CPA beats JPII by 50?

[90warrior]

yert!

[DAD1]

You beat CPA and the state champions? Then obviously you are cheaters!

[DougS]

why can't we all just get along! it's freaking xmas people! what would jesus do?

first Jesus would not say "freaking". and it's NOT "Xmas".. It is CHRISTMAS

[DougS]

I'm off the boards until after christmas. Looking forward to some good basketball in the upcoming week and look forward to sharing with everyone. To my CPA fans, good luck on your tournament and i hope you guys win the Arbys Classic! 90' i will see you soon!!!!

@Fanatic. Merry Christmas. Be safe. I am still praying for you.

[matt610]

You presume too much sir, BA is not dirty. They are Div II which allows them to give scholarships, i have no issue with this school whatsoever. Now CPA on the other hand is a different animal, they play Div I where you are not allowed to recruit players. They choose to play in Div I to enable their teams to have a decided advantage at winning state championships. CPA is very good in mens basketball but would not win nearly as much in the other sports, i.e. golf, volleyball, womens basketball, softball, baseball etc.. if they had to compete against the BA's, Ensworth's, MBA's of the world. So i don't have an issue with BA at all so lets make sure we understand each other here

lol. So much of this is so off-base I don't even know where to begin.

[90warrior]

first Jesus would not say "freaking". and it's NOT "Xmas".. It is CHRISTMAS

jesus would not judge either dougy.

[DougS]

jesus would not judge either dougy.

Actually Jesus did judge the Pharisees and Sadducees.  He often called them hypocrites and vipers.  He judged those that were claimed to knew the Truth but did not live by or actually know the Truth. 

 

Jesus told us in Matthew 7:1-2 , "[1]Judge not, that you be not judged. [2]For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you."

[kbrks]

The contact you have described with your son is not cheating...

 

devilfanatic states “I was approached by supporters of the school to gage my interest in bringing him there to play…â€

 

One of the TSSAA rule states – “Athletic recruiting is the use of influence on a student or the parents or guardians of a student, by any person(s) directly or indirectly associated with the school, to secure or retain a student for athletic purposes.â€

 

When one reads the entire section of recruiting and follows the train of thought about what is allowed and what is not allowed, how can anyone conclude that what happened to devilfanatic is not a recruiting violation?  How can anyone who reads the rules believe that anyone (based on the example like DF provided) can approach a family to talk about whether they would be interested in attending a school?  Read the rules – when it comes to athletes, the idea promoted is that any contact is to be initiated by the parents who may have an interest or desire to find information about the school through very limited approved avenues such as admissions office or school open houses.  When it comes to coaches the language is very strict as they are instructed to avoid even “the appearance of impropriety.â€

 

The problem with this discussion has always been the majority of people are going to believe what they want to believe regardless of facts.  Plenty of examples have been provided when this topic has been broached, but as is the case with the DF example, they are immediately dismissed, ignored or attacked.  Until the TSSAA proves a violation has been committed certain people will not be satisfied.  Of course if one is truly interested in truth, facts, honesty, logic, etc., what the TSSAA proves does not have anything to do with whether violations have actually occurred or not no matter how often people use that as their battle cry. 

[IceCreamMan]

devilfanatic states “I was approached by supporters of the school to gage my interest in bringing him there to play…â€

 

One of the TSSAA rule states – “Athletic recruiting is the use of influence on a student or the parents or guardians of a student, by any person(s) directly or indirectly associated with the school, to secure or retain a student for athletic purposes.â€

 

When one reads the entire section of recruiting and follows the train of thought about what is allowed and what is not allowed, how can anyone conclude that what happened to devilfanatic is not a recruiting violation?  How can anyone who reads the rules believe that anyone (based on the example like DF provided) can approach a family to talk about whether they would be interested in attending a school?  Read the rules – when it comes to athletes, the idea promoted is that any contact is to be initiated by the parents who may have an interest or desire to find information about the school through very limited approved avenues such as admissions office or school open houses.  When it comes to coaches the language is very strict as they are instructed to avoid even “the appearance of impropriety.â€

 

The problem with this discussion has always been the majority of people are going to believe what they want to believe regardless of facts.  Plenty of examples have been provided when this topic has been broached, but as is the case with the DF example, they are immediately dismissed, ignored or attacked.  Until the TSSAA proves a violation has been committed certain people will not be satisfied.  Of course if one is truly interested in truth, facts, honesty, logic, etc., what the TSSAA proves does not have anything to do with whether violations have actually occurred or not no matter how often people use that as their battle cry. 

 

Then prove that what DF alleges is true.  Just as he accuses, I say he lies for his own benefit.

[kbrks]

Then prove that what DF alleges is true.  Just as he accuses, I say he lies for his own benefit.

 

That is an entirely different subject altogether.  If it was the topic, I don't view it as my responsibility to prove what DF (or should I now say UCSportsFan) says is true or not unless I have specific information related to it.  Of course since you posted "he lies" I would think you have that type of information especially when you thought he "falsely accused CPA of cheating and recruiting" and obviously don't agree with the type of approach.  If you don't have the information then you have done nothing more than be guilty of what you accuse someone else of doing (even though he gave an example, so in reality it is not the same).  Off the top of my head I can think of a couple of Scriptures that approach violates for those who like to reference Scriptures to support their views. 

[DAD1]

kbrks, I believe your interpretation of the rule is flawed. You are looking at the words without any regard to common sense application. In your interpretation since I once had children at Brentwood High School and still support the football program if I were to tell a co-worker with a son at Franklin I thought they should find a way to get their son into BHS I have broken a rule. I have been/am indirectly associated with the school therefore I am recruiting. I believe the rule is meant for someone in an official capacity at the school.....not to necessarily be misunderstood as someone under the school's employment. All laws/rules have underlying intent/spirit that can be misunderstood by strict wording interpretation. It is apparent TSSAA has always chosen to apply common sense in their interpretation. As for DS I'm sure some interested fan/parent of some private school had/has commented on his child and he should be proud of their apparent athletic ability but I wonder why he is desirous to put down another school's program. Especially one that has been so closely scrutinized as CPA's without recourse.....other than rumor and innuendo of course.

[IceCreamMan]

That is an entirely different subject altogether.  If it was the topic, I don't view it as my responsibility to prove what DF (or should I now say UCSportsFan) says is true or not unless I have specific information related to it.  Of course since you posted "he lies" I would think you have that type of information especially when you thought he "falsely accused CPA of cheating and recruiting" and obviously don't agree with the type of approach.  If you don't have the information then you have done nothing more than be guilty of what you accuse someone else of doing (even though he gave an example, so in reality it is not the same).  Off the top of my head I can think of a couple of Scriptures that approach violates for those who like to reference Scriptures to support their views. 

 

You don't understand.  The burden of proof is on the accuser.  He says CPA recruits and cheats.  He has yet to prove that point other than saying that in some gym 6 years ago some parent said he should go to CPA.  If he can wrecklessly accuse without the burden of proof, then I can just as easily say he is lying.  That's fair.  Put this in context of what you would have to do in a court of law to prove your case.  He is the plaintiff.  The burden of proof rests on him, you and anyone else who accuses.