cooperstown

I guess the question comes down to whether an explosives accident is an acceptable risk at a youth high school football game. And, yep, I'm sure those schools that shoot off fireworks will need to re-think that policy if some accident occurs - if they are not already. Not too sure I follow the logic of comparing the risks of playing in a high school football game to that of firing off a cannon at one of those games. :confused:

Who have the schools below them beaten?

Who has Campbell beaten? (Asking, really don't know). You seem to be implying that Boone, Highlands, and CC are all pretty much interchangeable at the #2 spot? Boone and Highlands would appear to be pretty obvious and clearcut choices for #2 and #3.

Well, technically, debating on just about any of BGP's threads do little good. But it is what makes this forum fun.

Still an open forum for people to express opinions though, right? None of these opinions will have any effect on the final decision, so it's just people sharing their own personal views in a harmless manner.

No one said coaching was easy. This just made it harder and probably more time-consuming. But I would think most coaches would have someone they could rely upon to help coordinate projects like this. There are always people who do things for the right reasons. Hopefully . . . First off, if a parent is sitting back and doing absolutely nothing, how is their child's stuff being paid for (since my understanding is that parents who do the work have money applied directly to their own child's account)? Do these "do-nothing" parents just write a check? If a parent truly refuses to volunteer like other parents without having any valid reason whatsoever, I would explore options such as having the player work extra time or ask if other there were other family members/friends that could work in their place. If working such events are very clearly made a condition of being on the team from the very onset, and yet you still have a set of parents who refuse to do their share, then ultimately perhaps you may have to make the painful decision to release the player. Fair? Maybe. Maybe not. At the end of the day, there is far more to athletics these days than simply what occurs on the field/court. Fundraising is critical and if parents/players don't accept their responsibilities in this area, then perhaps their child doesn't need to be playing and parents insisting others to do their work for them. I'm guessing you would only have to do this one time (cut a player for failing to meet fundraising responsibilities) and the statement would have a huge impact on others who also prefer to sit back and watch a few do the work of many.

Regardless of the sport, it's fun and interesting to occasionally play out-of-state teams to see how you fare against their best and what types of things they do similarly/differently.

Yep, and it is "accidents" that cause insurance companies great alarm, especially when the accident under consideration permanently maimed an individual. Traditions are important, but so is safety and the safety of operating this cannon is now under question. Let's face it - no one is saying these guys did anything wrong on their end. The cannon apparently malfunctioned and should be a major cause for concern . . . .

A bit off-topic, but Bank of Kentucky's policy not allowing re-entry for all-day events like this is just plain stupid.

Very impressive indeed. Congrats to both schools!

Guessing your insurance company will probably need to discuss a rate increase with you.

Dang. I was going to suggest that first. (Just covering all bases in case Highlands offers a huge reward to the person with the best idea for replacing the cannon).

Don't recall saying that. Let me go back and check my post . . . . . . . . . nope, didn't say nor imply that at all. But if the money is to be divided equally, then the work should be divided as equally as possible. If the parents can't/refuse to work, I'm sure there would be some way the player could volunteer extra time towards the event or even have other family members pinch-hit for the parents. Shame it has to come to it, but sometimes the coach (or his designee) may need to closely oversee such an event to ensure the work is being fairly divided and "encourage" those parents who would simply prefer to leave the work to others.

You haven't patented this line or anything, have you? I'd like to plagarize sometime down the road. :thumb:

Perhaps, if it is managed correctly, it will help facilitate volunteers working equally. But, I know what you mean, it tends to be the few who do most of the work for many. However, if your coach (or whomever) is allowing some parents to get away with not doing any volunteer work, your problem goes beyond how the IRS dictates that you handle the proceeds.

Sorry, I didn't know I was supposed to take some post(s) you made in another thread into consideration. I thought your point was that the media has greatly exaggerated the dire state of the economy in order to benefit their financial situation and that a recession possibly doesn't even exist. Bad planning, I guess, as I'm sure you would agree that their reporting has had the exact opposite effect on their profits. I wonder why there was not some other story - any story - that they could fabricate/embellish that would help sell newspapers/air time? (BTW, did all the media giants get together at some secret meeting to corordinate this made-up and overblown "bad economy/recession" story? :sssh:) And actually, it was not the media's premature reporting that we were in a recession that hastened the process along. It is been determined that we officially entered into this recession in December 2007, so they were actually extremely delinquent in reporting this story.

Yes, World War III does not seem like such an appealing idea.

I'm not an Obama fan. Far from it. But it's a bit early to condemn him for actions he hasn't taken yet. Stimulus spending is absolutely critical to get this economy going again. You can debate what the appropriate amount should be, but until he's in office and makes some horrific blunder that further prolongs or deepens the recession, the criticism seems premature. And, let's be honest, the reason you haven't seen spending like this proposed in your lifetime is because you haven't seen firsthand a recession of this magnitude in your lifetime. Media exaggerated or not . . .

Lee Evans is a great WR with an absolute turd at QB. Moore is an average WR with a stud for a QB. However, New Orleans going against a pathetic defense in Detroit and, given that they themselves have a pathetic defense, this game will likely turn into a shootout. So I would see Moore as the better option this week. Of course, I am very anti-Evans (actually I'm just more anti-Buffalo QB) right now given that he has killed me over the last month. When the heck was the last time Buffalo had a decent QB????

Gee, I hate to be defending CCH but . . . I don't think it's fair to say these players aren't some of the region's best simply because they haven't won a Regional championship. CCH made it to the 2007 Regional championship game and lost a close one to Ryle :thumb:, which you could hardly blame on these players given they were only sophomores at the time. Last year as juniors, these players were instrumental in helping CCH compile a pretty impressive regular season record and again advance to the Regional final, where they simply came up against a very hot pitcher. I doubt you'd find many baseball people who would not tell you that CCH is the clearcut 9th Region 2009 pre-season favorite, due in large part to these players.

I'm unclear. So which is the best way to help the economy recover from a recession - more government spending or less? You cannot tax your way out of a recession. If you raise taxes, you cause people to further curtail spending, and deepen the recession. The bottom-line is that you have to get money flowing through the economy again and you do this through government spending (and, yes, eventually this has to be paid for down the road with higher taxes) and reducing interest rates to encourage less saving by the consumer and more borrowing by companies to grow their businesses.

Got it. So the recession is an imaginary, media-created conspiracy designed for the purpose of selling more newspapers and increasing TV news viewership? I wonder how we'll explain that to the 2 million people that have become unemployed since the beginning of the recession? "Sorry, Mr. Worker, you weren't actually let go because your employer was struggling and/or your factory shut down. No, they're doing fine. It just made for more titillating news to help the Associated Press, Gannett Company, New York Times, News Corp, and other news/media organizations make millions of dollars." (Though oddly enough, it hasn't had this effect at all on their stock prices or profits. Bad plan these evil conglomerates hatched to make more money . . . . :devil:)

"Stimulus spending" includes many other government-sponsored expenditures on infrastructure in the economy, not just the rebates checks.

And that's what makes the world - and this board - so great.

Ok, that's a fair question, as long as you make your case for some players whose names you think should replace them. :thumb: But they're certainly legitimate nominees to start out this thread.