Rez

What sticks out to me is the way the BH admin seems to be going about the hiring process. It smacks of (1) extreme overconfidence, (2) incompetence, or both. I may be wrong, but don’t schools usually proceed with some kind of system? That is, they announce the opening, put together a hiring committee, hire a consultant (if they want a consultant), interview the candidates, narrow down to a few finalists, and make a decision. BH doesn’t seem to be doing that. It all seems pretty haphazard.

I was agreeing with you, in case there’s any confusion

Exactly - Words don’t cost money. We can talk about it again in six months if people want to (RIP @purple eagle)

I don’t have any insight into why Abseck left. But my two cents: Based on watching my family members deal with the BH administration (I’ve got nieces and nephews in BH school district), I wouldn’t want to be employed there. It’s all petty politics and people letting power go to their heads. I’m getting this secondhand, but the “I can’t believe we have to deal with this” kind of stories I’ve heard add up to a giant red flag.

PNG loses Jackson Christian on the o-line. He’s irreplaceable. We’ll still have a good o-line, but unless we have another D1 caliber guy to fill his spot i think we’ll see a slight decline on the o-line. I expect we’ll be more physical and a little faster on defense next year. We were young in certain areas, and we’ve got some good guys coming up from jv. We’re getting our qb and Rb back. We’ll be at least decent there. overall, this next season feels like a “new” team without these seniors, some of whom have been with the team for three year (or more, in Jackson’s case). We’ve got a great coaching staff (I think we over performed in the playoffs, even with the loss to SOC. The coaches took a team that simply didn’t have the horses in certain key areas and got us to the 4th round). We probably were at least the third or fourth best team in the state (I think we would have beaten Argyle and Boerne). So, not a bad season. I expect we’ll be solid next year, but there’s a ton of question marks. I’m just glad we get a season to go in humble — No “defending state champion” nonsense. Just hard work and focus on the next game. As far as district goes, Huntsville looks like the unquestioned favorite on paper. We’ll be in the mix for the championship. Nederland is going to take another step forward. I have no idea what Lake Creek has coming up (they were pretty senior heavy last year). Montgomery is a question mark. Dayton will be better. West fork will be better (they impressed me all season - they might be scary soon). As a whole, our district will be tougher from top to bottom (except for splendora, who will be the exact same level of unfortunate as before).

For all Texas made mistakes and there are serious weaknesses, in the past two games we’ve beaten the ACC champion and the Big 12 champion (and were three points shy of an SEC championship) three weeks ago. With all the mistakes and missed opportunities, we’re doing a lot right too.

I have a simpler solution : Don’t do a single day count. Every day, every school in the state counts their attendance and sends that number to the state. That number results in money received from the state. Why not just take the average of those numbers the school has submitted from the beginning of the year up to the end of October? In other words, let’s use the numbers the schools use when they have every incentive for the numbers to be high, rather than have one snapshot day? Having the one snapshot day invites cheating and is a waste of time. The schools and the state already know the numbers the school uses, and the school should have to use that number.

Almost no one was making that kick, especially outside a range he’s ever made.

Randle mismanaged their last drive. Soc mismanaged clock and special teams. Two great teams who did each other too many favors.

Reminds me of Christian McCaffrey.

Best game of the week. Wow. Heartbreaker for that kicker.

I don’t love that holding call. It was holding , but I’m not sure it sprung the runner

RR shouldn’t have punted

Both teams’ offensive tackles are putting on a lead-blocking clinic

Refs just missed a massive RR hold. Second half feels a little more equal in the no-calls.

No ticky tacky holding calls on SOC. The holds are there. Guess the refs don’t want the six months of false allegations and baseless complaints.

No reason to throw that pass that was picked. Randle acting like they have to hit a home run when all they needed to do was keep getting first downs.

What about the one just now where they basically threw number 4 out of bounds well after the whistle?

That holding call was so ticky tacky. Refs just missed the exact same call on SOC. And when are the refs going to call SOC for all the standing over the ball carriers after the play?

Randle is putting on a show right now.

It’s not simply that I don’t agree. Your citation of Plessy vs Ferguson is entirely misplaced. I don’t think you’ve understood the meaning or point of that case. Is it your contention that merely requiring that kids and schools follow certain procedures prior to participating in entirely optional non-educational activities is the same as arguing for Jim Crow laws, “separate but equal” facilities, and other racially driven segregation? What do you have to say for the current rules, wherein kids and schools are required to follow certain procedures in order to participate, the failure of which bars participation? In other words, is your point that it’s not fair to stop cheating because certain people cheat more? As to the “abundance” of cases that agree with you … What are the cases, what do they say, and how do they apply to the argument you’re making? As far as “vague” definitions of equal protection, my use of vague referred to the absence of a definition from you — what definition are you using when you say “equal protection?” What “applications” and “broad definitons” are you talking about? To succeed in an equal protection claim, someone would need to show specific discrimination and actual harm to them. Simply saying, “everyone being subject to the same rules is a violation of equal protection” wouldn’t get there, especially when the rules are applied in exactly the same way to everyone regardless of race, gender, religion, etc, and especially when the rules are simply “here’s what everyone has to do to be able to play sports.” We already have such rules — Is a kid being forced to sit because he made bad grades a violation of equal protection?

Yes - I’m not sure you understood the analogy I’m drawing. You’re asserting that fairly applying uniform rules across the board is a violation of a vague concept of “equal protection” (though it’s not clear what you mean by the term, as that hasn’t been set out). I’m saying that making rules and fairly applying them regardless of socioeconomic status and other characteristics is the opposite of violating equal protection protections.

Equal protection absolutely has to do with penal codes.

You haven’t shown it impacts any group more harshly, and that’s not only element of the standard - Drug laws also impact poor people more harshly. Try bringing THAT argument into court. “Your honor, I did use those drugs, but as you can see I’m from a poor neighborhood.”

This could apply to any uniform application of the rules. That’s not a violation of equal protection.