Bobref

At that size, he’s going to end up playing with his hand on the ground.

I know. No problem. Just trying to stay “in character” with my previous TIC post. All good.

Someone said he was like Dan Hampton. I’m sure you, me, and other Bears fans like @Coach Nowlin will recognize that for the hyperbole it is. “Danimal” was a dominant player at 2 positions in the NFL. Not many can say that.

If so, he’ll be the first one ever.

In a very technically divided opinion, SCOTUS invalidated a key portion of the Trump Administration’s hastily-enacted “immigration reform,” calling the regulations “arbitrary and capricious.” This is the second significant blow to the Administration’s use of DOJ to implement what some might term a “conservative” agenda. While there were a plethora of opinions, including several concurring in part and dissenting in part, my takeaway is that all the Justices agreed that at least some facet of the regulations couldn’t pass constitutional muster. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-587_5ifl.pdf

In my 40+ years of high school football, I would have to say Coach Radtke is one of the more interesting figures I’ve seen. He is often his own worst enemy. But that is the product of his intense focus and his uncompromising attitude. Earlier in his career, he had lots of problems with officials. But later in his career he got away from that. There are 2 things that tell a large part of the story for me: (1) Despite his “tough love” approach, his kids love him. Talk to his former players, you’ll see, and (2) As a byproduct of #1, his teams play unbelievably hard for him. Some of my favorite games were when his Griffith team would take on Kirk Kennedy’s Lowell teams. The effort expended by both teams was really something to see. I also strongly disagree that he’s doing this just to pile up wins in pursuit of the all time record. I honestly think that sort of thing is not what drives him, doesn’t mean that much to him. He is just one of the more intensely competitive people I’ve ever met. My bottom line is that Coach Radtke has my respect. We’ve had a few run-ins over the years as a result of his intense focus and extreme competitiveness. But I never had any doubt that his only interest is the kids. That’s why he is very popular with his kids, and not so much with opposing coaches, officials, administrators, etc. He just has that singular focus ... and everything else is irrelevant. I’m looking forward to seeing what he does at Knox. I’ve seen them several times over the last couple of years, and that program has made great strides. If the kids buy into his program, I’m confident he will take them to the next level. I wish him the best of luck. And by the way, if anyone had told me 20 yrs. ago that I’d be publicly defending Coach Radtke against his critics ... well, you could have gotten pretty long odds on that. 😆

I notice you list your school affiliation as Lewis Cass. How can you live with yourself? Their nickname is the Kings. Escaping from monarchical rule is the principle on which this country was founded. It is the opposite of what this country stands for. It’s also blatantly sexist, implicitly approving a male-dominated government structure, and elitist. The use of “Kings” offends me ... and all right-thinking people. Shameful.

https://local.theonion.com/city-enters-phase-4-of-pretending-coronavirus-over-1844037065

I wonder how they’re going to report the 1859 raid against insurgent, John Brown, at Harper’s Ferry. The raid was led by Robert E. Lee, at the time a Colonel in the US Army. His 1st Lieutenant was J.E.B. Stuart.

This is a game-changer, from a supposedly “conservative” Court. Lots of ramifications. For example, what does this do to the fired teachers’ lawsuits against Roncalli, Cathedral, and the Diocese? The voting lineup in this 6-3 decision is fascinating. https://www.theindianalawyer.com/articles/justices-rule-lgbt-people-protected-from-job-discrimination?utm_source=breaking-news&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=2020-06-15 Justices rule LGBT people protected from job discrimination The Supreme Court of the United States ruled Monday that a landmark civil rights law protects gay, lesbian and transgender people from discrimination in employment, a resounding victory for LGBT rights from a conservative court. The court decided by a 6-3 vote that a key provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 known as Title VII that bars job discrimination because of sex, among other reasons, encompasses bias against LGBT workers. “An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court. “Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.” Justices Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas dissented. “The Court tries to convince readers that it is merely enforcing the terms of the statute, but that is preposterous,” Alito wrote in the dissent. “Even as understood today, the concept of discrimination because of ‘sex’ is different from discrimination because of ‘sexual orientation’ or ‘gender identity.’” Kavanaugh wrote in a separate dissent that the court was rewriting the law to include gender identity and sexual orientation, a job that belongs to Congress. Still, Kavanaugh said the decision represents an “important victory achieved today by gay and lesbian Americans.” The outcome is expected to have a big impact for the estimated 8.1 million LGBT workers across the country because most states don’t protect them from workplace discrimination. An estimated 11.3 million LGBT people live in the U.S., according to the Williams Institute at the UCLA law school. But Monday’s decision is not likely to be the court’s last word on a host of issues revolving around LGBT rights, Gorsuch noted. Lawsuits are pending over transgender athletes’ participation in school sporting events, and courts also are dealing with cases about sex-segregated bathrooms and locker rooms, a subject that the justices seemed concerned about during arguments in October. Employers who have religious objections to employing LGBT people also might be able to raise those claims in a different case, Gorsuch said. “But none of these other laws are before us; we have not had the benefit of adversarial testing about the meaning of their terms, and we do not prejudge any such question today,” he wrote. The cases were the court’s first on LGBT rights since Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement and replacement by Kavanaugh. Kennedy was a voice for gay rights and the author of the landmark ruling in 2015 that made same-sex marriage legal throughout the United States. Kavanaugh generally is regarded as more conservative. The Trump administration had changed course from the Obama administration, which supported LGBT workers in their discrimination claims under Title VII. During the Obama years, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had changed its longstanding interpretation of civil rights law to include discrimination against LGBT people. The law prohibits discrimination because of sex, but has no specific protection for sexual orientation or gender identity. In recent years, some lower courts have held that discrimination against LGBT people is a subset of sex discrimination, and thus prohibited by the federal law. Efforts by Congress to change the law have so far failed. The Supreme Court cases involved two gay men and a transgender woman who sued for employment discrimination after they lost their jobs. Aimee Stephens lost her job as a funeral director in the Detroit area after she revealed to her boss that she had struggled with gender most of her life and had, at long last, “decided to become the person that my mind already is.” Stephens told funeral home owner Thomas Rost that following a vacation, she would report to work wearing a conservative skirt suit or dress that Rost required for women who worked at his three funeral homes. Rost fired Stephens. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio, ruled that the firing constituted sex discrimination under federal law. Stephens died last month. Donna Stephens, her wife of 20 years, said in a statement that she is “grateful for this victory to honor the legacy of Aimee, and to ensure people are treated fairly regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.” The federal appeals court in New York ruled in favor of a gay skydiving instructor who claimed he was fired because of his sexual orientation. The full 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 10-3 that it was abandoning its earlier holding that Title VII didn’t cover sexual orientation because “legal doctrine evolves.” The court held that “sexual orientation discrimination is motivated, at least in part, by sex and is thus a subset of sex discrimination.” That ruling was a victory for the relatives of Donald Zarda, who was fired in 2010 from a skydiving job in Central Islip, New York, that required him to strap himself tightly to clients so they could jump in tandem from an airplane. He tried to put a woman with whom he was jumping at ease by explaining that he was gay. The school fired Zarda after the woman’s boyfriend called to complain. Zarda died in a wingsuit accident in Switzerland in 2014. In a case from Georgia, the federal appeals court in Atlanta ruled against Gerald Bostock, a gay employee of Clayton County, in the Atlanta suburbs. Bostock claimed he was fired in 2013 because he is gay. The county argues that Bostock was let go because of the results of an audit of funds he managed. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Bostock’s claim in a three-page opinion that noted the court was bound by a 1979 decision that held “discharge for homosexuality is not prohibited by Title VII.”

One of the new rules this year is that the penalty for the foul “disconcerting acts” has been reduced to 5 yds. from the previous 15. Even if you’ve been a high school football fan for many years, you may never have seen this called. But it’s a real thing, and it does happen. First, the Rule itself, 7-1-9: “No defensive player shall use disconcerting acts or words prior to the snap in an attempt to interfere with A's signals or movements.” Most are aware that the defense is not allowed to attempt to confuse the offense by calling out in a way that mimics offensive signals. But the rule involves more than that. Here’s a play from the 2020 Preseason Guide: Play — 3rd & 10 at the A 40. While A1 is calling signals DB B1, starting from a position 8 yds. behind his line of scrimmage, runs toward the line of scrimmage. He stops just short of entering the neutral zone. In response to B1’s charge, offensive lineman A (a) doesn’t move, or (b) flinches. Ruling — No foul in (a), but a 5 yd. dead ball foul on the defense in (b) if the covering official judges B1’s charge to be for the purpose of inducing a false start. If the covering official does not judge that to be B1’s intent, it is a 5 yd. dead ball foul on the offense for a false start.Noted football officiating authority George Demetriou, in the 2019 edition of Redding’s Study Guide to NFHS Football, says this about the rule: ”Team B cannot use disconcerting acts to induce a false start by Team A. The defense is allowed to shift to either side or from lineman to linebacker or vice versa. Also, linebackers or defensive backs who run toward the neutral zone attempting to time their blitz with the snap are not in violation. However, defensive players are not permitted to feint a charge to provoke Team A linemen into moving. Team B players who are stationary within one yard of their line of scrimmage are prohibited from making quick non-football related movements in an obvious attempt to draw an offensive player into committing a foul.” Love to hear some anecdotes from coaches, fans, officials, etc., about experiences with this rule.

Get used to it.

This was actually a thing!

Implications for this Fall’s Hoosiers? https://247sports.com/Article/Indiana-Hoosiers-football-Peyton-Hendershot-pleaded-guilty-to-criminal-trespass--148006037/ Indiana tight end Peyton Hendershot pleaded guilty to misdemeanor criminal trespass on Tuesday in Monroe County Court. Hendershot was arrested back in February on charges of criminal trespassing, plus misdemeanors for domestic battery, criminal mischief, and criminal conversion. The latter three misdemeanors were dismissed as part of his agreement. For the trespass offense, Hendershot was sentenced to one-year probation and is required to receive a mental health evaluation and participate in a batterer’s treatment program. According to a Bloomington Police Department news release obtained by the Bloomington Times-Herald, Hendershot went to a former girlfriend's apartment, entered the property without permission, and accused the woman of infidelity. Hendershot then took the woman's cellphone away from her and looked through calls and texts, according to the report. When she made an attempt to get the cellphone back, the 6-foot-4, 255-pound Hendershot, "grabbed her by the neck and shoved her against the wall." The woman said that Hendershot threw her phone into the kitchen and broke the screen door upon exiting the apartment. She then dialed 911 and, after the emergency call went through, police arrested Hendershot at his residence. A three-star recruit out of Tri-West High School in Lizton, Indiana, Hendershot was the 247Sports Composite's No. 1,086 overall prospect, No. 53 tight end and No. 13 player in Indiana for the 2017 class. Hendershot just completed his redshirt-sophomore campaign at Indiana in 2019, where he set the Hoosiers' single-season tight ends record with 52 receptions for 622 yards (12.0 average) and four touchdowns through all 13 games. Following Hendershot’s arrest in February, the Hoosiers issued the following statement in a university news release: “Indiana University Head Football Coach Tom Allen has suspended redshirt sophomore Peyton Hendershot immediately and indefinitely from all team activities. He will continue to evaluate the situation pending further developments.” Hendershot has since been reinstated to the IU football team in a modified way during the offseason program.

Fair assessment. And don’t forget to credit the Valpo punter. IMO he was the MVP of the game.

There are many possible scenarios as to why Coach Radtke is now at Knox rather than Portage. Immediately assuming that Coach Radtke pulled the rug out from under Portage is unwarranted, unless you are aware of the actual circumstances. Anything else is just jumping to conclusions without evidence to support those conclusions.

Jumping to conclusions, or do you have access to some non-public information?

I can tell you from the officials’ standpoint they are. We get the “script,” and are advised that it must be followed without deviation. The officials are contracted by the host school, just like a regular season game.

Politics is like gender. It doesn’t matter what you really are. Only what you “identify” as. 😂 Seriously, I consider myself ambidextrous.

Glad to be of some service.

Interesting. We must not have had the same Evidence and Trial Advocacy classes in law school.

Embarrassing.

I actually entertained the notion that, on this and other subjects, @Howe was actually a responsible person, and was only doing what he does to stir the pot, spark discussion, etc. But I am now convinced that he’s simply a series of trite phrases and familiar labels, like “left wing” and “libtard” that he shapes to fit any occasion. If what you’re after is thoughtful discussion and responsible debate, he’s simply that annoying gnat that buzzes around your ear. Pesky, but in the final analysis, of little to no significance.

This actually reminds me a little bit of The Man in the High Castle. If you don’t like a part of your history, just erase it and act like it never happened.