Careful stating facts around here.
Not to mention a lot of those historical stats were in a 25 year window 70years ago.
From 1979-2009 we reached something like 9 elite 8 or better. In his 12 seasons he has reached 7.
I’m choosing to support Cal, and here’s why
- Thread starter Wonky
- Start date
Not to mention a lot of those historical stats were in a 25 year window 70years ago.
From 1979-2009 we reached something like 9 elite 8 or better. In his 12 seasons he has reached 7.
Doesn't have anything to do with my comment.
You can pick out bright spots all you want. For example, I could say - we swept Tennessee this year so he's not running us into the ground.
Yes. I know those details.
Hey, you're the one who started with the trolling business which is usually a sign of defeat in internet debate.
I think it goes to part of the issue with Cal. He's not fully supporting UK. It's about him.
Since 21 it's headed downward
Nobody with any clue was saying this in the 2019 NCAA tournament in which we were hosed by refs once again 17,19,20 were really good seasons. 22 was at times aswell
The game is not the same sport it was even 6 seasons ago. Much less when tubby was here
Ashamed that UK fans are relegated to at least 1 more season of inferior coaching all because CCC’s agent was smarter than the UK athletic administration. $9mil for a has been!
You must be living in the past..just like Cal. Everyone get judged on current performance...not past performance.
Yes, because it is targeting one person, in their presence and disrupting his ability to perform his job. I am not saying it was, I am just telling you the law.
The articles are posted in privately owned newspapers, and goes against freedom of press. Nor are they present when Cal is performing his work or disruptive of that.
No, that’s not targeted when it's done to all the players potentially shooting free throws on an opposing team, or even just multiple players.
Technically, that could have been harassment of that player. I would need more context.
I'm not even a liberal. Solid Trump voter, in fact. I guess being logical and knowing the law is political now as well.
You just opted to leave them out of your analysis?
Trolling and needing multiple usernames because they impose posts allotments on new accounts is a bit different. You're simply arguing for arguments sake. That is trolling 101.
And that’s wrong. You should be judged on both, until such time as your current performance outweighs your past performance. And whether you like it or not, the facts are this hasn’t happened yet.
You realize those have been hate speech by the government right? And thus not allowed in public funded places as it would look as if the government supported such? And is one of those specific instances I mentioned earlier. Now, I don’t agree with that per se but that’s the current state of things.
The UF kid could probably win if he sued, but suing is a lot of time and money. And for the record, I believe UF was extremely wrong for that. There wasn’t even really any public outcry by most But they decided to be stupid. Again he could probably take that all the way up and win. But time and money. Against a well funded university.
Could a school fly a battle flag? You’re asking if a United States school should fly a battle flag of what was technically a foreign country? Might as well ask if they can fly the flag of the Third Reich or Al-Queda. Not even addressing the idiocy of that.
now, the student wearing “Confederate” clothing could get legally interesting. School would probably limit it for obvious reasons. But I would consider it a violation of speech. However, I could see that being ruled against as its mere presence would cause a huge disruptio of the learning environment in today‘s culture.
So your agreement is that they do limit speech the way you like? That’s not a biased argument at all.
"Technically, that could have been harassment of that player. I would need more context."
Now that's comical.
"Yes, because it is targeting one person, in their presence and disrupting his ability to perform his job. I am not saying it was, I am just telling you the law."
Ah....now we know what's been holding Cal back.....a sign.
Man, logic and critical thinking are not your thing.
I think people tend to underestimate the amount of time it takes to recover from the debacle that was Barbee + Justice + losing Robic. Fact is our recruiting was way, way down. We all know Cal can only win when he has the elite talent. Well guess what? I’m ok with that as long as he’s actually getting it. So that’s why I’m willing to give him a chance.
Exactly. While last performance does matter (and should for the most part) it doesn’t justify current performance.
Past performance helps in your job to build loyalty and trust. It’s there to protect you against mistakes. Hence why Cal wasn’t fired after 9-16. But it can only help you so far. If your performances continues to de then action most be taken.
I had a part of me that thought that as well, but his X and O ability is so dang bad that hopeful part of me just keeps shrinking , and JMHO ... He's severely damaged BBN , we aint what we used to be .. maybe never will again ?
I'm sure to a layman of the constitution and law, it is comical.
If you say, so!
Also, since you opposed to kneeling, are you also opposed to on field prayer?
"Could a school fly a battle flag? You’re asking if a United States school should fly a battle flag of what was technically a foreign country? Might as well ask if they can fly the flag of the Third Reich or Al-Queda. Not even addressing the idiocy of that."
And for the record I was clear I do not support flying the Confederate battle flag. The south was a foreign power and was defeated by the US.
*********
My point on the US flag is this....which has been missed by many.....the US flag is viewed as a hateful flag by many on the Left. They view it as a symbol of oppression. Same with the National Anthem. You may have noticed prior to the stuporbowl there was another "anthem" sung. This is the division the Left wants in this country.
See where this is going? The whole woke movement, the kneeling, etc....is designed to remove the US as you and I understand it. You may not believe me and probably won't. However, I remember M. Obama saying "all this for a flag?" in the runup to the 2008 campaign.
If trends keep going in this country saying the pledge, flying the flag, etc.....will be deemed as hate speech. Maybe not in our lifetimes....but it will happen.
You continue to claim to know the Constitution yet you've illustrated you don't many times already.
If the players want to pray they can. If they don't they don't have to.
But IIRC the NCAA did at one time, as did the major sports leagues, have rules/standards, about the National Anthem.
You could say that but it makes no sense in this context.
I’m talking about a full season. Last season wasn’t a bright spot. It was a full season. We blew out Kansas, UNC and Tn. We won 26 games.
We earned a 2 seed. We were a top 10 team.
Yes it ended badly. But the season was a good season.
It’s certainly not running it into the ground
Cal has had 2 bad seasons in his 13 completed seasons. One was terribly bad.
Some, (many here), want to go ahead and make this a bad season.
And maybe they will be right?
But the story on this season is not written yet. Things are looking up though.
This the very basic and simple point people have just refused to acknowledge.
You ever going to demonstrate how this is?
Can't they do the same with kneeling? If they want they can, if not, they don't???
IIRC what?
So, you're fine with players kneeling on the field for prayer, but you take issue with them kneeling for the anthem?
Interesting...
The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It applies to federal, state, and local government actors. This is a broad category that includes not only lawmakers and elected officials, but also public schools and universities, courts, and police officers. It does not include private citizens, businesses, and organizations. This means that:
A private school can suspend students for criticizing a school policy.
A private business can fire an employee for expressing political views on the job.
A private media company can refuse to publish or broadcast opinions it disagrees with.
UK isn't private. Neither is UF.
www.freedomforum.org
Is Your Speech Protected by the First Amendment? - Freedom Forum
4 steps to know what speech is protected and when.
www.freedomforum.org www.freedomforum.org
Also, SCOTUS ruled on this in 1969 in Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
Facts and Case Summary - Tinker v. Des Moines
Decision Date: February 24, 1969 Background At a public school in Des Moines, Iowa, students planned to wear black armbands at school as a silent protest against the Vietnam War. When the principal became aware of the plan, he warned the students that they would be suspended if they wore the...
www.uscourts.gov www.uscourts.gov
this thread sure brought the socks out ... bastards .
The court was motivated by the anti-war movement of the day.
Same as the court was motivated to uphold slavery and separate but equal and the murder of the unborn child.
Try to keep up.
They are expected at UK. That is why when coaches start spiraling downward they don't last long like they do at some other places. They are paid top dollar to continue giving UK stanard performance. Because of that don't we (UK) doesn't owe them loyality for what they did previously. They were paid well for that.
Last edited:
It can happen but it does tend to turn into a pissing contest for the most part. I think there’s merit on both sides of the argument truthfully.
I honestly wouldn’t even care if it turned into a pissing contest… as long as the results on the court were what was being debated. It’s the fact that every thread degenerates into a political discussion that ruins the board.
I'll be waiting like:
The reasoning for their motives is irrelevant to what the law is, which is what the argument is about. The law states they are free to kneel and cannot be punished by UK (public school) for it.
You seem to be the only one confused.
While I respect the flag and what it stands for and the people that have given lives for it, I also realize that the rights it represents are WAAAAY bigger than a piece of fabric. The US doesn’t need a flag to exist. It does need its people and its law. So I get why people get upset over it. I don’t like it when it’s disrespected either. But, it’s protected speech. Just as saying you hate this country is protected speech, albeit ironically. The flag represents a complicated history. The US is not without sin. No country is. Some do act like we are though. We aren’t perfect by any means. However, we are still the best country on earth in a lot of ways.
Without diverging into a major history lesson, I myself, have refused to say the pledge on a few occasions. Or have at least left out “wtih justice for all” because I feel there isn’t justice for all in this country. There’s justic for some, and it’s usually for those with money and power. Again, without meandering to to far, that’s another discussion.
Point being, racism is alive and well. It’s naive to say it’s not. Is it widespread like it once was? No. Will it ever be gone? Sadly no. And it’s not about that solely either. We’ve seen countless examples of police abuse/brutality and government overreach Lately. And that goes to all sides of the political spectrum and all races. So it’s easy to see why people are upset and aren’t happy with what the flag represents or at least in their minds represents.
Personally, the flag represents the Constitution for its highest ideal and intent. Where all peoples in this country who are here legally, or wish to come here legally, are free, and protected equilaterally under law. Law is what made this country fair and great. we have to resent to being that shining beacon we once were. And not be a country without accountability or rule.
It I digress. TL;DR we need to stop being extremists, and that goes for both sides.
Yeah Sock Troll, the point was it was not a first amendment issue like others were arguing. It is an organizational issue and what they will allow.
"No, that’s not targeted when it's done to all the players potentially shooting free throws on an opposing team, or even just multiple players.
Technically, that could have been harassment of that player. I would need more context."
On Wednesday night South Carolina fans repeatedly shouted "lock him up" when Miller touched the ball. Specifically directed at him.
Harassment? Yes or No.
But it is a 1st amendment issue. UK is a federally funded public school, correct? So, they are bound by the constitution.
The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It applies to federal, state, and local government actors. This is a broad category that includes not only lawmakers and elected officials, but also public schools and universities, courts, and police officers. It does not include private citizens, businesses, and organizations. This means that:
A private school can suspend students for criticizing a school policy.
A private business can fire an employee for expressing political views on the job.
A private media company can refuse to publish or broadcast opinions it disagrees with.
UK isn't private. Neither is UF.
www.freedomforum.org
Is Your Speech Protected by the First Amendment? - Freedom Forum
4 steps to know what speech is protected and when.
www.freedomforum.org www.freedomforum.org
Also, SCOTUS ruled on this in 1969 in Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
Facts and Case Summary - Tinker v. Des Moines
Decision Date: February 24, 1969 Background At a public school in Des Moines, Iowa, students planned to wear black armbands at school as a silent protest against the Vietnam War. When the principal became aware of the plan, he warned the students that they would be suspended if they wore the...
www.uscourts.gov www.uscourts.gov
That depends on SC laws as it pertains to harassment. Each state has their own laws.
It's so obvious even Biden would say it's "self evident". 😂
From the UK Student-Athlete handbook (2018-19).
G. Disruptive Behavior Disruptive Behavior is any conduct that disrupts any teaching, research, administrative, disciplinary, or other UK activities. Disruptive Behavior may occur at functions on or off campus, or at other authorized non-UK activities when the conduct occurs on UK Premises
What if, what if... What if frogs had wings... why not save this post until April after we have made the Final-4? Seriously.
