Bobref

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.

I can’t think of anyone who has been more openly critical of the NCAA governance.

How’d you like to be his successor?

Saw this on Facebook. Notices like this are going to be more and more commonplace. And yet, when I turn on the TV, all I see is replays of Kyle Schwarber throwing an absolute hissy fit after he got called out on a pitch that, according to the TV strike zone, was an inch or two outside. And we wonder why it is proving so difficult to eradicate abusive behavior toward officials. “Players and Coaches, We are at a crossroads with player behavior. Due to poor player behavior; we are losing umpires, losing field permits, and our game is in jeopardy. That MUST change. We must change to protect the game we all love and ensure a future where we are still able to take the field. We can no longer watch while players behave poorly each weekend. Players have become comfortable with mistreating directors, umpires, opponents, fans, and honestly anyone in the park. This ends now. We have given teams every chance possible to behave and have not seen the change we need. This has forced us to implement a much more strict policy to protect our game. This past weekend (Pikes Peak NIT) alone we had threats to “Take it to the parking lot”, players in an umpire's face, eliminated players antagonizing teams, slides with the intent to hurt opposing players, and in general, poor sportsmanship from teams all around. This was a relatively mild event. None of these things can be tolerated and are unacceptable moving forward. If you think any of these things belong in the game, please save us and yourself time and find another place to play. There are plenty of organizations that run events that will not be as strict and they will be a much better fit for you. We ask that you withdraw from our events now. Our park is not a place for you to come drink too much, smoke weed, and take out your frustrations from life on everyone around. We understand being competitive and having the desire to win, but many take it far beyond this and make it personal. Umpires are going to make mistakes and people need to learn to have a respectful conversation, instead of throwing a fit. We want to foster the spirit of competition and being the best players you can be. We will not foster treating people like garbage and trying to cause fights. Moving forward, teams that come to the park and cause issues will be withdrawn from future events. We will start suspending the whole team and having each individual player go through the appeal process if they feel they had no involvement. If you don't like that, then I suggest you start checking your teammates and holding them accountable. I am not going to waste our time and have a conversation any longer. I will remove the team from our events and we will move forward. We are ok if you disagree with this. You do not have to spend money with our organization. We are looking for teams that are interested in the most competitive and organized events possible. Please be honest with yourself and decide if our standards are a good fit for you, or if another organization has events that offer what you are looking for. We hope this will help ensure a bright future for our organization and give us the opportunity to focus on providing the best events possible without spending so much time babysitting adults and worrying about conduct. We look forward to our future events and moving forward with the players that are interested in developing their abilities. Sincerely, Colorado USSSA”

Keep in mind that both sides in this case are relying on the First Amendment … but different “rights” protected by the First. Coach is arguing that his praying immediately following a game, on the field, is protected free speech, and by prohibiting him from doing so, the school district violated his right to freedom of speech. The School District is relying on the Establishment Clause of the First, i.e., the clause that prohibits the establishment of a “state” religion. For me, this is the crucial aspect of the case. The coach was not fired because of the content of his speech, i.e., prayer. Rather, he was fired because the school district had been advised that allowing this to go on could subject them to civil lawsuits by students and their parents, claiming that the practice violates the Establishment Clause. They made every effort to accommodate the coach’s wish to pray following games. “Free” speech has never been absolutely free: the whole “yelling ‘fire!’ in a crowded theater thing. Speech is always subject to reasonable limitations as to time, place, and manner. The thing that makes it hard for the coach to win (I think) is that there is no evidence that the school district acted because of the content of his speech, i.e., a prayer. If this truly was only about the coach’s freedom of expression, there would be no problem with him doing it in the privacy of the coaches’ locker room, or on the field after the students had gone, both of which, IMO, would represent reasonable time, place and manner restraints on his protected speech, and both of which were offered as alternatives by the school district. But, as the following article points out, it depends which version of the facts you believe. https://today.law.harvard.edu/supreme-court-preview-kennedy-v-bremerton-school-district/ Although this is a Q & A with a Harvard Law Professor, it’s easily understood by non-lawyers, and presents a very clear and concise overview of the case, and explanation of the issues involved.

Right now my wife is at Disneyworld. She took her 90 yr. old mother and two grown sons there to reenact a vacation they took 20 years ago. It includes photos with Disney characters. Should I be concerned that she might get “turned” while down there?

Well … that could be a fractured ulna …

The “Mad Bomber.” The days before dink and dunk became the way to go. And most importantly, a Notre Dame man.

Not a whole lot in the way of rules changes this year. Blocking below the waist is headed for extinction, as it was further restricted. https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-rule-changes-2022-ncaa-addresses-targeting-appeals-kenny-pickett-slide-fake-injuries/ College football rule changes 2022: NCAA addresses targeting appeals, Kenny Pickett slide, fake injuries The NCAA announced Thursday that several rules will be enacted for the 2022 football season, including an appeals process for the targeting rule. Additionally, changes were made to address fake injuries, fake slides, blocking below the waist and defensive holding. Schools will now be able to appeal second-half targeting penalties to determine if the player who committed the foul will be forced to sit out the first half of the team's next game. The conference will submit an appeal to the national coordinator of officials, who will determine if the foul was assessed correctly. If it wasn't, the penalty would be overturned and the player will be eligible to participate in the first half of the subsequent game. The NCAA also addressed players faking injuries to slow the pace of a game, a practice that has become more common with the widespread use of up-tempo offenses. Conferences and schools will now submit a report to the national coordinator of officials, who will provide feedback to the conference. The conference or school would then levy any additional punishment. "We considered all options to address this issue, including allowing both teams an opportunity to substitute after a first down," said David Shaw, Stanford coach and chair of the Football Rules Committee. "This is another step to consider in the future." The so-called "Kenny Pickett Rule" has also been greenlit. Any ball carrier who fakes a feet-first slide will be considered down at the spot. Pickett, the former Pitt quarterback, famously ran for a 58-yard touchdown in the first half of the 2021 ACC Championship Game vs. Wake Forest after faking a slide. Blocking below the waist was addressed by the committee as well. It will be allowed by linemen and stationary running backs inside of the tackle box, but blocking below the waist outside of the tackle box is prohibited. Defensive holding will remain a 10-yard penalty, but will always carry an automatic first down.

I fear for the youth of today, being taught by people with such clearly inadequate logic skills.

Got to be yellow mustard. I like mayo, too.

What are your condiments of choice? And I’d like a nice, thick slice of red onion.

And the way compensation has exploded for wide receivers could possibly be another reason. Two sides of the same coin.