Leaderboard

The other 63 teams in 3A all get Mono.

Once again, we will be hosting two Kicking / Punting Camps here at Roncalli. The Kornblue and Kicking World Camps that we have hosted in the past will once again be back. I continue to work with Brandon and Brent because I truly believe in the way they approach the camp experience - primarily in keeping the numbers manageable (so that your player gets plenty of personal attention) and the cost reasonable (when compared to other Kicking Camps). Here are the details... KORNBLUE KICKING CAMP Sunday May 19 10 am - 4 pm Kicking and punting / snapping evaluation available upon request All ages and grades are eligible $350 ($100 off if registered 30 days in advance) KICKING WORLD CAMP Saturday July 20 11 am - 4 pm Kicking and punting with competition at the end Ages 13-18 are eligible $225 Contact me with any questions. Coach Strykowski

I am a "6"....short for 666, I guess. BTW, I have been saving check no. 6666 from my checkbook for a few weeks. Yeah, I still write those things. Been saving it for my inevitable annual payment to the IRS next week....desperate attempt......admittedly. Edit - unless someone can tell me a better place to point that bad karma missile. Mortgage has long been paid off.

As you always say, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

https://www.newstatesman.com/future-proof/2015/02/sex-isn-t-chromosomes-story-century-misconceptions-about-x-y

Achievement Gap Between Rich and Poor Public School Students Unchanged Over 50 Years: http://reason.com/blog/2019/04/08/achievement-gap-between-rich-and-poor-pu Competition drives continuous improvement in the quality of goods and services in every other part of our economy. It can do the same for educating America's children too.

True. You never admit it when you're proven wrong, lol.

Reminds me of Pacino's character, Ivan in Author, Author, upon confronting, LArry Kotzwinkle, the guy that his wife ran off with ... Ivan : I have done many terrible things in my life but I have never put another man's wife in my bed. Larry Kotzwinkle : Wasn't she married to that Spanish painter when you slept with her? Ivan : Don't prove me wrong, Larry, I hate it when I'm proven wrong.

Seems to be an apologist's approach. If you can't prove everyone, then it doesn't exist? Not sure how you are getting stereotyping anymore than @swordfish's initial post about evidence showing right wing being more tolerant of free speech. I'm pretty sure that he didn't mean everyone, so I took it as such, that he didn't mean everyone and I argued the general point taking definitive figureheads from each party and pointing out very specific responses to exactly the same type of issue. But if you want to go beyond just a couple of folks, then go to the video and listen to the many AUDIENCE members who are cheering and chanting about beating folks or taking them out to the parking lot or cheering paying for their court costs if they assault someone else. That's much more beyond the idea of just one person. As for folks calling out folks or going after them in public, I don't condone it on either side and have never condoned it on either side. I have offered up contrary items when someone posts something from the "higher ground" side of the argument in contrast, but that isn't condoning anything ... merely pointing out that the ground isn't all that high. Similarly, my point in countering @swordfish's post had nothing to do with claiming that any side didn't do X or do X at all or to say that it was OK to do X because the other side also does X, but to offer up that the "higher ground argument," especially with regard to leadership, isn't really there. As for how does it make me feel, I feel more for the man who was beaten by a mob at Charlottesville or for the young woman who was run over. Doesn't mean that I don't feel for the guy in the MAGA hat who had his meal interrupted, etc., but I care more for the other victims. As for not caring, I will freely say that I don't really care about the guy who was asked to leave a memorial service at a Canadian university for New Zealand massacre victims who showed up in his MAGA hat to tell folks there that the vigil was meaningless. I care much more for the victims than for the guy trying to get a rise out of people with his red hat.

I want to see an increase in the the number of kids playing football at Bremen.

Perhaps AOC, Biden, Beto et al are referencing the version of capitalism we actually have, not the fantasy capitalism Mises and the article's author are describing?

Do I get a per head deduction for any relatives that died fighting for the Union side when my Reparation’s bill shows up? Since it’s tax season and all.....just trying to figure this out.

As I understand it, scout video still belongs to the team who originally uploaded. They aren't creating new instances of those files when they are exchanged. The core video still exists. Your version just has layers over it that allow you to view it, add your own telestrations, etc. I would be surprised if scount video counts toward this limit. Definitely check with Hudl. VAR's promotional videos tout them as server based rather than internet based. It sounds like they are assuming only one coach is using it on his laptop. What if all coaches want to access it? How can players access and review? How can they create highlight videos? If it's server based you need to be connected to the server in order to view it. The internet is nothing more than a series of shared servers. I think the VAR guys have a great analytics tool but they either don't understand how others will be using it or they are glossing over it hoping you won't notice and buy their service. The exchange part does send the video to the team with Hudl, but they now have to download it from your Google Drive (time consuming) and then upload it to their Hudl account (time consuming). Good luck with that. Like them or love them, Hudl has created a very efficient system for video sharing. Jimmy makes great points above regarding data storage. I also work in IT and highly recommend teams keep any practice or game video they want in the future offline. Use Hudl for 3-4 years worth of game video, current season practice video, and any scout video (assuming it won't count against you because the video itself isn't stored on your account). If you buy something like VAR you are doing it for your own analytics purposes if that's worth the additional cost to you.

Have you read the history of that denomination? Wait, I was born and raised....what am I saying?

LOL

Word must have spread fast 😂

I don't know anything about the politics of Mr. Winder. The facts are that he assaulted another individual, and then first lied about it.

So there is documented evidence/sworn testimony stating that an individual instigated a sword attack against another individual only because he was wearing a MAGA hat? That is the individual was NOT wearing a MAGA hat he would not have instigated a sword attack?

Not really. It's just a picture of a slogan on a Chinese hat. I won't need to get around it, I'm not running for President more than once.

Wow, Trump Groupies evidently get triggered by red hats also. Imagine that. Hypocrites.

Then why did you and 2 others downvote a picture of a hat? Triggered.

I don't attempt to display an image. What you see is what you get with me. What term is that? Hypocrite? I call 'em like I see 'em.

Commentaries on both.

This intolerance is taking over college campuses : Student files bias complaint against dorm roommate for watching Ben Shapiro video: https://www.thecollegefix.com/student-files-bias-complaint-against-dorm-roommate-for-watching-ben-shapiro-video/ Young was unable to give an estimate of costs to run the bias reporting program, although she noted the campus Office of Institutional Equity has one employee dedicated to following up on reports of bias. Residence halls “and other units on campus likely have employees who also follow up on bias reports as well,” Young said. Mostly a colossal waste of time and taxpayer's money.

Doesn't have anything to do with the right wing not being offended. Do you even read my comments, or do you just attack without even knowing what you're attacking?

No and Yes

Worthless currency litters the street in Venezuela. Not "real socialism" I guess.............

So says the individual who when proven wrong about Social Security being a government entitlement program (as defined by the U.S. Senate itself, nonetheless) instead dodges, ducks, and spins.

Mark Zuckerberg Calls for Government Regulation of Political Speech on Facebook: http://reason.com/blog/2019/04/05/mark-zuckerberg-calls-for-government-reg If "we" don't want a private company to decide what is or is not political speech, it seems even more obvious that we don't want the government to do so, especially if that means speech can be shut down on the grounds that it traverses campaign-speech laws. It bears underscoring: If the First Amendment protects anything, it's political speech, however hard that might be to define. Whatever their intentions, campaign-finance laws and other attempts to control political speech are always arbitrary and used to squelch rather than expand political discourse. Elsewhere in the interview, Zuckerberg talks about increasing the number and quality of various reports about what sort of material gets taken down, whether for fomenting violence, influencing votes, or other reasons. However imperfect such a mechanism might be, that sort of attempt at transparency is a far less-destructive way to give users context and information than applying prior restraint to conversations on Facebook or other platforms by having, as Zuckerberg suggests, oversight boards of "40 people, who are experts on free speech and safety" making binding decisions on what is legitimate content and which is not. Especially if some or all of those censorship boards are dictated or overseen by the government. Facebook's "walled garden" would be about as freewheeling as a university safe space offering coloring books and squeeze toys to high-strung college kids on Election Night. Zuckerberg's enthusiasm for having the government step in right about now is understandable. Since at least the 2016 election, it's a rare week that doesn't bring a new story about some privacy breach or major scandal involving Facebook. Unsurprisingly, the service appears to be losing a significant number of users in the United States, and the average age of users is climbing, which doesn't portend well for its future. Democrats still wrongly blame Facebook for costing Hillary Clinton the election by letting Russian-controlled pages drive down voter turnout while Republicans are, also with zero good evidence, claiming that conservative voices are being suppressed at Facebook and other services such as Twitter. In a move that should freak out anyone remotely interested in limited government, Sen. Hawley of Missouri recently demanded that Twitter submit to a third-party investigation to see if it was suspending more right-wing than left-wing users. In most commercial sectors, that sort of bipartisan Malachi Crunch, combined with market-share concerns, leads inexorably for to calls for regulation by companies worried about declining revenue and position. That such calls are made in the name of the public good only makes them more nauseating. But Zuckerberg is ultimately being shortsighted, especially when he claims that Facebook and other social media platforms are actually functioning as "the digital equivalent of the town square." Up until now, the courts have ruled that in fact social media platforms are more like shopping malls. That is, they are private spaces that don't have to allow for freedom of speech the same way that an actual town square does. In a case decided late last year, a U.S. District Court ruled that YouTube, owned by Google, had every right to decide what sort of videos appeared on its service and whether they could be monetized or not. The plaintiff in that case, the conservative video producer Prager University, argued that YouTube and other services were effectively public spaces that should have to abide by broader First Amendment guarantees. Which is exactly how Zuckerberg is now characterizing Facebook—as a "town square." Inviting government oversight into his business might help lock in Facebook's dominant market position for a few years—remember, he's willing to help them write the regulations!—but ultimately that sort of collaboration merely forestalls a business's decline, it doesn't eliminate it. More importantly, producing more and more rules that allow for more restrictions on speech for an endlessly proliferating number of reasons will hasten Facebook's value as a place where people can go to share anything more interesting than recipes and death notices. In the name of preserving some vague notion of community, it will create a dessicated space that has less and less value for all of us. That's not a tragedy, really, as websites come and go (RIP, My Space, et al.). But it is a waste and a loss nonetheless. The far-better solution is for platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to help users develop stronger media-literacy skills so that we can all more easily spot rotten information and develop critical reading skills while also providing more-robust tools to block material we don't want to see. The brilliance of social media is that it creates an infinite sandbox where we can find more and more interesting places to play while avoiding bullies and blowhards, however we subjectively choose to define them. That was the animating spirit of the internet and it's a dream whose passing we should all mourn.