Bobref

I think parents/fans getting out of hand at a youth game is an issue that should be handled at a league administrative level. In high school, it’s game management, usually an AD or assistant AD. In my experience, they are very willing to assume responsibility for addressing those matters.

That is not the purpose of a sideline warning in football, and it shouldn’t be used “off label” in that fashion. A sideline warning is given when the coach is out of his designated position: either in the restricted area when the ball is dead, or behind the restraining line when it’s alive. A coach coming on to the field to argue a call is one of the specific instances of unsportsmanlike conduct by a nonplayer found in the rule book. When I was wearing the white hat, they could bark all they wanted (within reason) as long as they stayed where they were supposed to be. Crossing the sideline to complain, however, was dealt with swiftly and decisively.

I don’t think your understanding of the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech is accurate. At least, it does not appear so from your post.

How much better is it to wear that white hat and stay out in the middle of the field, pretending you don’t hear the asinine comments, and trying not to laugh? 😂🤣😆

I have to ask, what on earth is “presenting the ball?”

One of the drivers behind the officiating shortage is the unreasonable behavior of fans toward sports officials. Many of those “fans” are actually parents or other relatives of players. If they act that way, in public, toward officials, I can only imagine how they act toward coaches when Little Johnny is riding the pines, or Little Suzy is batting 8th instead of cleanup. I’m sure @Impartial_Observercan share on that subject, as can many others.

Having two schools in one state is no guarantee of mediocrity (see Michigan and MSU), nor is a single school state a guarantee of success (see Minnesota). There’s a lot more to it than that. But once again, I never said anything about Coach Allen.

I never said anything about firing Allen. But more generally, all improvement comes because someone refused to accept the status quo. What obstacles prevent IU football from becoming Wisconsin? Is that an unrealistic goal?

“Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?” - Robert Browning

The very definition of an “outlier.” Probably the greatest non-human athlete in history. At the Belmont, they couldn’t even get the 2nd place finisher in the camera shot on the stretch.

Does the GID keep stats on, for example, the earliest in a poster’s GID career to have a post removed? Asking for a friend. 😆

Or, perhaps the uproar over the Smith/Rock incident caused security folks to reevaluate how they handle such incidents. Some people are capable of learning. And some people are “hypervigilant” for purported disparate treatment.

Not sure what the crime would be. But if it’s one of the Justices’ clerks, I’d be worried about my law license.

If this does come to pass, the ensuing sh*tstorm will be of truly epic proportions. I am very interested to watch the various states try to put the genie back in the bottle. And in situations like this, keep in mind the most important law of all: The Law of Unintended Consequences.

Just change a few words here and there, and you’ve described the officials shortage in a nutshell. Makes me wonder if there isn’t a common cause in there somewhere.

And that was following 3 consecutive recruiting classes ranked in the top ten nationally. Can you say “lack of development?”

I agree that it is beneficial to have a guy with speed who can take the top off the defense. But with Fields’ running/scrambling threat, they will likely be seeing less man to man coverage in the secondary, and more zone. So, they really need route runners.

Bears release Nick Foles … finally. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/33835367/chicago-bear-agree-release-quarterback-nick-foles-two-seasons

I’m sure he’s not too disappointed. After all, he’s “on the right side of history,” whatever that means.

Might as well get a new thread going for 2022. Start by discussing the draft. Through the first 3 rounds the Bears drafted a corner, a safety, and a wide receiver. All reputed to be good players. One analysis I saw gave the Bears an A-, A-, and B+ for the three selections. I’ll take that. I would have liked to see some work on the O-line so as to preserve the health of the budding franchise QB. Maybe today.

This is a particular favorite of mine. Reporter asks Lasorda his opinion of Dave Kingman’s performance after he hit 3 homers against the Dodgers.

Undoubtedly, the king of all rants.

I thought it interesting that when they interviewed Rodgers, he said he was “surprised“ when Davante Adams bolted to the Raiders. I wonder if he would have done anything differently if he had known that in advance. And I wonder how he feels now about Adams. And I also wonder why GB didn’t draft a receiver, now that Adams is gone.

He was the reason Hammond football players went to Morton. Open enrollment was successful in rebuilding the Morton football program because of him. Not the other way around.

I agree … and so does the Constitution. The problem is always with the concept of “implied coercion.” There’s 60 kids on the team. The coach announces a voluntary “Christian” prayer session after the game, and almost all of the kids enthusiastically support it. Almost all. What is the likelihood that the 3 kids who don’t (2 have been raised as atheists, and one is a Muslim) will not feel coerced into attending? Despite the coaches’ assurances that not attending will not be held against anyone, that only heightens the skepticism of the 3 on that issue. Is there concern unreasonable? And how do you account for unconscious bias that might work against the 3? The whole point is that the government should not be making those kids choose.