GCHS

Any news on the Dunbar hire?

If you do number 3 (eliminating federal influence), then rural districts, especially, will lose a lot of money.

I am not sure evidence would bear out the "more discipline" problems argument. Although, I suppose it depends upon your definition of problems. There is a tendency, I think, to look at the past with rose-colored glasses. We often don't take into account that a much bigger chunk of the population is being educated. Back in the day, kids that didn't like school just left after 8th grade or dropped out as soon as they turned 16. You also had fewer special education-type kids in the classroom. I believe that a lot of discipline "problems" in our schools are teacher issues. There are too many of us that get sucked into power struggles and take certain behaviors personally. Rather than realizing that it took a kid 15 years to learn negative behaviors, and trying to teach them a different way, we often times get butt-hurt, puff-up, and escalate a problem that could have been handled with minimal disruption.

It is simple... There are more 3 stars in the NFL for one reason and one reason only - not because they work harder or are less entitled. It is because there are a TON more 3 stars than there are 4 & 5. A 4 & 5 stars have a higher likelihood of getting to the league than 3 stars. As much as we like to rip recruiting services, by and large they are pretty good at identifying elite players. They make more mistakes in the 2 to 3 range, IMO. Overall, they are pretty good.

Still has to be a change of address, unless the previous school releases him.

It is just a numbers game... 4 & 5 stars are much more likely, by percentages, to wind up in the league than 3 star guys.

Gotcha... Not knowing the behind-the-scenes, it seems Marple kind of got hosed - although, I think Stoney is a good hire.

I could be wrong, but I very seriously doubt that Stoney would undercut someone like that. Don't know him well, but has always seemed to be an stand-up guy from what I have heard.

Another aspect of the concussion discussion that is being underplayed is the fact that all the CTE cases have been found in deceased NFL players. These are guys who played football at least a decade longer than the vast majority of High School players. Also, there still is not a reliable way to test for CTE in living athletes... Therefore, the science is incomplete. Truthfully, concussions and sub-concussive impacts are a real danger to players of all sports, and probably more so to some (including football). Some of my thoughts on the subject: 1) We do start contact football too soon. In my opinion, 3rd and 4th graders do not need to be playing full contact football. Even 5th & 6th is a stretch for many. You can do a lot to teach certain fundamentals when they are young without full contact. 2) Lost in the hulabaloo, and pointed out by Coach B, are the many positive benefits of playing any sport. To be fair, I have heard a lot of doctors and neuroscientists in the media recently saying this very thing. Our young people are put much more at risk by the pervasive inactivity of American life than they are by playing football. 3) I am a football guy, so I am obviously biased... However, I think our sport does a better job at teaching and/or uncovering some basic values our society sorely needs. As the perfect team sport, football teaches the importance of teamwork, tenacity, and dependability. It also can be a place where young men discover their physical courage, as well as dealing with adversity. Perhaps the greatest thing I learned playing the game was the ultimate importance of picking yourself up when you get knocked down and focusing on the next play... What more important lesson can young men learn than that? The power of persistence and focus.

Face guarding is ONLY illegal in high school, as I understand it. Also, this is a commonly miscalled penalty. Many officials throw it if a defender has his back to the ball and attempts to defend the pass. Technically, the play is only a penalty if the defender attempts to shield the eye of the receiver. Often times it is called simply if the defender has his back to the passer... Once receiver touches the ball, there should be no penalty for defender breaking up a pass, no matter where his head/eyes are. One of the most common mistaken flags thrown, IMO. Of course, I am an old DB, so I am a little hyper-sensitive to this particular call.

Jacob Foley (Garrard). At least worthy of an Honorable Mention selection at RB, IMO.

You are right... Since, if UK was in the SEC Championship game, they would be playing in Atlanta.

Already some surprises... Can't believe Paris is so far down the list - of course, they had basically a lost decade or so. I think it would be interesting to figure out a way to include regional championships and total wins, but the amount of research involved in that would probably turn a fun project into a job. lol Could make the scale a 6 point scale and slide in regional championships, then do a point for so many wins... IDK. That said, great job on this, it is very interesting.

I guess we have different opinions of what we consider human error... A missed call, inadvertent whistle, not seeing something, etc. are human error. Not knowing or improperly enforcing a rule are not human error, IMO. That is a lack of training and education. There are multiple officials, there should be someone on the crew who can say "Wait, hold on, let's talk about this" and make the right call.

A missed call is one thing... Not knowing the rules or applying them improperly is another.

I reject your premise that "the best official" is a BS thing to say. The OP's original point is absolutely right, there needs to be a clear way to evaluate officials. Are they in always in good position? Are their eyes where they should be? How is their demeanor? Do they know/apply the rules properly? I don't know how that would work, but there has to be some way. I get that the assigner has a tough job. I get that officiating isn't easy. I understand that it is getting harder and harder to get people to do it. I get all that... However, there are too many situations where officials are not in position, don't know the rules, etc. In the regular season, it makes sense - officials are spread thin. In the playoffs, and especially in the championship games, it is inexcusable.

For some perspective... If a new HS opened started playing football in 2016 and had an undefeated, state championship season EVERY year... They would be to 800 wins in 53+ years!!! Think about that - an undefeated season EVERY year and they wouldn't get to 800 wins until into the 2070 season.

I know virtually nothing about either of these teams, but I do know that,since the inception of the running clock, for a team to score 70 one of two things must be true. 1) You must have a team that can score with you, at least enough to stave off the running clock. Judging from the comments about Lafayette on this thread, it doesn't seem like that is the case. 2) There must be a complete and total outclassing of the losing team. The difference has to be IMMENSE. I am not sure that, in a state championship game, there will be enough of a difference b/w the two teams. So, my vote is "no"

1) You are right that Garrard was big... And they run, but that is really where the similarities with Belfry end. The two teams run very different systems. Also, Garrard was playing a lot of guys both ways in those LexCath games... I think some of lack of fundamentals and team speed that you saw could have been a combination of different schemes and general fatigue. That team really was worn down by a season full of injuries, off-the-field adversity, etc. That said... 2) Belfry is a different animal, altogether. I have always said that Belfry's style of play makes them play faster than they are. Add that to the fact that this is probably Belfry's fastest team I have seen, and it is a difficult deal to defend. 3) LexCath's running game has improved tremendously. I think having Thompson at QB has added a whole new dimension to their offense. They are playing with more urgency since he has been in.

That makes more sense, but I am still not sure it would be accurate for you to say everyone was picking you to make a 2nd round exit. It was a hypothetical amongst three teams, two of which would play each other. I just never understood all the "us against the world" stuff people buy into. LexCath has talent, they are well-coached, and they play hard. Either it is enough or it isn't. That is just my opinion.

Everyone was not picking LexCath to win one game in the playoffs... You are saying that everyone was picking you guys to lose to the winner of Henry/Garrard??? Looking at the prediction thread, almost 70% of poll respondents had you guys winning against Garrard. You guys have a really good team, no need to conjure up bogeymen to fight. Also, its tough to play the no respect card when you have been in the Top 5 all season, even after starting slow. Anyone that knows anything about football knows what kind of schedule LexCath plays. I will never understand why fans do this kind of stuff... All that said - this could be the best game of the bunch. I am going to say that either team could run away with it, or it might be one of those "team with the ball last" games... That said, I think the wild card is Belfry's defensive line... They are really good, and could disrupt Catholic enough to force a few mistakes. In the end, I think this game comes down to turnovers - whomever wins the turnover battle, wins the game. I feel like Belfry may be able to dictate that more than LexCath. Then again... :idunno:

Mercer's Student Section is one of the best I have seen. Funny, organized, irreverent. Just all around good stuff.

A great article... Probably good for a lot of fans to read - might make them think twice before ripping a coach in the stands, or on forums.

As I have been reading the threads about Thanksgiving practice traditions, and all of the matchups for this week, something occurred to me... IMO, the week of the semis is the best week of football in KY. Here are my arguments: 1) Thanksgiving Practice - there is just something special about it. Whether your program does anything different or not, fact of a team being together on that day just makes it special. Add to that the possibility of community involvement b/c most are off work, and the fact that recent alums are home from college & can swing by practice, and it makes for a special atmosphere. Just a different feel than any other practice, IMO. 2) Home games... Let's face it, the atmosphere of the Championship games is anti-climactic. The home crowd, night game (usually), and smaller confines of semi-final games just makes it a better atmosphere, for the most part. 3) Better games. I have absolutely NO hard evidence to back this up, but it seems to me that semi-final games tend to be "better" games. Fewer blowouts, more intensity, etc. Again, I have no idea if the numbers back me up, but that is how it has always seemed to me. What say you folks?

I love the idea of Thanksgiving football, although I know a lot of administrators in the state would definitely balk. It would be perfect for that out-of-district game most teams have at the end of the schedule. If you start the 2nd Friday of September and take out the open week, it would work perfectly. Of course, that would put you playing State championship games during Christmas, some years. You could just push it to the next week and give Championship teams 2 weeks to prepare. I am going to say something that might stir the pot a little, though that is not my intent... There is really no good reason to play August football... I know moving the season back would upset the basketball applecart, but if the well-being of the kids is the main concern, I don't see any reason why the season starts so early. It would also have the benefit of pushing baseball out of March, which is ridiculous, anyway.