bulldog77

And the correct move.

Just noting that as reference to some of the conversations that took place between this coach and, what I assume is, his new AD. Strikes me as a bit out of place maybe. Just a passing thought.

The name of the school is Evangelical Christian right?

And your understanding is incorrect. Most Independent Districts are NOT open enrollment and follow pretty much the same rules as the county districts. I'm not saying all, and I'm not saying none. But most independents are much smaller and draw from a much smaller community base so I'm not exactly sure where you get the idea that there is an advantage athletically.

Talented? No. Polished? Absolutely. The expectation that freshmen will ever look as polished as seasoned upper classmen is unrealistic at best. Not a defense or indictment of anyone's view or opinion of the UK system, just a realistic view of athletes and their development.

I'm always fascinated by the fact that we track wins and not total games coached. I wonder who has coached the most GAMES in northern Kentucky. You put no less work in for the losses than you do for the wins, right? Just a thought.

Add Dixie and St. Henry to that mix.

I've done this awhile in several sports both in boys and girls and I could not possibly disagree with you more. Some sports, sure, most sports, not a chance. Not in a quality program of any sort anyway.

Got mine and the only side effect I had was a craving for brownies. Well . . . that might have been there before, so . . .

Wow. The list of my childhood heroes that have passed is getting longer seemingly almost daily. Gibson, Brock, Seaver, Sutton, Morgan, Aaron. Sad day for me.

Evening? You have something against day drinking?

Coach stipends have implications on more than just other coach's salaries. There are Title IX issues involved, general budgeting and others. Some of you are correct in stating this isn't college. And the booster money some are suggesting might be even more closely monitored than the general fund money for just these kind of reasons. There's this thing in public schools called "Red Book" that governs all expenditures and it doesn't compromise.

Okay, I'll step up and say it. Hydrox are better. There. Beat me down.

You cannot make decisions in a vacuum, much to the dismay of Mr. Tackett and you apparently. Cash Cow or not, there are dozens of other factors that had to be considered and, thankfully, were.

So you think CovCath should be playing Heritage Academy in a regular season game?

This is fun. I think someone alluded to this earlier, but it went right over everyone's head, but how about Coach Eviston. If you can't beat 'em, call 'em? Again, just for fun, why or why not?

Just for fun. Why or why not Noel Rash?

Could not disagree more with you. Deuce is correct on this one. Football, nor any other single activity is the measure of putting STUDENTS first. I don't like the decision from a coach standpoint, but there are valid reasons for the decision.

I don't recall blaming anyone or citing any reasons. However, the fact of the matter is they haven't played a legit opponent. Intentions mean nothing. The question was "are they being overlooked." Clearly, to me, the answer is no. When they do play a quality opponent, I'll re-evaluate my opinion. Till then, eh.

Play somebody.

Actually it was encouraged but was ultimately left up to the discretion of each school district. You had to know that with the over=precaution that surrounds this whole ordeal that that was going to be the case. Again, I'm in disagreement with the process, but it cannot be a surprise to anyone. School districts are trying to protect their students AND themselves.

Just an observation here, but, I guess now it's so much for the "just let them play, we'll do whatever we need to do" mentality? This isn't a surprise. The whole two-week quarantine after a positive case was in the plan all along. I disagree with the entire plan and have from the start, but it IS what was laid out beforehand right? Nothing new here.

I'm thinking you'd have to go way back to the Villa Madonna (when it was all girls), OLP, LaSallette days to find that. Just a guess on my part.

Heard this conversation this weekend from some folks who have quite a bit of knowledge about the inner-workings of this mess. Just paraphrasing their explanation folks, not stating facts: They explained that having a season without fans the schools collectively look to lose some 4 BILLION dollars in total losses and expenditures, while not playing the season they cut those losses in half strictly from just lost revenue (again I'm paraphrasing and they were just using round numbers). The players will remain on scholarship and retain their eligibility for another year. It sounded to me like "playing football" is the least of the university's concerns and I get that. Those are staggering potential monetary losses if accurate.

Easily the biggest problem we have in making a decision is the inaccuracy of the reported numbers. Whether you believe they are under-reported or over-reported it is the fact that the numbers are wildly inaccurate makes decision-making for schools and businesses a non-science and thusly a WAG (Wild Guess). There is no right answer for Superintendents so they are, frankly, compelled to play "cover their butts" both legally and morally. I cannot see how there will be Fall sports or even Winter sports to be honest.