Leaderboard

The kid from the little 1A school has turned out to be a star … on so many levels. CONGRATULATIONS JACK KISER! Jack Kiser, Cass County's 2019 Lilly Endowment Community Scholarship recipient continues to make all of Cass County proud. Kiser, a Royal Center, Indiana, native is now the 20th Notre Dame NFF National Scholar-Athlete to be inducted into the Hall of Fame during ceremonies in Las Vegas last night. Jack already has two degrees: graduating with his baccalaureate degree in three years in May 2022, majoring in business analytics and earning a master's of accountancy in 2023. He is currently pursuing further graduate education. Jack earned the Tom Frecka Academic Achievement Award for posting the top GPA (3.97) in the entire Notre Dame Master of Accountancy program. A member of the 2024 NFF Hampshire Honor Society, Kiser claimed the Dean's Graduate Business Award. Jack has also lead the fighting Irish football as a defensive Captain this year and is a finalist for the Allstate Wuerffel Trophy honoring collegiate football players who also excel off the field in leadership and community service. Congratulations Jack and the Kiser family!

It's obvious. Lutheran's aren't Catholic. The are dirty protestants who believe in Justification by grace through faith alone.

LIKE and AMEN! Well, Cathedral High School must have made a mistake with me then, back in the day!

Blake Horvath definitely outshined his counterpart Bryson Daily. Navy had 378 total yards, Horvath had 107 passing and 204 rushing. The fake punt gained 29 yards for a total of 340 yards, which means the rest of team had 38 total yards.

I’m not Vegas. Me too, but not Georgia, Missouri, LSU or South Carolina.

Cignetti started with nothing and made the playoffs. Deboer started with everything and failed to make the playoffs. Yeah, I'm going with Cignetti. You take DeBoer.

How can you blame the IU fan base for being excited for a change? Lol, they've suffered for years. Correct. I've I'm going into battle, I'm picking Cignetti.

You don’t trust the guy who has a much more talented roster and is 113-15 in his career as a head coach huh? The guy who took over a sub .500 Washington team and took them to the national championship. The guy who beat TEN ranked team (10 more than Cignetti I might add) in just two seasons in Seattle. Curt Cignetti’s biggest career win is over a rebuilding 7-5 Michigan team. And I get accused of having rose colored glasses.

OSU should start worrying about conference titles first… Michigan has outscored OSU 130-84 since this proclamation.

That may be the case, but I don't trust DeBoer against Cignetti. I'd probably just refrain from betting on that game. Vegas is basing their spread on the number of four and five star players playing for the Tide. But damn, something is missing in Tuscaloosa. No way Cignetti gets routed by the Sooners they way DeBoer did. The committee made the right choice. No one wants to see a three loss team with inconsistancy issues. If you lose three games, you lose your right to compete for a championship. Hell, I'd rather see a one loss MAC team get their opportunity to showcase themselves on the big stage. But tragically, that will never happen.

So what you are saying is that faith without works is a dead tourney season?

You need to look up the definition of “obsess.”

For those with peacock app there’s a series called Here Come the Irish. There are only 3 episodes that are like 35 minutes long but episode 3 I think has a nice piece with Jack Kiser on the farm and proposing to his girlfriend. All episodes are pretty good

I can't imagine a better feeling than going into a hostile environment where everyone hates you to compete in a football game.

While not a fan of either team, thought this was a cool photo….

Some people can't stand it when a p/p beats a public school. They couldn't stand it in the 1920's and 30's and they can't stand it today. Many p/p's don't even have good football programs. From 1942-1997 not one time did a Catholic school win the IN high school basketball championship. They would like it to be the same in football. It might be ok if a p/p wins a championship in football every 45 years. For some people, every time a p'p wins a championship, that is a bad thing. It's always going to be that way. Some would be happy if they brought back the Oregon School Law of 1922.

You’ve demonstrated with this that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

That’s impressive. Taking the time to put that video together makes you think the Lowell administration actually cares about winning football games. Makes sense considering all of the success they’ve had over the years. Can’t say it enough, the difference between an administration that “actively supports” athletics vs an administration that “doesn’t hinder” athletics is HUGE. It’s nearly impossible to be elite without an administration that actively helps and supports your program.

Here is my problem with a multiplier and why I prefer a success factor: Western H.S. has 791 students and Gibson Southern has 771 students. Gibson Southern is 99-21 over the last 10 years (7-3 this year) and Western 49-54 over the last 10 years (0-10 this year). Both are public schools so is Gibson Southern's 771 students times 1.65 (or whatever multiplier you have chosen) better than Western's 791? Heritage Hills has 635 students and Owen Valley has 650 students. Heritage Hills is 91-29 over the last 10 years (14-1 this year)and Owen Valley is 44-62 over the last 10 years (0-10 this year). Both are Public Schools so is Heritage Hills 635 students times 1.65 (or whatever multiplier you have chosen) better than Owen Valley's 650. Bishop Chatard has 730 students and is 104-32 over the last 10 years (9-3 this year). You feel Bishop Chatard's 730 students are 1.65 times better than Gibson Southern's 771 and Heritage Hills 635 because of the type of students they don't have to count. However what you don't look at is with a 1.65 (or whatever multiplier you have chosen) this will also be applied to Hammond Bishop Noll's 617 Students. Because you also feel Hammond Noll 617 students should be counted as 1.65 (or whatever multiplier you have chosen) because of the students they don't have to count like Heritage Hills and Gibson Southern do. Hammond Bishop Noll is 8-80 over the last 10 years (this year one of their most successful years at 3-7). This is why I don't like the multiplier, the multiplier will be applied to ALL Private/Parochial schools equally and they are not ALL equally as successful just like not ALL Public schools are equally successful or not successful. At least the success factor looks towards the success of every school and bumps up the successful schools. No the success factor is not perfect and needs tweaks to make it better. You can't convince me in any way that a multiplier is needed when you have Private Parochial schools like Hammond Noll. You only look at the successful Private / Parochial schools because it fits your narrative.

Actually was in this exact situation in high school as it turns out. Are the student populations the same? Probably not, but to pretend that any student population of any school, public or P/P is the same is laughable. When I was in high school, Benton Central, Crawfordsville, and West Lafayette were all 3A schools: all public, all in the same general geographic area (West Central part of the state). Were those 3 student populations the same? I would argue absolutely not: Crawfordsville is a stand alone town, West Lafayette is one of 4 public schools in a more metropolitan area (to say nothing of their proximity to Purdue) and Benton Central (who actually shares a school boundary with West Lafayette) has what was at one point when I taught there years ago, the largest geographic district in the state withsome studentswhonhad tobdrive 45 minutesone way to getto school. I can tell you from experience, those student populations are in no way the same: so how do you control for those variables, even among public schools? Is it okay for public schools of a similar size to play in the same classification as Chatard? Yes, it perfectly logical for them to do so. I graduated from Crawfordsville High School in 2006: we played Chatard my sophomore through senior year. I get it: our student populations were not the same, no more than our student population and Benton Central's were the same (BC was likely at a much greater disadvantage than we were given how spread out that district is). We wouldn't have had to play in the same classification as Chatard if the IHSAA would impose a multiplier or we had the success factor in the early to mid 2000s: we didn't. We got blown out my Sophomore/Junior year and played a damn competitive game my Senior year (lost 21-7). Was that fair to me and my classmates? I would argue it was at the time given the rules we had to play by (straight up enrollment, no success factor): we were all born 15ish years too early. Now, I've answered all your questions, please answer mine. Why is a multiplier more advantageous than our current success factor? Would not Chatard have been bumped up to 4A prior my having to play them? Depending on when it was implemented, absolutely. It arrives at quite literally the same place that that you who so desperately are pushing for a multiplier, and does so not explicitly on the basis of public versus P/P, but on the basis of a programs success on the field and nothing else. See the above. Theoretically, I love true promotion and relegation in professional sports, in high school sports you have to have a baseline to work off of, and enrollment is by far and away the most logical. It makes the most sense to start with enrollment and let results on the field ( the success factor) work the rest out. Look ladies and gentlemen, as foxbat said, there's literally always going to be some reason to complain. Are there logical problems with the success factor? I'm sure there are, though I have yet to see any. Is it perfect? I'm sure it's not because nothing is perfect. Personally, I think there are bigger problems with our tournament system, for example I absolutely hate the all in format, but that's not the subject here. But to pretend that a blanket multiplier either instead of or somehow in addition to the current success factor is, to me, laughable. As I said before, the success factor quite literally arrives at the same result, only it is results based and applies to publics as well as P/P schools, which again, makes perfect sense. Under the logic I keep seeing here, public schools with sustained success (New Pal, Adams Central, and Linton as examples) clearly have some kind of advantage over their fellow public school counterparts, why not bump them as well?

Muda, the ever-present turd in the punch bowl.