Leaderboard

Yeah but it could be a bike ride for semi-state.

I doubt anyone could have predicted 4 traditional 32 teams moving into 30 and 3 traditional 31 teams moving into 32. Just odd to have this much movement.

Just hit http://www.ihsaa.org/Portals/0/ihsaa/documents/news media/2018-19/042919SectionalAssignments.pdf

Man, my heart can't take much more... Avengers Endgame... Game of Thrones... IHSAA Sectional Alignment...

ARYA!!!!!!!!!! wow

Completely disagree. I think it should go the other way. Like a 4 year cycle instead of 2. 1 very good class can easily get you enough points to move up which I don't think was the intention at all.

🏈Award Winners🏈 🏆State Runner-Up Honor Roll 1A- North Vermillion, 2A- Eastbrook, 3A- Evansville Memorial, 4A -Evansville Central, 5A -Decatur Central, 6A- Carmel. 🏆State Champions Honor Roll 1A- Pioneer, 2A- Western Boone, 3A- West Lafayette, 4A- FW Bishop Dwenger, 5A- New Palestine, 6A- Warren Central. 🏆Coaches of The Year 1A- Brian Crabtree, North Vermillion 2A- Justin Pelley, Western Boone 3A- Shane Fry, West Lafayette 4A- Troy Burgess, Evansville Central 5A- Kyle Enright, Decatur Central 6A- Kevin O'Shea, Indianpolis North Central 🏆Assistant Coaches of the Year Defensive Coordinator: David Gregorich, Pioneer Offensive Coordinator: Jayme Comer, Western Boone 🏆Players of the Year 1A- Jack Kiser, Pioneer 2A- Spencer Wright- Western Boone 3A- George Karlaftis- West Lafayette 4A- Khris Harness- Mishawaka 5A- Charlie Spegal- New Palestine 6A- David Bell- Warren Central 🏆Big School All State (4A, 5A, 6A) David Bell, Trevon Booker, DJ Bowles, PJ Buck, Tyler Bukur, Clayton Coll, Jon Eineman, Romeir Elliot, Nate Fry, Brian Gaffney, Michael Garrett, Jayden George, Chris Harness, Dawand Jones, Austin Keele, Beau Robbins, Joey Schmidt, Caleb Shaffer, Chamaar Smith, Charlie Spegal, Joe Tippmann, Larry Tracy, Chase Triplett, Jonah Wichman, Bronson Yoder. 🏆Small School All State (1A, 2A, 3A) Nino Barbosa, Dawson Basinger, Jashawn Berlanga, Adam Bowman, Michael Campbell, Michael Clemons, Branson Combs, RJ Erb, Max Goodwin, Daniel Gregorich, Sage Hood, George Karlaftis, Xaine Kirby, Jack Kiser, Isaiah Lacey, Kale Lawson, Michael Lindauer, Landry Ozmun, Bailea Sprunger, Aaron Steele, Conner Walker, Devin Weakley, Tavion Woodard, Gage Woodard, Jacob Wunder.

https://news.yahoo.com/richard-lugar-helped-securing-soviet-arsenal-dies-001929869.html IMHO one of the last great statesmen of the world.

Birch Bayh and Dick Lugar are two politicians every Hoosier can be proud of.

I’m not advocating for this in no way possible. But....if I’m not mistaken...Princeton and GS COULD meet in the semi state game if both teams were to be fortunate enough to advance as far.... crazy to think 2 county rivals separated by 12 or so miles could be playing each other at semi state

For years, Batesville/Greensburg traveled 2+ hours to Corydon, North Harrison, and Edgewood. Lawrenceburg traveled to Hamilton Heights at least 1 year. It's extremely hard to please all 64 teams especially with those teams in the corners of the state.

April Predictions 33- Andrean, Rensselaer 34-Pioneer, Cass 35-Luers 36-Eastbrook, Tipton

Just.Plain.Stupid

Gonna be a lot of rejoicing and a lot of OMG

Back in the day Sectional 20 was WL, Benton Central and they were aligned with Yorktown and Blackford as well New Pal coming out of the South now in 5a

You and me both brotha!!!

I have refreshed their site so many times I probably crashed the server.

Are you referring to a boat load of undrafted FA's? I've heard it's often better to go undrafted than be a late round pick. Mainly, it's beneficial to have the option of picking a team that isn't strong in your position if presented with a multitude of teams wanting to sign you.

Thanks for posting this: I have had 1 opportunity to take it all in, what a show Mr. Condry and his crew puts on for Indiana High School Football

Had the pleasure of coaching with Justun at Cathedral. He is a great hire. While he is a great coach, he is an even better man. Best of luck Justun.

Congratulations Justun. You were a loyal, hard-working player at JC and have obtained some great coaching experience. I wish you the best of luck as you head back home to lead the Panthers.

added to ifca.net

As a Whitko grad I think it's a good hire. If you read the Times Union article, it talks about him intentionally balancing life as a coach and father. That's a trend that seems to be appearing more in the profession and I will be rooting for Coach Jensen even more because of it.

it is

Mood music?

I think 4 years would be better because under the current format a team can win state 2nd year of one enrollment period and win again the first year of new period and have back to back state titles without moving as long as they didn't win more then sectional the other year in each petiod. Another team wins regional and state but both in same period and moves up.

Concur Its still ok to win 21-7 instead of 56-0

Then why are you giving me so much grief over it if everyone can read a graph and do basic math? And why am I the jerk for not including everything that you would have posted or would like to have had posted? @swordfish posted a picture and I posted one too, with a couple of links. Mine just happened to have a different take on the subject than the one that he presented. And why the name calling? I merely posted an item that showed the details behind the fact that the picture posted was in error. I also posted the specific data, in total, along with the reasoning and support behind it. I also posted another article that actually speaks directly to potential climate change implications in that harbor and specifically Fort Denison which is the structure in the picture. So we can't have discussions or disagreements anymore about data without it turning into a shouting match with insults?

@DT He took exactly 1 year off from Warsaw to now Whitko I am sure he understands the current climate of Indiana H.S. Football

Because of the type of work I do, I spend a lot of time in hospitals and physicians’ offices. I confess, i don’t understand how, on the one hand, health care providers complain loudly over the niggardly reimbursement system of Medicare -and the insurers who take their lead from it - while on the other hand, every hospital I see has got significant construction underway, is building freestanding outpatient centers in the community, is buying up physician practices, etc. They’re obviously making money somehow.

The hospital's charges have little to no connection to their cost for the services, so those figures honestly don't tell us whether the hospital is still making a profit at that level of payment. The "window sticker" charges at hospitals are almost never paid by anyone: private insurance companies aren't paying anything close to those charges, and most poor uninsured people don't pay full boat because the hospitals just write off the charges. Because of the way our health care system works, the hospital's charge list exist mainly just to (a) be the place to start the negotiations with insurers (public and private) over discounts and actual reimbursement rates, and (b) get over in those rare cases where a wealthy person is willing and able to pay out of pocket.

What a fantastic phone application:

Since many of them spend a significant % of their monthly income on paying off student loans, cash that could have be used for investment, I can see the allure of a "get rich quick" scheme like the lottery.

I’m not so sure. It’s a different generation of people we’re recruiting now. I suspect some of the old “truths” no longer apply.

But can those private companies still make a profit if Mr. Sanders version of single-payer comes to fruition?

https://reason.com/2019/04/24/the-contradiction-at-the-heart-of-bernie-sanders-medicare-for-all-plan/ Sanders calls this Medicare for All, but what he's describing isn't Medicare as we now know it. As The New York Times noted earlier this year upon the release of a Sanders-inspired Medicare for All bill in the House, the new program would "drastically reshape Medicare itself," changing both what it pays for and how. In many ways, it would be a completely different program. Medicare for All, in other words, isn't really Medicare. And that program would be far more expansive and expensive than nearly any other comparable system. It would cover more, and require less direct financial outlays (not including taxes), than either today's Medicare or typical private insurance plans in the U.S. It would also be substantially more generous than the national health systems set up in other countries. Sanders likes to unfavorably contrast America's mixed public-private health care system with foreign systems where the government is more directly involved. When he announced the 2017 version of his Medicare for All plan, for example, he bemoaned the state of affairs in the United States "a time when every other major country on earth guarantees health care to every man, woman, and child." Discussions about health care policy on social media often include some variant of the question, "If every other country with a developed economy can do it, why can't the United States?" The problem with this line of questioning is that what Sanders is proposing isn't what other countries do. Canada, for example, has a single-payer system, but it doesn't cover dental care, vision, drugs, or any number of other services. A majority of Canadians carry private insurance in order to cover those services. In Britain, which offers a fully socialized medical system where health care providers are government employees, many resident still buy private coverage. Sanders, on the other hand, would effectively wipe out private coverage in the space of just four years. There are similar limitations on coverage in other countries, like the Netherlands. It's also true in Australia, where patients typically pay a percentage of the cost of specialty services. It's true that in these countries, government plays a more central role in health care financing. But their systems have also reckoned with costs and tradeoffs in a way that Sanders, after so many years, has not. Indeed, the main trade-off that Sanders seems willing to discuss is the elimination of insurance companies, which he portrays as greedy middlemen driving up the cost of health care. Wiping out the industry in one fell swoop, as Sanders has proposed, would be a unprecedented and disruptive move that would have significant economic repercussions, including the probable loss of thousands of insurance industry jobs. But it still wouldn't do much to bring down the cost of health care, because so much money in the nation's health care system is tied up in provider payments, especially hospitals. And therein lies the contradiction. Most people probably think of hospitals as places where you go to get health care services. Politically and economically, however, they also fulfill another role: They are hubs for stable middle-class jobs, paying reasonably good wages to thousands of highly trained workers, most of whom are not doctors or specialists earning stratospheric salaries. To acquire the revenue to pay for all these jobs, hospitals rely on a mix of private and public payments. Public payments make up a somewhat larger share of total hospital budgets, but private payers are typically charged much higher prices. Hospitals like to argue that Medicare and Medicaid payments are too low to cover their costs, and that as a result, higher private payments effectively subsidize public health coverage. Critics (with some evidence) often respond that hospitals either overstate or don't really understand their own costs, and that this is just a ploy to extract more money from government health programs and private payers. But when considering Medicare for All, the particulars of this debate are largely beside the point, because there is simply no question that eliminating private insurance and payment for all services would drastically reduce the amount of revenue for hospitals. Yet that is exactly what Sanders wants to do. His plan calls for paying for health care services at Medicare rates, which means that, practically overnight, hospitals would end up with far, far less revenue. Exactly how much is unclear, but one estimate indicated that payments could drop by as much as 40 percent. That would leave hospitals with a couple of difficult choices. They could eliminate services. They could try to force some employees to take pay cuts. They could fire large numbers of workers. Or they could simply shut down. As a recent New York Timesreport on how Medicare for All would affect hospitals noted, rural hospitals—many of which are already struggling to stay afloat—would be particularly at risk of closing. Whatever ended up happening, there is simply no way most hospitals would or could continue operating as they do now under the payment regime that Sanders envisions. Lots of middle class jobs would disappear. Services would be eliminated or cut back. Yet Sanders not only imagines that hospitals would continue to operate as they do now, but that they would expand their services to even more people, since more people would have coverage. And since he also imagines a system with no deductibles or copays, those people would almost certainly end up dramatically increasing utilization of hospital services. Studies of health insurance have consistently shown that expansions of health insurance result in increased demand for (and use of) health care services; more people with coverage means more people lining up to get care. (Relatedly, introducing even very small copays—on the order of just a few dollars—can reduce the number of visits to doctors and hospitals.) Greater utilization of health care services does not necessarily translate into measurably better physical health outcomes. But it does increase the strain on the health care delivery system—which is to say, it puts a huge amount of pressure on hospitals. So what Sanders is proposing is a massive reduction in funding for health care services at the exact moment that the system experiences a massive increase in demand. It would be difficult to do either. Sanders wants to do both at the same time. It is a recipe for disaster—and a contradiction that Sanders has so far barely acknowledged, much less resolved. Spot-on analysis and commentary by Mr. Suderman. Mr. Sander's "Medicare for all" plan would be a disaster if implemented.