to think all that hard about who would be a candidate. We are talking about schools that have either never had a sniff of even a few playoff wins, let alone a state championship. This option really doesn't have much impact on the KHSAA. It's currently an option for schools, very few take advantage of it, and I'm not aware of anyone that has ever "missed out" on a possible big season by sitting out district games. Remember, these are teams that are at the literal rock bottom. And the lesser programs that do this aren't trying to stop playing competitive football. They are already not playing competitive football. This is about trying to be more competitive. And remember, this isn't necessarily about not wanting to play a powerhouse. This does a couple things. It gives both really good and really bad teams more control over their schedule that allows them to play more games that are mutually beneficial for the teams involved. Good teams can further challenge themselves against other good teams, and the less accomplished teams can play more competitive games and better position themselves to have some measure of success. It prevents some of the long travel, lopsided first round playoff games. It gives the teams that make this decision a chance to build a program, and learn how to win and perhaps start moving toward success.
-
To your first question, that's exactly what you'd have. And these games would be more competitive, more fun, and better overall for those programs. The alternative, which we have now, is getting blasted in two or three district games, and then getting blasted again in the first round of the playoffs. I don't think there's any argument to which is the better option. For your second question, yes, no playoffs. Which in most cases would be better than traveling on the road, getting running clocked, and finishing your season that way. Lastly, the teams considering this option are typically teams that have no real history of success and are limited by finances, population, facilities and many other things that make fielding consistent winners on the football field very difficult, if not almost impossible. This isn't about raising the white flag or giving up. It's about putting your students/athletes in the best possible situation to have success. And success isn't always measured by state titles.
-
Correct. Too many other choices and things for kids to do where they aren't getting their teeth kicked in.
-
What is it that they have to play for? Is a yearly 60 point loss in a game(s) you have zero chance of being competitive and a good chance of getting hurt really something to play for? District play hurts the really good teams and the not so good teams by forcing them to play games they get nothing out of. Despite what people constantly say about how kids can learn from adversity and all the life lessons football teaches, these forced matchups don't teach anybody anything. Football is ultimately a game, and wasn't developed as a way to teach someone about life (although it certainly can). It's a game, and the purpose is to compete and have fun. These games are neither competitive or fun, and ultimately hurt participation in the schools that come out on the wrong side of these blowouts. Dropping out of district at least allows teams to be able to better manage their schedule and put their players in positions where they have a better opportunity of having success.
-
No knowledge or insight on this either, but what about Eric Turner? He's a Boone county Alum.
-
Might be one of the worst ever. He had zero self-awareness. And a complete lack of intestinal fortitude.
-
Scott 33 Bishop Brossart 30
rjs4470 replied to I gotta go to work's topic in KY Girls Basketball (High School)
And Scott has a good group of 7th graders coming up through Woodland who have won back to back MS championships. -
Sometimes 3 team districts occur because the 4th team in the district doesn't field a team. For example, the 37th district on the Girls side only has 3 teams because Calvary Christian doesn't have a girls team.
-
The problem with relegation is that outside of your top teams year in and year out (of which there are really only a handful in each class) relegation/promotion always take place after the fact. And for most teams, the good years are cyclical. Teams might have their "great year" which might happen every 4 or 5 years (or more), and then be forced to play up over their heads for a few years right after the "great group" graduates, before getting relegated. The reverse is true as well. Teams have their down period of a few year, then get relegated and have a big year playing down. It also could create geographic placement issues (which obviously could happen under any system). All in all, I don't think it really solves the problem.
-
Making all the classes even wouldn't necessarily get rid of 6 team districts. Geography is the issue that drives 6 team districts, not the number of schools in the class. It would only work if one or two of the teams in the six team districts were big/small enough to move up/down a class.
-
NLRB Rules Players at Dartmouth May Unionize.
rjs4470 replied to Jumper_Dad's topic in Controversial Issues
I absolutely believe some player(s), and some school(s) is going to have a tax issue at some point in time. It's inevitable. People have tried to beat taxes since taxes became a thing. My main point was that it was made to sound like unionizing would suddenly create the need for those who secure these deals to have to start paying taxes. That's not true because they already have to pay taxes on NIL deals. If anything, I think NIL actually makes it less likely we'll see a big tax issue, because these deals are now mostly on the up and up and publicly visible. In the past, when these deals were prohibited, players were certainly trying to hide their tax liability because publicizing the deal would affect their eligibility. -
NLRB Rules Players at Dartmouth May Unionize.
rjs4470 replied to Jumper_Dad's topic in Controversial Issues
The IRS won't be a problem as long as they pay their taxes. Do you think NIL money shouldn't be taxable? Most of these NIL deals aren't big money.....I've read the average NIL deal is a little over $3700....thus there isn't a lot of tax liability coming along with most of these deals. That being said, some big deals are getting signed, and we are two years in and I haven't heard of any IRS issues yet. There will absolutely be one at some point in time, but if it were going to become a major issue, I'd think we would have seen it happen by now. Most of these big deals will likely have agent involvement, and while not all agents have the best interests of their clients as a priority, agents should be providing at least the advice to take care of tax issues. Parents also need to be involved. -
Youtube Tv, Hulu, Paramount, Peacock, HBO Max (free through my ATT mobile phone service), Prime and Apple TV. Not really looking at any new ones, although I do sometimes watch a few of the free services that I have access to from Roku. I do get a student discount until the end of the year. But we watch a few things on each service will likely drop Hulu and Apple TV because we watch very little on those two.
-
I don't think so. Streaming allows the a-la-carte option that people have been looking for for a long time. People are tired of paying for 200 channels and only watching a few of them. I have a half dozen streaming services, watch what I want without all the extra useless channels and am saving about $75 per month from what I was paying on DirectTV . I know quite few people like myself. I think most people will be ok with just a handful of streaming services vs a cable or satellite package. Per channel cable may be cheaper on a per channel basis (most of which you'll never watch), but overall it's still more expensive AND you have to deal with the possibility of losing channels over contract negotiations.
-
It’s a very cool place and the atmosphere for a big 5 game was always unbelievable. Great place to see a college basketball game. Lasalle’s and St Joes arenas were pretty cool too.
-
Chiefs 25 49ers 22 (OT) Super Bowl LVIII
rjs4470 replied to 16thBBall Fan's topic in National Football League (NFL)
Andy's there until he decides he doesn't want to coach anymore.