BigShow1

While calls can be missed and often it seems that too many are missed considering it is this late in the season and only the best crews should be officiating... Keep in mind that that is not the only call made in a game. I've seen a few games this year and I can tell you that that game was officiated poorly. But it was really bad AGAINST Stone most of the game. In fact, if the game is officiated evenly... that call would not have mattered because the game would have already been over. That is my honest opinion. Regardless of the merits of that call which might should not have been called and a travel would not have been called either since the ball was loose... That call was one of the few questionable calls against CHS and most questionable calls seemed to favor them the whole game.

Its true. Adam Kefauver from Sequoyah High School.

Usually the fans that are on message boards are the most passionate sports fans. Sports where competition and toughness are two of the most important characteristics. There is so much sensitivity here in this thread that was very complimentary of both players. I have no dog in the fight. I just looked at the statistics. Both teams played a tough schedule and I'd say being a private school and thus games like Christ School not counting towards the CoachT schedule did make a difference in the strength of schedule. But Stone has the number 1 schedule I think according to CoachT. Not perfect rating system but still a very tough schedule. Cole was guarding Lindsey when he was not able to get many looks. He defends really well. I just said that statistically there was no comparison although all those things Bradshaw does well no doubt. But considering writers can't see all the games I just assumed stats would figure a lot. And Cole's statistically has numbers that are very very rare. As in player that is going to Kentucky that won the AAA Mr. Tn Basketball award rare.. That is all I was saying Now please.. buckle your belt and stop being such a sissy and complaining about threads being negative or whatever.

Just curious when the voting takes place and is it from sportswriters? This is what I have heard. And do most of those sports writers come from Middle TN? Bradshaw is a great player and will enjoy another 4 years at the next level. He also has a teammate that is a top player in the nation and is on a great team. But so is Cole. The statistics do not compare. Cole averaged nearly 10 points more per game and like 7 more rebounds. He also played the toughest schedule. I'm just curious how this is all decided

The reality is you had two great teams that both have great players. Per size Cole is probably the best player in the state and there is no close competition. Its kind of crazy. I did not see the thrown punch, of course as usual the person that started it (CPA kid) was the one that got away with it. I kind of wish in college and elsewhere where they allow the officials to go to the monitors for flagrant fouls that they could go see what initiated the issue. I hope CPA and Stone fans do not begin to argue and fight over this game. I love both the CPA girls and guys team. Both are well coached and have solid and really good players. Stone does as well. It did originally sound like there was a post that said Cole had a better day due to 21 being out of the game. That is how I originally took it. But your post also pointed out that Cole is deserving of his accolades due to his not looking like a Mr. TN finalist. I have to agree with you on the eye test. But the reality is, 21 scored on off rebounds and not on position against Cole. He got outplayed. He also did not draw a charge on 12 like the official called. He earned I think every foul he had. Cole would have prob gotten his points regardless. We can leave it at that. And jerk can be said all you want but it is true that CPA and other private schools have a huge advantage even when not actively recruiting. Eventually all private schools will be taken and put into D2. But until then, I still enjoy watching players and teams that we would not normally see if these schools were not playing D1. I enjoyed watching CPA despite it being an unfair advantage. Lets keep it classy guys. Two good teams, two good coaches. some really good players.

It really is sad. These are the best referees too that are selected from each region from my understanding. The fact is bad calls are going to be made for sure but you are right there are not enough good officials for the state tournament. The only answer is to extend the tournament. There are probably 12 good officials there. But due to the amount of games it is impossible for them to officiate all the games. The Girls State championship was horribly called. CPA was on the wrong end of almost everything in that game. They still won but it was bad. When you have 3 back to back to back championship games, you have to have 9 good officials. Apparently that is too hard in the state of TN. Keep in mind too that it was LA that was fouling a lot and I believe the officials started calling everything both ways when it was in fact LA that was the culprit most of the time. Although you do point out some bad calls against LA

The man asked for matchups. I know that CPA has two Mr. TN finalists. I know they are predicted to win by most people by default since they are I believe the favorite to win the entire tournament. I do not know anything about their team though. Things to keep in mind: SMHS has never passed the eye test. They are not really big. But they are quicker than what a lot of people believe. Even #5 is quicker than most believe as he has added a drive and pull up jumper to his game this year. They have 2 great shooters and probably 3 other above average shooters. They also have a post that averages over 25 a game against competition that is just like that of CPA. He has done that against guys much larger and as athletic as CPA guys in the post. At this time of the year a lot comes down to making shots. If Stone makes shots, and takes care of the ball, and half way defends, they can beat anyone. But they do not have the same ability as CPA to just sky above you if they do not hit shots. My prediction: Stone in an upset based on what I saw yesterday. But no doubt this is probably the most exciting game of the week in the boys state tournament considering the differences in matchups and the 3 finalist for MR TN on the floor at the same time. Should be fun

Not a misprint... That is how they are doing it this year... I have no idea why of course... but that is how they are doing it... makes little sense

WC lost to Oakland by 19 during the season. Stone lost to them by 2. You still picked WC to beat STone. Just curious if there were injuries in that game or something that caused WC to struggle so much against Oakland?

The kid that missed the lay up looked distraught.. He knew he was not fouled. #30 got a walk called on him under the basket on an easy score where he was obviously bumped and one official was calling the bump but allowed the other official to make the walk call. He should have overruled and called the bump as he knew that what caused the "walk". Alcoa over plays and should obviously get more fouls called. #3 did not even seem distraught on that call where Rowan and Torino bumped... He looked almost like he knew he had done something wrong.. The officials could have called another Technical at the end and Jones could have gotten a T much earlier. I still don't know why there were offsetting Technicals called on #3 and #32 of Stone. 32 did not do anything. So anyone complaining about the officials are right.. They were awful for the girls championship(even worse than guys) and the boys championship... But to act as if Stone boys got the best calls.. is ignorant.

A girls assistant.. He was resting comfortably last I heard. Might have been a Gall Bladder now.. I'm not positive. Waiting myself. But thanks for your concern. We believe everything will be ok as far as I know

I am not familiar with all the rules that TSSAA has created in terms of limited off-season individual workouts for coaches. Based on my small amount of experience I would say probably breaking rules. But that is unfortunate. Its like being allowed to call a timeout just before a kicker trys to kick a field goal to win the game (the act of icing the kicker). Its legal, but a stupid rule to allow that. The negatives to allowing a coach to be paid/or not for offseason training: Coaches might make workouts "mandatory" and those students who play other sports or have families that do take vacations will miss. Another negative would be that some athletes will play for coaches that do not allow proper healing of the body (such as Dooley giving Tenn off on Mondays last couple weeks) as some coaches do not understand the healing process of the body as compared to most coaches in college who are well educated on these processes and usually do not over train athletes. Any negative that includes something to do with fairness such as, this person can afford offseason training and this family cannot it tough for me to include as I prefer Capitalism to Socialism in all aspects of society. The positives: They are infinite. Better training. students have better chances to get good coaching and be able to earn a college scholarship. students stay more healthy. Competitivness is improved among athletes. More Tenn athletes having success in sports like football where few currently are successful at the next level as compared to other states. more role modeling from coaches for athletes. Better pay for coaches already making less than 3 dollars an hour. More oppurtunity for good coaches to impact players lives and athletic abilities. More coaches will keep with the profession as they can make more money thus more good coaches getting into the profession to begin with. better prepared for the individual training that does take place at the next level thus fewer athletes quitting as they are now more prepared. Economics teaches us there are both cost and benefits. These benefits in my opinion outweigh all the costs. Lets change the rule if it does not allow more opportunity for choices and success.

Wondering if D2 is split from D1 in cross crountry? Since it is not like football/basketball/baseball do they compete all together with like track/field and cross-country thus rules for D1 apply for all? Either way once again.. school choice eliminates the need for rules that are well intentioned but have unfortunate consequences.

I just think it is sad that in America (what use to the the most free society in the world) an individual can not choose where he/she wants to be educated and play their prep athletic sports. Idealistic, realistic, whatever... Freedom is restricted. The most sad thing is that in this discussion the freedom to choose and make choices for one's own good has not even been brought up except my myself (and I apoligize if I missed someone). I just hate that citizens of our country are so far removed from the ideals of our founding fathers that no one can even consider that freedom is always the best choice in a society like we have in America. This freedom would establish a competitive market for schools to compete for students and athletes. Thus offering them the best education and athletics they can in an effort to get those students to attend their schools. Currently there is very little competition to do such a thing. Coaches who run practices like youth club practices and do not win for years and lose their jobs and we have people online writing and saying that because these coaches have been a part of the community for so long and are good people that they should be able to keep their job. Other coaches/teachers are not even considered to be replaced. In a competitive market coaches and teachers who are not successful would be let go and better coaches and teacher would emerge thus improving our secondary education and athletic institutions. I started this thread as an oppurtunity to show you that there would not need to be seperate divisions if we had this policy. In reality I have pushed for school choice for a while now and athletics had nothing to do with it. I just thought that this would be a good forum to look at it from yet another angle that is advantageous. Everyone keeps replying with how this is idealistic and in the real world could not work. It does in some countries already and what proof do you have that it doesn't with the exception of back in the day of Jim Crow laws, etc...? I know this would be the largest change our society has seen in years. But do you not think that our education system is worth it? Competition leads to greatness in every arena in America's capitalistic society. But how dare we allow it to affect our education system... is not the right attitude to have. I believe our education system is too vital to not allow capitalism boosts its production as it does every other walk of our life.

I've been away for a while and apparently we have everything but death threats happening in this post. This is quite funny. Again back to the original topic. My concern is that if a student has the ability to learn and to acheive at a sport, why should that student be forced to stay in a school if they really want to leave. If the parents pay taxes and the state does most of the funding, should a student not be able to choose where he/she attends school? This is for that player that wants to play for a Jody Wright, or now an Aaron Green, or coach blevins at Bearden but is stuck somewhere where the coach has no motivation to become better by reading and studying about the game. All I was concerned with is whether you believe it is right that a student who could earn a scholarship to get a college education should be allowed to maximize their efforts at pursuing this by allowing school choice so that that students could attend a school with better facilities, a great coach, and a chance to play competition that can get them ready for the next level. Is that not what school is about? I believe sports should be treated the same way.

I'm sorry your saying Greene should crawl away from Bruce Pearl as the video Coordinator/Assistant and possibly next in line assistant for Pearl or for Forbes(when he gets a head job) and go to Oak Ridge? By crawling? Jones has been an assistant there for a few years.

Are there not rules limiting how big classrooms can be now? I don't know what the difference is in large schools versus small schools when it comes to the classroom? A large school has more teachers and more classrooms but the classes have the same amount of students. If you think that you would not have gotten as good an education at a large school because of all the more kids you must believe that walking through larger more crowded hallways somehow affects the classroom. I doubt there is a lot of public education evidence in terms of small classrooms versus large classrooms IN CERTAIN SUBJECTS. In other words say a history class that is mostly a teacher centered taught subject. I dont' know that I would learn more from a lecture if there were 100 students in the class versus 25. Maybe for some subjects like math where you might need hands on help but not some subjects. Plus money would be saved and could be put to more teachers and resources if schools were larger and we did not have to build and operate lots of small schools. That is why I believe competition would lead to more larger schools but yet more resources at those schools.

Are you sure its open it isn't posted anywhere? Why did the job come open?

You sound like a very well informed person. But again while I do not know of every court case you have referred to. And while I'm sure you might be right that under the current Supreme Court they would probably use thier power to possibly outlaw the perfect school choice bill that I have given an example of. But we know that supreme courts are wrong many times as well. Constitutionally speaking again equal oppurtunity means not taken away from anyone on bases of gender, race, etc... Again from the original intent of the constitution (and hopefully we will soon have that original intent ideology dominate the Judicial Branch) equal oppurtunity does not grant everyone the right to anything but does not allow the congress to limit your access. Congress can't keep this person from going here due to race, gender, etc... Which is a great law. It does not say that anything that is government funded must be spoon fed to everyone if that person cannot drive themselves to the voting booth or to that school. Lets get back to topic away from the constitution. I'm not trying to push ideology on anyone just throwing some ideas around. Do you not agree that even the "weaker" schools would benefit in that the teachers there will work much harder even if their ultimate desire is to get hired at the larger school and make more money? As it currently is there is no motivation beyond inner heart morale to get schools to do everything they can to educate a person. I just have never in my life could have imagined the United States of America while outlawing a parents right to choose where their kid is educated, could argue it on the bases that A) Not everyone has great parents to keep their child's best interest at heart, that not every family will have the money or resources to drive their kid to school thus I don't think anyone should have that freedom, C) that because some people might abuse the system (coaches do everything they can to get a child to play for them) thus we should not allow the system. I don't know where I stand on the coaches having the ability to try and get a 14 year old to go to a specific high school as being a bad thing. Hey child let me show you our facilities, you know my knowledge and record as a coach. Here is our weightroom. Oh and Mom and Dad good to meet you let me introduce you to our dean of education and show you how good of an education your child will get here. I just don't see the harm in that. Yah some kids will have to deal with coaches pulling them in different directions and maybe not always with the best intentions.. but I just don't know if the negatives of that outweigh the positives. Economics is about weighing the good and the bad. And in this case maybe the good would be much better than the bad? Would you not agree?

lets back up a minute now. The walmart analogy was only used in reference to building bigger buildings. You questioned there not being enough room in the "good" schools and I said more funding due to more students equals more construction just like Supercenters. That is all that analogy was used for. The Constitution also says all things not covered in the Constitution would be taken care of by the States. Education is not a part of the U.S. Constitution and thus I would rather have more State involvement anyways. Now I would have to read the Tennessee Constitution to see from there. But your argument does not hold firm either in this regard. The Constitution now grants women and black people equal right to vote but they do not transport them to the vothing booth because there might be a higher percentage of them that do not own a car or something. The constitution side of the argument is way too far out there to try and say that because the government(tax payers) fund something like education that thus every child must be given transportation to any school of thier choosing. Just equal oppurtunity. Constitutionally this means that government can not stop you from doing so. For example there is not guaranteed freedom of speech. If there was children would sue when the teacher said stop talking. That is funny to even think about. The Constitution simply says the U.S. congress shall make no law restricting your freedom of speech. If anything one could argue that the Constitution should not restrict us from attending the school of our choosing. So I would stay away from the constitutional argument side of this. Lastly, I understand the recruiting of a 13 year old thing. What is great is that parents still have a say so in all these matters. Again I don't know that the recrutiting would become a huge problem. But I simply support an individuals right to choose if they want to play for Coach Wright at Fulton instead of Joe Somebody at a school that does not take it as serious. That sounds reasonable to me.

And now we get to the beautiful part. What happened to Walmart when more people kept shopping there and they became overcrowded and people started wanting groceries? SuperCenters. Today they are just called Walmart because all Walmarts are supercenters. Schools build on. They become crowded and the principals and the board of directors of that school are like now it is time to use this extra funding to build bigger schools. I am not agaisnt having a high school with 3000 students or 4000. In just a couple years many of those students will be going to colleges with 20,000 students. So bring on the concstruction. Then more kids will be able to attend. Poor parents are already having to send their children to bad schools in many cases. The point if you would read some of my posts(I know their long) is that all schools get better because those teachers that have little motivation to do good because they don't get pay increases, etc... will now be motivated to do better. Bad schools get better. And worse case scenerio, it gives some of those kids an oppurtunity that they currently do not have. Why would I stop hundreds of thousands of kids in Tennessee not be allowed to go to the school of thier choosing because some of the poor kids can't get transportation to the school of their choice? So you think that because this poor person can't get transportation there should be a government entity say no one can? You can't afford healthcare so Bill Gates can't get any either? people only think that way in regards to education. Why? The most important or one of the most important institutions in our nation and this is where we ask common sense questions that are addressed everyday in the business world. The world where America is greatest. I have to go workout now. My friend is rushing me!

I'm glad this has become a good dialogue. I love teaching. I'm a teacher myself. There are people in this line of work that work hard and many that do not. Teaching is an easy degree to get in college. It is tough though to be a good teacher. Bad teachers make the same amount as good teachers and thus there is less motivation to continue being a great teacher. I will always do my best no doubt but not everyone will. Whether we want to say it or not money motivates and I do not believe there is anything immoral about that. Money will motivate teachers too. You missed my point though. With competition (no zoning laws) schools have a reason to compete for students and thus they will look to hire the best teachers who can attract the most students thus raising their funding. Teachers who are good teachers will work there, more students (thus filling up schools that are not full yet) and those teachers will make more money. For example a good history teacher at a good school could teach classes of 70 students in a room much like freshmen would go to in college. That teacher could make, due to the extra funding with the more students coming to that school, say 50-60,000 dollars instead of the 35,000 they currently make. The money is there because the school is full now with more students and the money following the students. Other schools would pay less and the quality of education not as good as that school but the quality will be better than the already failing schools of today. Because those teachers are thinking: "I'm going to get better so that I can get to that bigger school one day." There would be fewer schools because some schools would fail and most schools would be larger but better schools. You act like teachers don't care about $ but teachers who get masters degrees 90% of the time are thinking about the extra few thousand not becoming a better teacher. Same thing with EDS degrees. Why do you think a lot of teachers want to become principals their last five years? Because retirement is based on your average salary your last few years. Money talks loud. Oh by the way... there is nothing wrong with doing something for money. You should love what you do. But most things that are all about money.. are usually ran pretty well and efficiently. Money motivates people whether you and I believe it moral or not. From the athletic standpoint once again the reason I bring this up is this. Choices and Freedom. If someone is against school choice they apparently do not like freedom. How is it American to tell a child and his/her parents they must attend this school in this zone and can not go anywhere else unless you want to go to a private school and pay for that while also paying taxes to pay for our government schools? Why not simple say: "Government is to help promote a better life for people. People can make better decisions than the government. You can choose where you want to attend school." Not everyone would take this oppurtunity. But is that any reason to not allow the oppurtunity to others?

I totally disagree. Teachers do not always give it their all that would be silly to say. I have been in classes and seen it for myself. There are great teachers out there that make the same as others who don't try. Go to NYC where they have the rubber room teachers that sit there and do paper work because they won't take a shower or teach but the Teacher Unions will defend their tenure and its more costly to fire and fight the lawsuit than to pay them for sitting in a room. So they have a building just for these teachers and pay them teacher salary while paying an actual teacher in the school too. Furthermore the amount of money spent per student in the U.S. I believe is over 10K and it is higher in many of our poorer schools. America spends more money per student on education than any other nation last time I looked. That is when every bit is taken into account. I know there is no perfect scenerio but competition breeds better things in every walk of life and people say it won't in education and athletics. Besides if a good teacher/coach could make 70K a year... don't you think some people who choose not to teach in order to do something that can make them more money might choose teaching/coaching. They might be really good at it too. Lastly all studies show this. School Choice would most help those people that most anti-choice people claim to look out for. Inner Schools and failing schools would benefit the most. There are some who go to those schools that do not have the resources to move out. But there are many who's parent would love to drive them 15 or 20 miles to go to a non-private school that functions better than the current school. If it is only 100 students out of 1000 that would benefit it would be worth it than to make all 1000 struggle. I have never understood how people can argue competition will only make something worse when our society is a testament to the contrary.

Unfortunatley to fully explain my desire in this post would take too much time and would be more reading than most would want to deal with. So if people reply with reasons they would be for or against this then I could reply and hopefully people will understand the need for this. With school choice in regards to athletics and academics, parents could send their child anywhere to school as we currently do in our colleges. One could call it a voucher program but government money would in essence be sent where the parent wanted their child to attend school. This would motivate our schools and our school athletic departments to hire the best teachers, best coaches, and even pay those who are better more than others in an effort to convince parents to send their child to the best school possible. This as we do now in college. No one argues whether American colleges are the best in the world most agree that ours are. But we grade far lower in our secondary schools. With this change we could eliminate the separation of private and public schools in regards to TSSAA because all schools could recruit as they do in college now. Athletes who want to be great at basketball will have more motivation to get better because every child will have the oppurtunity to play for a Jody Wright or a Rickey Norris or whoever they deem to be the best coach for them in the best system. Many today are less motivated being stuck at a school where they feel the coaching is lacking or athletics and more importantly academics are not taken seriously. Academically I and others have been pushing for school choice instead of being forced to go where you are zoned in for a while now. With this competition would increase. And competition is what motivates so much innovation and improvement in our lives to take place. I believe it would work with academics and athletics as well. This would make coaching more challenging but also more fun. The coaches that work the hardest and are the best would make more. Thus more coaches will work harder to earn this higher pay. This student athletes will become better players in the state. What objections would people have towards this?

I know this forum has changed to another subject but just in case a person was desiring to become a middle school coach I just did not want them to be confused. Middle School HEAD coaches can be non-faculty members if they desire to be. There is some misinformation in this post. I'm sure if you were really wanting to become a coach you could have looked it up yourself. But in the Bylaws move down to page 34 to read the rules for Middle School specific... I'll post the information that proves it.. TENNESSEE SECONDARY SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION BYLAWS OF THE TENNESSEE MIDDLE SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION (Unless otherwise specified in the statements which follow, rules and regulations of the Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association will apply to schools participating in the Middle School Athletic Association, with the exception of Article I, Sections 6, 9 and 10....... Article I, Section 9 deals with Coaches so thus the following is the seperate rule for Middle School coaches... RULE 10 – All coaches must be approved by the principal, superintendent, and/or local board of education. Any coach who is not a full-time employee of the school system and does not possess a teacher’s certificate or the equivalent or is not a retired educator must complete the TSSAA Online Coaches Training Session within his or her first year of assuming the position. A fine of $50.00 will be assessed to the school if the coach does complete the TSSAA Online Coaches Training Session and he or she will be required to complete the session immediately. All non-faculty coaches must complete the ASEP Coaches Education Program in a TSSAA-approved course within five years of assuming the position. Schools must submit the names of all non-faculty coaches to the state office each year. A school must pay an annual registration fee of $40.00 per coach. The maximum fee for a school to register non-faculty coaches will be $100.00 per year. Again I am a middle school head coach and I know a few coaches who follow under this guideline. I hope this clears it up and no one is confused by other people who keep getting on here and disputing it when I am a person who is a head coach only because of this rule...