BA vs. TSSAA Ruling In

[Bill#49]

Excellent post! I wish Ronnie would put a stop to the madness too. I want everyone back together. I think allowing everyone to recruit is only fair - seems like the magnets, open-zoners, transfer-friendly publics, and privates do benefit right now by not having fully closed zones. And the recruiting would even itself out with a merit system.

 

WOW, capital letters - sorry to the offend few, we see eye to eye on something.

[BDURHAM]

Recruiting cannot be allowed. Get real!

 

The coaches who sign to abide by the

rules have to follow the rules.

 

Do you break a law and then fight to

change the law in your trial? No, you

change the law before you break it.

If you break the rules, you are a cheater,

pure and simple.

 

Have coaches keep this oath, which they

basically do when they commit to being

members of the TSSAA:

 

"Raise your right hand. Do you swear

to follow the rules? Do you understand

that you cannot recruit? Do you intend to

break the rules?"

 

Ask these two questions of each coach,

"What rules do you want to change? Do

you think recruiting should be allowed?"

 

How many coaches will say they want to

recruit? My guess is less than 5%.

[sharptop]

It would be interesting to know if the members of the Supreme Court attended private,prep,catholic schools, public, etc... or if they sent their own children to private schools.

 

 

 

you know the supreme court will side with the privates. they went to private

school ,so did their children and grandchildren.

[tnsddeveloper]

The coaches who sign to abide by the

rules have to follow the rules.

 

Do you break a law and then fight to

change the law in your trial? No, you

change the law before you break it.

If you break the rules, you are a cheater,

pure and simple.

Uh, have you not been paying attention. BA didn't break the rules. The courts have found that the vague "rules" were just that ... vague. Being that, an implementation of the "undue influence" rule was too arbitrary and uninforcable - and inviolation of BA's right to free speech. My advice would be to lobby the TSSAA for more concrete rules than "undue influence". Have them spell it out literally if that is what it takes.

[tnsddeveloper]

you know the supreme court will side with the privates. they went to private

school ,so did their children and grandchildren.

I think your probably should read up on the SC justices profiles. They mostly attended private colleges and law schools ... but not high schools. They earn their positions with merit and having a private school high school education doesn't mean much once you get into Yale Law School.

[BDURHAM]

Is this what BA did, lobby the TSSAA?

 

Did BA pick up the phone and ask for

an interpretation of "undue influence?"

 

Or should BA simply be able to do what they

want to do, and to heck with the rules?

 

And as you're pondering your omnipotent response,

please tell us what was Carlton Flatt's state of mind

as he sent out the letters and gave away the tickets.

 

 

 

Uh, have you not been paying attention. BA didn't break the rules. The courts have found that the vague "rules" were just that ... vague. Being that, an implementation of the "undue influence" rule was too arbitrary and uninforcable - and inviolation of BA's right to free speech. My advice would be to lobby the TSSAA for more concrete rules than "undue influence". Have them spell it out literally if that is what it takes.

[lazarus]

"Recruiting cannot be allowed. Get real!"

 

why not?

 

"My advice would be to lobby the TSSAA for more concrete rules than "undue influence". Have them spell it out literally if that is what it takes."

 

ah, the first step towards a thousand pages of specific rules which would still be circumvented.

 

"an interesting fact about the SC ruling was that it was a 5-4 outcome, with lines split evenly down liberal (for) and conservative (against) lines"

 

i have always found the definition of irony a little tough to meet. however, the particular posters on here who are applauding the decision of the court liberals establishing the control of the courts over high school sports has to qualify.

it may not be "irony" but it sures fits "it depends on whose ox is getting gored".

maybe the courts can rule on playing time next?

 

 

"to say this is like bonds and steroids is stupid."

 

i have to disagree. i would say it is exactly like bonds and steroids.

i have seen no concrete proof that bonds used steroids, but i cannot ignore what i see with my own eyes.

i have seen no concrete proof that BA sought out athletes and recruited them. but i cannot ignore what i see with my own eyes.

[tnsddeveloper]

Is this what BA did, lobby the TSSAA?

 

Did BA pick up the phone and ask for

an interpretation of "undue influence?"

 

Or should BA simply be able to do what they

want to do, and to heck with the rules?

 

And as you're pondering your omnipotent response,

please tell us what was Carlton Flatt's state of mind

as he sent out the letters and gave away the tickets.

Let's see. The kids had already signed paperwork to attend the school. They were going to attend the school. Where is the undue influence? Why in world would they call to have that reviewed? Do you call your wife and ask her if it is OK for you to burp?

 

Look, people WAY smarter than you and me have ruled that the "undue influence" rule was vague and basically uninforcable since it would be applied arbitrarily due to its vagueness. Why is this hard to understand?

[KCHSCoach]

Bottom line T$$AA should cut its loses and put everything back the way it was, and come up with a better system and some rules it can fairly enforce, or I believe the state legislature will step in and who knows what we will get.

[commander1]

"Recruiting cannot be allowed. Get real!"

 

why not?

 

"My advice would be to lobby the TSSAA for more concrete rules than "undue influence". Have them spell it out literally if that is what it takes."

 

ah, the first step towards a thousand pages of specific rules which would still be circumvented.

 

"an interesting fact about the SC ruling was that it was a 5-4 outcome, with lines split evenly down liberal (for) and conservative (against) lines"

 

i have always found the definition of irony a little tough to meet. however, the particular posters on here who are applauding the decision of the court liberals establishing the control of the courts over high school sports has to qualify.

it may not be "irony" but it sures fits "it depends on whose ox is getting gored".

maybe the courts can rule on playing time next?

"to say this is like bonds and steroids is stupid."

 

i have to disagree. i would say it is exactly like bonds and steroids.

i have seen no concrete proof that bonds used steroids, but i cannot ignore what i see with my own eyes.

i have seen no concrete proof that BA sought out athletes and recruited them. but i cannot ignore what i see with my own eyes.

If you read my whole post on the bonds and steriods post you will see I said you COULD see the difference in bonds... what do you see with BA ... NOTHING. Just accusations not proof. What the TSSAA accused them of is NOT a violation of anything. If you see something more please enlighten us because the TSSAA and all it's high paid lawyers couldn't find it.

[lazarus]

"what do you see with BA ... NOTHING."

 

that's funny,

i see size, speed, athleticism far beyond any other school of remotely similar size.

 

my kid went to a small D-II private.

i have seen what just falls into your lap.

 

i see just what i see with bonds.

something that doesnt "just happen".

[tnsddeveloper]

my kid went to a small D-II private.

i have seen what just falls into your lap.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about Alcoa, Maryville, Riverdale, Hillsboro, and Shelbyville. Funny how things work out for them.