Leaderboard

impressed

Be the best a man can get! Kinda puts the Gillette SB ad in perspective doesn't it?

x2!! Can't wait until I'm that age!!!!

** He was getting his balls deflated ** 😄 -Lord I apologize for that, and be with the starving pygmies in New Guinea......

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/environment/2019/02/26/bill-grow-hemp-clears-senate-hurdle-gov-holcombs-support/2977697002/ Good news for all involved. Hemp should have never been labeled a controlled substance to begin with.

https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/columnists/gregg-doyel/2019/02/22/fishers-high-school-swimmer-suspension-botched-hse-school-board-ihsaa/2949529002/ Disgusting. All Around. And have pretty much lost all respect for the governing aspect of the IHSAA.

This is a really good and it is what I thought. It points out exactly my question. How are underclassmen getting offers??? Schools must just be taking a chance without really ever meeting the kids. Thanks for the info and I apologize on changing the subject from the original title of the blog. Lets get back to discussion on Top Qbs. I was just happy to see someone mention ours. LOL Official visits: Recruits can now start taking official visits starting September 1 of their junior year of high school. In the past, official visits weren't permitted until the athlete's senior year of high school, so this rule is actually bumping them up! College camps and clinics: Recruits and college coaches are not allowed to have any recruiting conversations during camps prior to September 1 of the athlete's junior year of high school. Previously, there weren't really any rules that prevented coaches from talking about recruiting to underclassmen during camps. In fact, it had become common practice for college coaches to extend verbal scholarship offers to top recruits during camps. Unofficial visits: College athletic departments are not allowed to be involved in a recruit's unofficial visits. Quick refresher: Unofficial visits are any campus visits paid for entirely by the recruit's family. Before the rule change, unofficial visits were an easy way for underclassmen to visit a college camps, meet with the coach and get an early verbal offer. However, if athletes want to take unofficial visits now, they cannot schedule them with the coach-they should treat the unofficial visit just like any other student would. If the recruit happens to bump into the coach on campus, they can't have any recruiting conversations at that time.

So the US, when it had its Civil War, was also an admission that democracy doesn't work?

Kind of like the coke traces in your paper currency ... only grosser.

My guess is this is the case with pretty much any public access point. Money, touch pads for debit/credit cards, a hand rail ANYWHERE, magazines at the doctors office, touch screen on the Coke machine at Burger King, etc. I would argue too much disinfecting is probably more detrimental to our health than ingesting a little microscopic fecal matter.

Ew, EEEEWWWW, EEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWW!! Come on man.....Bringing out the rubber gloves now......

Or so you THOUGHT that was the ONLY human interaction. 😂 http://mentalfloss.com/article/565564/mcdonalds-touchscreen-menus-are-covered-poop-report-finds

You can make unofficial visits on your own any time. I would assume most of these schools offer camps that athletes can attend. I'm assuming the offers are made then. Been a while since I've been in the recruiting business, but I assume most of this still holds true.

http://www.kyagr.com/marketing/hemp-pilot.html https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidcarpenter/2018/08/28/kentucky-farmers-hemp-more-profitable-than-tobacco/#47be651c100f Tobacco farming is basically non-existent in Indiana anymore, this is a viable crop for farmers. In turn with an additional crop in the rotation, this could lead to less supply of traditional crops, thus more favorable prices for farmers. https://www.country-guide.ca/crops/should-you-be-adding-hemp-to-your-crop-rotation/ I have loosely followed Kentucky's program, based on my listening to KY radio. McConnell took care of the folks on this one. While listening to our backwards ass governor rail on the ills of cannabis, and promoting hate crimes legislation, KY is way ahead of us on this issue, an issue that really boost our agri-business economy.

Indiana needs to move quickly on this, we're way behind surrounding states.

Gotta add the New Prairie QB, Chase Ketterer, to the mix. He had about 2,300 total yards last year and somewhere around 30 total TDs. He was selected as the 4A IFCA Junior All State QB. Should have a solid year with a lot of key offensive players coming back.

Jealous? 🤣

14 minutes!!!!

Am I the only one who finds "naughty language" like the least of our problems as far as retaining officials? I think this is a solution in search of a problem.

The main issue is just like there are some coaches who take getting on the officials too far, there are officials who take finding every possible reason to throw a flag. For instance, we found a play last year where the official was literally staring at one of our coaches who was in charge of signal calling and he was in the box calling it and he stared at him the whole time he was signaling. We had not addressed the ball yet, we had not snapped the ball yet , and after our coach was done signaling the play before the ball was snapped, had stepped back to where he was suppose to be, and the official throws a flag and gives us a sideline warning. The crazier part about that was it was the 3rd play of the game. We read the rule and made sure we were not just going insane . So, the reason I make this example is for the reason of there has got to be discussion between the coaches association and the officials associations because when a coach has an issue, he should be able to address that issue and get communication back instead of hey, here is a flag, just deal with it. It is more frustrating at the lower levels like JV and freshman, because you get nothing explained to you. Communication is the key and when there is none, coaches get frustrated.

I like it, but with a warning first. But what was actually said, and what is profanity? "Cr*p" ?Sh*t"? Pay them more. Trust free enterprise.

Can we bring George Carlin back to let us know what constitutes a profanity? Am I going to get a 1 from a coach for flagging him for saying $hit? Maybe I don't hear as much as I should, but I don't think profanity is a huge issue. I'd much rather hear someone say they thought that was a Bull$hit call than to hear "You're cheating us."

This means Bob will handle discipline within the building of a particular grade level or alphabetical level (A to E) of the student body. Will probably also handle attendance, supervision of lunch and or after school or even conferences such as special ed, etc. It is not an easy position. With Bob's background as an assistant principal, with an administrative license, he could handle teacher evaluations if called upon. This is not a created position but a position in addition to the principal and asst. principal. Many schools are adding this position due to the amount of extra work placed on the principal and asst. principal of the building. From what I understand Peru would not allow Bob to be head football coach and asst. principal. Their choice. Some schools will allow this. Knowing Bob this is a great move for Huntington as Bob is great with kids and discipline. Plus, he will good for the football program. Be careful how you phrase comments thinking it's just a way to hire another coach without knowing the facts. Your questions are good but your suggestions are ???????

http://reason.com/archives/2019/02/26/minimum-wage-boosts-are-greatfor-robots Developing and maintaining robotics, more than ever, is a growth industry that young people should be encouraged to get involved with.

It was just locker room talk.

https://mises.org/wire/draft-should-be-abolished-everyone-—-not-just-women We’re likely to hear a lot about how “fairness” and egalitarianism requires an expansion of the Selective Service System. But those claims are all distractions from the central issue here, which is the state’s power over the citizen. After all, if women want to go help terrorist groups in Syria (which is what the US is doing there), they are free to volunteer. Whether or not women can be directly involved in blowing up revelers at Afghani weddings is a completely separate issue from conscription and the Selective Service. Besides, if fairness is a concern, there’s an easy way to achieve fairness on this issue: abolish the Selective Service for everybody. It’s as easy as that. It wouldn’t even cost a dime of taxpayer money. Simply shred the records, fire everyone who works for Selective Service, and lease out the office space to organizations that do something useful. Then, we won’t have to hear anything about “discrimination” or the alleged sexism implicit in a policy that outrageously neglects to force women to work for the government against their will. Some who want to expand Selective Service for egalitarian reasons are claiming that it’s all just symbolic anyway, because the draft “will never happen.” “The US hasn’t had the draft since the early 1970s,” one columnist loftily intoned as if that were evidence that the draft could never return. Wow, the 1970s? Did they even have electric lights back then? Moreover, it’s a mistake to think that the draft could never return because people would overwhelmingly oppose people being forced into combat. Even if that is the case, there is no reason at all why conscription could not be used to draft people for non-combat positions. After all, only a very small portion of the military ever sees combat. The vast majority of soldiers are involved in logistics, transportation, and desk jobs such as computer programming. According to one report sponsored by the Naval Postgraduate School, "only 17% [of active-duty military personnel] are identified as performing combat specialties."1 Long gone are the days of pouring fresh conscripts into fox holes with little more than a rifle and a shovel. Only a small portion of military deaths occur in combat. Most deaths in the military are due to accidents. Additionally, there is no reason that Selective Service could not be modified to be used to draft people for so-called “national service” positions in which conscripts would perform non-combat bureaucratic and manual-labor jobs. Austria and Switzerland (which have conscription) allow this option for those morally opposed to combat. And historically — such as during World War II — “service” was imposed on conscientious objectors who were forced to work on farms or perform other types of manual labor in special camps. So no, the draft is not “hypothetical,” “symbolic,” or something that “will never happen.” Numerous countries in Latin America, Europe, and Asia still employ conscription, and it is hardly some kind of never-used relic from the distant past. Alas, much of the opposition to the expansion of Selective Service has taken the form of National Review’s opposition which is based on the idea that conscripting women is some kind of special unique evil, quite unlike conscripting men. Military service is one thing, the editors write, but forcing women into it is “barbarism,” they admit. They’re half right. It is barbarism to force women to fight wars for the state. But the same is also true of conscription for men. Agreed. Conscription is anathema to the concept of a free state. It needs to be abolished.

https://mises.org/wire/venezuela-poster-child-socialism Fantastic analysis of the failures of socialism. Too bad there are some who will ignore history and just try to repeat it..................