rollredroll

Well, no doubt it was a late hit, a cheap shot. The EHS broadcast crew deemed it "low class", but I did find some of their own commentary rather interesting and hypocritical: http://deadspin.com/coach-ejected-and-suspended-for-title-game-after-late-h-1470310849 0:10 second mark: Derisive laugh 0:48-0:51: "Have fun playing at UT, bud. Have fun losing." 0:54-1:00: "Have fun losing, buddy. That's all I am going to say to you. Bye, Bye. Have fun playing in Rocky Top. What low class." (As if we didn't get the message 10 seconds earlier?) Class manifests itself in actions and words. Pot and Kettle need to take that into consideration; they're young, they will learn. They also may have forgotten that they were inadvertently but effectively taking some digs at some former EHS players (Carter and Richardson, if not more) who play at UT. As for the post-game confrontation with the official, if Bowers's ejection/suspension from the next game is not overturned, it will be an injustice, at least based on what we could see/hear from the Fox news clip. I would appeal, sue, do whatever; that official overstepped his bounds in my opinion (and conveniently walked away like a wussy, or some derivation of that word.)

You can find them at the Internet Archive (link below). If you type in rebelsnation.com, it will take you to various years with cached pages that you can access. You have to be creative and resourceful navigating cached pages, as some icons don't show up and you have to hover over empty spaces to see where the links will take you. https://archive.org/ This link specifically should take you to all of those pictures (I can see them): https://web.archive.org/web/20071013124827/http://rebelsnation.com/Timeline.html

Whether it's a game between two in-state schools or two schools from different states, you get what you get with the stripes. Some take their jobs seriously; some want to just get their rears home and salvage what's left of a weekend night after what is likely a 40+ hour week doing a day job as well as a Friday night gig. Biases exist everywhere - we're all leery when our team goes to another city or another state. Usually there is some sense of consolation in knowing that, with what are usually home-and-home series, the forces that may be working against you in one season are reversed in the other season of that series. An unnamed Kentucky school came to Tennessee in 2005. Trailing 17-13 late in the 4th, the Kentucky school embarked on what could have been a game-winning drive when a bank of lights went out on one side of the field (just one bank; the bank on the opposite sideline was on and provided more than ample light given the circumstances). While it was darker on that side of the field, and it was that end of the field towards which the Kentucky team was driving, to say that visibility affected that final drive would be a stretch. If any school was at a disadvantage, it was the Tennessee team - it was on defense and didn't have the benefit of knowing where the ball was heading. Long story short, the Kentucky team lost, and conspiracy theories were rampant on the Kentucky boards about the Tennessee school disabling that bank of lights intentionally (a total crock of a theory). Nevertheless, the complaints can go both ways. For what it's worth, that same Tennessee team went to Kentucky the following year for the return game and won a similarly tight game by 2 points, but certainly there could have been concern that the perceived shaft from 2005 may have been returned by the Kentucky school/refs, but it wasn't. Tennessee went 19-11 versus Kentucky this year - 8-5 (.615 winning percentage) in Tennessee and 11-6 in Kentucky (.647). We had some of our top teams play their top teams (and both won in each other's states), we had bottom feeders play their bottom feeders, and we had some mismatches both ways. Bottom line, the refs are going to play a role in some outcomes, but on the whole, the game is going to be decided by the players and teams and which ones are the better ones. I don't want to diminish the feelings of Blackman fans; I wouldn't be happy either. You played a heckuva game on the road and still overcame a ton of tough breaks enough where a win was ever so close in hand. When 2014 comes around, you'll have home field advantage and Tennessee officials. My hope would be that you get dedicated officials and play hard and motivated enough that the outcome will be decided by the play on the field. I know that's not much consolation this year, but channeled, motivated revenge can be powerful.

If the Bowling Green fans are saying that, that is somewhat amusing. Before playing McCallie this year, I can't see a game Bowling Green has played against a Tennessee school since at least before the 1998 season...that's 15 seasons between 1998-2012 of not even playing a Tennessee school. It's very easy not to lose to a school from another state when one doesn't play a school from another state! I've read a lot of rhetoric on the Kentucky boards over the years about Tennessee cancelling the original All-Star Game series with Kentucky because Tennessee was "tired of losing to Kentucky" when Kentucky won five of the last six games to cut Tennessee's series lead from 14-4 to 15-9. The truth of the matter was that the better players from both states started foregoing the game for fear of injury, thus diminishing somewhat the powerhouse rosters each state had (especially in the '80s and '90s), and it was essentially mutually agreed upon to end the series. It is worth noting that since 2006, when the players from that season played in the last All-Star game the next summer in 2007, Tennessee schools lead head-to-head games with Kentucky schools by a 109-72 margin. Even a lesser prestigious all-star game between the two states (National Guard Border Bowl) emerged in 2008, and Tennessee is up 4-2 in that series. Maybe we should quit all future Kentucky games, regular season and all-star games alike, since we're eking out wins (tongue firmly planted in cheek.) With all that said, I like reading the Kentucky message boards and their fans in general. They fight with each other like we do, but they are much more civil with each other than we are, and they seem to be a tad bit humbler in victory and gracious in defeat. I love our state and this message board, but we could take a lesson or two from our neighbors to the north about more civilized banter. To the game, it should be a great one. I watched some of the McCallie-Bowling Green game, and BGHS seemed pretty skilled and fast, but they had to rally late to win in what was a tight game the whole night. BGHS has momentum (win streak) and home field advantage, but Blackman certainly has the defense to keep them somewhat in check. Obviously, the Blackman offense has to be a bit better this week than last to keep pace. Go Blackman/Tennessee!

Pre-game speech from 1980 US-USSR hockey game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwpTj_Z9v-c

It is worth noting on Sonny Moore's ratings that he himself states "Only games played against the teams in the ratings are used to formulate the power ratings", meaning that out-of-state games don't factor into a Tennessee team's strength of schedule (the W or L counts, but the SOS does not). As an example, take 2009. MUS was largely considered by any neutral party to be the state's best team that year (let's just go with it for argument's sake, even if you disagree) - nationally ranked in all of the polls and in the top 10 of many of those. One of the wins in MUS's 13-0 season was a win over South Panola (MS), who was on the heels of winning 76 of its last 77 games and would go on to a 14-1 record and win Mississippi's state title in its largest classification. One of the national ratings services had MUS #1 overall in TN and with a #11 SOS in TN; another national ratings service had MUS #1 in TN and with a #5 SOS in TN. However, Sonny Moore's Tennessee-only ratings had MUS's SOS at #30 in the state because of the absence of the South Panola game in its SOS. As such, MUS finished #2 in Sonny Moore's ratings that year behind 6A champ White Station (13-2), despite the fact that MUS beat White Station head-to-head that year by 20 on the field (55-35). Just thought the lack of an out-of-state game SOS factor in Sonny Moore's ratings is worth noting; it is NOT an attempt to diminish or discredit any school's, private or public, current or past ratings in Sonny Moore's ratings. Given the number of out-of-state games played each year (70 thus far this year), the excluding of out-of-state games has a domino effect on many teams in Tennessee, meaning the ratings could equally underrate or overrate a TN team, private or public (and therefore that's teams in-state opponents as well), based on how weak or strong that out-of-state opponent played was.

I noticed, and even watched some of the game (I had MBA-BA, McCallie-Bowling Green, MUS-South Panola, and Ensworth-Father Ryan on at one time on four tabs; the fact that it was hard enough to find a HS game on the radio 15 years ago and yet one can find streaming games with relative ease now is flat-out amzaing). I'm not sure if South Panola is as good as they were in those years when they were in the midst of that streak when they lost only twice - once to MUS - over the course of 100+ games, but they are still pretty good and fill out their uniforms rather impressively with some big boys and good talent. South Panola has and will beat many teams with its personnel, but the MUSs of the world are better-equipped than most if not all of South Panola's opponents to neutralize them somewhat with coaching and schemes.

Frankly, I haven't understood the undertone of your messages since you started denigrating the National Merit Scholarship Corporation several weeks back (http://www.coacht.com/boards/index.php/topic/232700-best-coach-in-dii/?p=2988896). You seem on top of things in general, but I remain baffled as to how you could infer, with a straight face, that an abundance of National Merit Semifinalists at a school but a lack of Presidential Scholars at the same school somehow indicates a chink in the armor of the school's academic program. I don't know if the number of MBA and Harpeth Hall alums with kids at EHS is "growing". Given that not a single EHS parent is an alum of the high school, the parents naturally have to come from somewhere else. It would make sense that the number would grow at some point when starting from a zero base, but to say it is continually growing, I'd have to see some hard data to believe that. If you know the high schools backgrounds of the parents of the three schools as you purport, and matriculation patterns in general, in the spirit of transparency, you could at least acknowledge to this board a fairly significant exodus of 6th graders from EMS last year to rival schools, as well as the fact that both MBA's and Harpeth Hall's athletic teams, not to mention their student bodies in general, are still littered with legacy children (I, too, don't believe in mentioning names on a website, but look at the rosters on those schools' websites - it's all there in plain view for anyone with knowledge of the children's parents. Heck, the name of one of the kids alone at the very top of one of those MBA rosters tells me that family ties don't mean everything in terms of where parents choose to send their kids.) Nevertheless, if the number is indeed growing, then I would surmise that there must be some sense of pride amongst those MBA and Harpeth Hall alums that their presence at the new school is contributing to the cachet of EHS - an ironic concept in all of this vitriolic banter. I have grown tired of "the rivalry", and it has nothing to do with who wins or loses on whichever of the dozens of athletic fields/courts or who performs better on standardized tests or college applications. I still care about those things, but the fights aren't fair anymore. The individual cases made are generally one-sided and shortsighted. Most of us are too old to be participating in such petty jabbing of one another's schools. As TFF said in The Tennessean article a few weeks back, choices are needed in the community, and there is a role for single-sex schools and co-ed schools. We should listen to this successful man; he's built a viable, attractive alternative for high school students in Nashville, and he seemingly got the educational pedigree to do it in part from somewhere that must be pretty decent itself.

I'd be shocked if Ensworth is not ready to play and be in a good position to win. Whether you support Maryville or MBA, Millington or Middle Tennessee Christian, or any school in between, this is Tennessee versus Kentucky. Get behind your home state team. I don't understand why anyone would want an out-of-state team to beat one of our own, regardless of our opinions of or feelings towards a particular school. Get 'em, Tigers.

There was a John Griffin who was drafted by the Rams in 1963. He played at Nashville East and Memphis State.

The first post in this thread was from a fan not only showing support for his school but also, and more noticeably, extending support for a bitter rival. And how was that response met? With a verbal jab from a poster who supports that bitter rival who joined the site yesterday just to antagonize and bring up dirty laundry (and whose first post was duly deleted by CoachT - e-mail CoachT if you want the details of what was deleted; as a father, I don't think you would have been proud if your son made such a post). Let's not forget the side of the ledger from which the "diminishing" began. One "in search of truth" would know that not having "gentleman" in a boy/man's school motto shouldn't preclude that boy/man from striving to be one. Why you chose to give the first ungentlemanly response a pass but attack the second one seems a tad hypocritical in such a discussion of how a man comports himself. The first post in this thread had the potential to engender some positive discussion but quickly degenerated into a glass house from which we throw our stones - another shining example of how low these boards have sunk.

I haven't looked wide and far, but the one comment I've seen on one of the KY boards certainly was respectful: "We've got a really good Tennessee team coming in next week. Tonight's game should help us get ready." http://bluegrassprep...tml#post4410143

The name of the store is Tennessee Sports Fan, but even with all that time, I'm not sure you'd want to waste it in that mass of humanity. MF's website has a listing of places where it is sold. Some of those locations look like they may be more convenient.

I bought it at a (very inconvenient) Sudden Service gas station on Nolensville Road heading away from downtown and past Old Hickory Boulevard. Opry Mills has it, but the line just to get on the grounds was a 1/4 mile off the exit ramp when I went, so I ditched it. I'd recommend the mailing option if neither are close and you live in Nashville.

I found this publication 15 years ago in a convenience store in rural East Tennessee while on the way to a golf trip. At $7, it was the best entertainment I could have bought for downtime on the trip. I have been buying it ever since, save for 2011, when the demise of Borders made getting convenient access to it nearly impossible in Nashville. If Murphy has extra copies, I'd get one. On that note, I really wish some more Nashville locations would be added to the distribution list; I had to drive an arm and a leg to get one this year, and that at a store that wasn't actively displaying it. I just happened to notice a stack of copies behind the counter - it was the traditional thickness/binding that gave it away, as they were sitting face down on the counter. I see criticisms of the book on other threads. Sure, it has mistakes, but what doesn't - scores get reported incorrectly on websites, in newspapers, on TV, etc., every Friday/Saturday. It's a great bang for the buck even with the difficult editing process. To all, here's to a bicker-free 2012 season...let's avoid the in-fighting and peeing contests with others about Division supremacy. These boards need a jump-start, as too much of the bickering and childish retorts have seemingly diminished user input. This game is too exciting to be trivialized by some of the commentary on here. I know my mouth will stay shut...until it is pried open, of course.

2007 Patrick Willis (Hollow Rock-Bruceton) at 11th Justin Harrell (Westview) at 16th

To be clear: The link I posted was not intended to highlight a Maryville bashing thread. The link was to one post in particular in that thread (click it again and see where it lands) that talked about CAK and KCHS “manning up†by playing in DI, which, to a tee, was exactly what was referenced earlier in this thread (and posted days before the linked post) about how some people have no clue about financial aid. The post/link I made neither had nothing negative to say about Maryville (in fact, it didn’t have anything at all to say about Maryville), nor did it weigh in on which team/coach was better in my eyes or anyone else’s. I was jumped as if it did, though. For me, my only remaining issue is the whole double standard about national polls/ratings. We’ve been this route before – if a DII school is alone, or ranked/rated higher, in a national poll/system, then it’s open season on questioning the validity of those polls/ratings – but put the shoe on the other foot and it’s “disrespectful†to question the same rankings/ratings. The MUS/Alcoa threads from late 2009 will indisputably show this is the case, and that’s just one example. The takeaway is this – not one side in these debates, whether it’s a team side and/or Division side, has the market cornered on taking swipes. For all of the concern about facts, it’s all right there for the viewing with a simple search, and I don’t see how any unbiased person would dispute that it occurs both ways. Heck, just look at the last sentence you posted – is that not exactly representative of the “imaginary football league†issue you have taken exception to in the past? Honestly, it really hasn’t taken much restraint for me not to post this year. The whole annual debate just doesn’t bother me anymore. It’s driven by bias, there are no winners and losers, and, in the big picture, it’s just not worth it. If I had one issue this year, and to call it an issue would even be a stretch – a curiosity may be the better term – it’s a lack of understanding of the “relative lack of talent†rallying cry. Honest question – is there really any regular opponent, other than Alcoa (so that also excludes the occasional Melrose that shows up in the playoffs), that actually has had more talent over the last ten years than MHS? I know this year’s QB and C are going to UNC and Clemson. The TE from a few years ago was a freshman All-American at UT and potential All-American at Alabama this year before the offseason tragedy. There was a RB a few years before that who was a starter at Auburn, and a QB who signed with South Carolina around the same time. And that’s just to name a few. I’m sure there’s a resource to track DI signees, but William Blount and Heritage have not had remotely close to the signees that MHS has had, nor has West or Lenoir City. I can think of a couple of high-profile signees from Catholic (to ND and UT) and one or two from Farragut and Bearden (both to UT), but I just don’t get the “he’s a great coach and would be greater if he had more talent†argument. Throw in the teams in the region/district from the 4A days and it’s still the same question. No unbiased person would dispute he’s a great coach, but, in my humble opinion, a “he’s a great coach, but he has been blessed with good athletes†approach would carry much more goodwill weight, especially with those in MHS’s region. It’s not a sin or indicative of anything sinister to have good athletes in the school.

As I hope you have noted, I stayed out of any arguments this season. I don’t like them, even if not involved with them, but it’s the same story/fight, just different players in some instances. It’s just going to take additional restraint each year to minimize it, although it seems there is no shortage of new people to join the fray. My New Year’s wish for all is to take a higher road. It can be done, and I have the ulcer to prove it. That poster is a new poster. I don’t know his affiliation, but to be consistent, since in general we’re not giving much credibility to new posters on their assessment of talent between two teams, we probably should do the same with him. Frankly, if they closed the thread, I’d prefer it. My opinion on this matter – and remember, this thread is only a discussion of financial aid, not of who is the better team, coach, etc. – is that it is pitiful that people generally (not exclusively) only care about financial aid if it’s an “athlete†getting. If the Chess Team captain gets it, who cares, right? That’s a sad commentary on what people make priorities in life, although I’d like to and do think that the virtual message board world is perhaps a bit crueler than the real world. As I said earlier, high school athletics exist because the schools exist, not the other way around. Similarly, Division II exists because financial exists, not the other way around. For anyone to say that CAK and Knoxville Catholic are “manning up†by playing in DI is illogically beyond words. I am 100% certain that are posts on this site from fans of at least two DI schools (CPA and CAK) that depict that their schools’ financial situation (not coincidentally, these are two schools less than 20 years old that are not financed by large benefactors) dictates where they play in the TSSAA. The TSSAA is not dictating how much financial aid they give. Drop athletics at either of those schools and financial aid doesn’t go up a dime; if anything, it goes down, as there is less athletic gate revenue and the schools are less competitive in overall attractiveness (less interest, fewer applications, lower tuition revenue, etc.). The quality of team/coach arguments, I am staying out of, but I have not heard a good reason as to why people are less concerned about non-“athletes†that receive aid. Does their lack of impact on the rings and trophies make them worth less consideration in life? Has anyone on this site ever complained that their public school lost out on a great “student†because a private school gave kid aid? My guess is that if a certain ACC-bound QB played at a private school this year instead of the public school he played for (and won a second state title for), there would be more of an uproar about the school losing the QB to the private school, although the rest of the story is that the public school also would have lost out on a kid who made a perfect 36 on the ACT.

Like clockwork, another new arrow for the quiver right here.

Of the individuals on financial aid at a certain school, 100% of those individuals are students. Per your question, is a kid on aid who plays football and also is a National Merit Finalist labeled as an "athlete" or "student" for classification purposes? Or both? The fact of the matter is that some kids on aid play sports. Some of those are great athletes and not-as-great in the classroom. Some of those are great in the classroom and not-as-great in athletics. And then there are the kids who don't play sports - kids who debate, sing in the chorus, etc. And in some cases, there are the kids who plays sports and do those non-athletic extracurriculars as well. What's sad is many people on these boards who have issues with financial aid, and I'd say 99+% of those frequent the DI boards far more than the DII boards, only have an issue about financial aid as it relates to athletics, as if superiority in athletics is some sort of measure of manliness or self-worth. How many times have we read the rhetorical question to the effect, "Would my kid get financial aid at a school if he played in the band?" There are many kids at private schools across the state who are on aid who just play in the band, debate, etc., but the average anti-DII person doesn't give a mierda about that fact. Even worse, that same average anti-DII person doesn't care if the non-athletic, National Merit Finalist valedictorian on aid at a private school is keeping the public school for which he/she is zoned from having another shining example on the academic ledger of said public school. Of the million+ posts on this site, if there are 10 in which someone is complaining that his/her public school lost out on a National Merit Finalist because a private school offered/gave aid to the kid, I'd be shocked. I think this is one reason why DII boards have dwindled in posts, as many of us are put off by the athletics-rule-everything mentality that has been witnessed quite often. High school athletics exist because schools exist, not the other way around. Guidestar.org proivdes tax returns for many private schools, although the church-based schools generally are not as held to the same level of public accountability. You can see general financial information there but not student-specific info, although I do recall seeing a couple of returns 10 or so years ago that had individual grants listed. As it relates to athletics, that information should not be available to anyone but the school and the TSSAA.

I think you need to make up your mind as to where you attend school. Go to: Post That, With All Due Respect, Really Discredits You

On this post, you deem yourself a Milan student. Your post above also would seem to contradict the title of the thread you started. Sincerely, Sybil (Those old enough will understand that reference.)

I probably am not alone in seeing the irony of this response, given that, by (1) pointing out one school’s administrative issues, (2) focusing on the legal entanglements of another school’s alumni, and (3) making an inference to a third school’s short existence as a reason to exclude it in a discussion of the merits of one school versus another – all with an underlying implication that the fourth school in the discussion has not been subject to any of these dynamics, past or present – you are participating in the same comparison and effectively making a similar proclamation of superiority that you yourself have deemed so “classlessâ€. Personally, I’d recommend waiting before deciding to respond with the requisite flame to this response. I have a hunch that plenty of people will take you to task far worse than this.

While perhaps not Exhibit A, this thread is indicative of the degeneration of many Division II discussions the past year or so and why some posters have abandoned engaging in any discussions lest they be ridiculed, threatened, etc. So, with that said as I dip my bloody toe into the shark-infested waters… Was the original post politically correct, nice, etc.? No (and while it was rightfully removed, it is not automatically removed when it is quoted in a response, so perhaps a flag waver needs to inform a moderator to edit that quoted post to remove any evidence of it ). It would probably be unfairly dismissive to call this much ado about nothing – it is treading on some unpleasant territory – but let’s get real, folks. Civil torts? Legal council [sic]? I guess stranger things have happened, but if that’s the case, then our court systems all across the country better get ready for a flood of conceivable (yet equally frivolous) lawsuits and overbooked dockets for all of these electronic slams that occur by the thousands every day on message boards, newspaper sites, etc., which is the last thing we need. We need the court system available for the murderers and other vile transgressors of the world. And Lindsay Lohan (counsel has informed me that I am in the clear on that one). Simon Says sayssimon asked a legitimate question (and yes, I know he is a “newbie†who made his “first post ever†and must be “a closet [insert school] fan lurking under another screen name who deflects attention from his own problemsâ€, but the CoachT IP Tracking Team will readily tell you it’s not me). As the father of a teenage girl, it’s hard not to keep up with Justin Bieber. And for those not in the know, he has a presumably worthless paternity suit being dangled in front of him from a seemingly groundless fame/money seeker. His advisors have responded with a “we’re going to sue her for defamation…â€. Could he sue? Sure. Will he? Maybe; likely not. Hopefully The Biebs and his advisors have Googled the phrase “squeeze blood from a turnip†first. And yes, I myself have already Googled “it’s not about the money; it’s about the principleâ€. I get it. As standard protocol, I now have opened myself up to the personal attacks that are sure to ensue, and the ironic validation of such when it does. I can take it (I’m a sarcastic son of a gun and am reminded by the Mrs. often about it). And, for bringing a Shakespearean, Lohanean, and Bieberean reference into one post, I probably deserve some blame for the aforementioned “degenerationâ€. But, have at it. I know lawyers, too (he said as he pounded his chest). It may not matter, though, because if all of these David vs. Goliath lawsuits go forward, then those are signs of the apocalypse that spell doom for us all. (And for those of you without a trace of a sense of humor or understanding of what’s really important in life, put them on your Christmas list. These boards and this world need more.)