|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 18, 2016 0:36:25 GMT -5
WF, I'd like to see your proof of that. I went through the MOAC Constitution and no where does it state that any team, let alone, Harding is under such scrutiny. It states any school can be voted out by 3/4 of the League. www.moacsports.com/MISC/MOAC%20CONSTITUTION.pdfI graduated from Harding in '84. Played football and basketball in one of the toughest conferences in the state, Buckeye Conference, and am glad Harding is turning the corner in football. With that said, I have followed Harding and Pleasant for the last twenty years, and at best, Harding may have won five of those games. Today, Harding has answered the debate on the field and us Pleasant homers can't deny that. What works against Harding is the size of it's conference opponents. Like Buckeye Valley, Harding may have to win it's non-conference games and win all of it's conference games to get a sniff at the playoffs. Good luck to Harding and Pleasant the rest of the year. Surely you jest. Since when do members of leagues and their people do nothing outside of what's in their Constitution? Schools in leagues are ALWAYS watching what other schools are doing. I saw NOTHING in that constitution that said schools COULD NOT "hide and watch", make notes, keep a book. What do you think was going on in the NCC when 8 schools just walked away from the other 4 schools? Secret meetings were held, not all schools were invited, a few schools were contacting other schools on the sly. The League President did not do what was best for the league. Made no attempt to hold the league together. Do you think those occurances were covered in their constitution? Don't be silly |
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 18, 2016 0:46:42 GMT -5
I believe doing the wrong thing keeps you out of games and not Judges. really??? Because the same day the judge who is a pleasant coach was removed from his case he was allowed to play so get out of here a that bs I'll tell you how backward you are. You gave ZERO proof that a judge based his decision on where his house is. No proof = foolhardy slander. |
|
|
|
Post by usa70pp on Oct 18, 2016 4:27:55 GMT -5
I believe doing the wrong thing keeps you out of games and not Judges. really??? Because the same day the judge who is a pleasant coach was removed from his case he was allowed to play so get out of here a that bs Since it is public record, you won't mind giving the judges name will you? It would help greatly to determine your veracity. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2016 5:50:40 GMT -5
The ability that a league constitution gives its members to remove an unwanted school with votes and the disbanding of a league because a portion of the members want to separate from other members is not the same.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2016 5:52:20 GMT -5
But probably both would be organized behind private meetings.
|
|
|
|
Post by blazer on Oct 18, 2016 6:20:07 GMT -5
The ability that a league constitution gives its members to remove an unwanted school with votes and the disbanding of a league because a portion of the members want to seperate from other members is not the same. No one stated they were. As a matter of fact, it clearly states each scenario in their constitution. |
|
|
|
Post by blazer on Oct 18, 2016 6:24:31 GMT -5
WF, I'd like to see your proof of that. I went through the MOAC Constitution and no where does it state that any team, let alone, Harding is under such scrutiny. It states any school can be voted out by 3/4 of the League. www.moacsports.com/MISC/MOAC%20CONSTITUTION.pdfI graduated from Harding in '84. Played football and basketball in one of the toughest conferences in the state, Buckeye Conference, and am glad Harding is turning the corner in football. With that said, I have followed Harding and Pleasant for the last twenty years, and at best, Harding may have won five of those games. Today, Harding has answered the debate on the field and us Pleasant homers can't deny that. What works against Harding is the size of it's conference opponents. Like Buckeye Valley, Harding may have to win it's non-conference games and win all of it's conference games to get a sniff at the playoffs. Good luck to Harding and Pleasant the rest of the year. Surely you jest. Since when do members of leagues and their people do nothing outside of what's in their Constitution? Schools in leagues are ALWAYS watching what other schools are doing. I saw NOTHING in that constitution that said schools COULD NOT "hide and watch", make notes, keep a book. What do you think was going on in the NCC when 8 schools just walked away from the other 4 schools? Secret meetings were held, not all schools were invited, a few schools were contacting other schools on the sly. The League President did not do what was best for the league. Made no attempt to hold the league together. Do you think those occurances were covered in their constitution? Don't be silly This post is conjecture, as most of your post are. But yet, you demand proof/facts from everyone else. Maybe you can let us in on who the "note keepers" are. Names and schools please. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2016 6:36:31 GMT -5
The ability that a league constitution gives its members to remove an unwanted school with votes and the disbanding of a league because a portion of the members want to seperate from other members is not the same. No one stated they were. As a matter of fact, it clearly states each scenario in their constitution. Okay I'll try to be clearer. The discussion of what can potentially happen in the MOAC and what actually happened in the NCC are not very comparable. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2016 6:41:10 GMT -5
The MOAC has a process to where the majority members can remove an unwanted member. IF that would ever take place is doubtful in my opinion.
With the NCC there were a majority of schools that wanted to form a new league without some of there conference members at that time. They had no intention for the NCC to survive.
|
|
|
|
Post by blazer on Oct 18, 2016 7:39:38 GMT -5
The MOAC has a process to where the majority members can remove an unwanted member. IF that would ever take place is doubtful in my opinion. With the NCC there were a majority of schools that wanted to form a new league without some of there conference members at that time. They had no intention for the NCC to survive. We're on the same side of the fence. WF brought the NCC into the conversation. Apples and oranges. |
|
|
|
Post by jedbartlet98 on Oct 18, 2016 8:50:35 GMT -5
Usually when they run the ball, instead of passing the ball, or little Johnny should get more playing time, but I'm in the stands and not on the field, so I don't hear those comments. That's been the status quo at Pleasant for 20 years. Certain groups of parents have run that school for a long time and that's why the school is in the shape it's in Those people have cost them : The current Boys Basketball Coach at Elgin The current Football coach at NU Current Asst. AD at Harding Current Boys Basketball Coach at BV |
|
|
|
Post by blazer on Oct 18, 2016 9:02:37 GMT -5
Usually when they run the ball, instead of passing the ball, or little Johnny should get more playing time, but I'm in the stands and not on the field, so I don't hear those comments. That's been the status quo at Pleasant for 20 years. Certain groups of parents have run that school for a long time and that's why the school is in the shape it's in Those people have cost them : The current Boys Basketball Coach at Elgin The current Football coach at NU Current Asst. AD at Harding Current Boys Basketball Coach at BV Agree |
|
|
|
Post by babymaker on Oct 18, 2016 9:51:06 GMT -5
Hey can this end. Hardings D is better because Slater is a great coach.
Harding is in the league and they won. Ugly game but they won.
Pleasant the last 2 years have been down.
The deal with the kid in Jail... he broke the law by not showing up at court. The main case has not been decided so he is innocent.
The selling points to keep them in the league with stadium and facilities are irrelevant to me as a reason for them staying or going.
They won and in future years I am sure it will be a great game. Congrats on this years win. Good luck in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eagles nest on Oct 18, 2016 11:14:13 GMT -5
Oh how I hate to prolong this post even further but….. I liked reading the banter between scooter and wf on different issues in other threads but wf come on man. Do you always have to be right or the you know more than let’s say everybody else! Again, I like reading your posts, some make me laugh and some you hit right on the head. So I will wait for a snappy comeback on my beginning statement. Back to the thread. Harding knew the MOAC was a lose lose for them in football, but logistically it makes since. Several MOAC AD’s said why we would drive past MH to play a game when they are right next door. If it came down to a vote I just don’t see enough votes to remove Harding. BV, Galion, Harding would vote no, RV could swing either way and Pleasant and NU would be the only yes from what I heard. If anyone remembers they did have a meeting before the season and only NU said yes to remove Harding. I just don’t understand the way some people think. All these kids have played against each other since youth football (MOACYFL) and Jr high (COAL), Harding hasn’t dominated those leagues. The Mid 90’s HHS teams are gone, I have watched all HHS games and they are outsized by every team in the league and it will continue with Ontario and CF. Do we have athletes in the system yes, burners like this year no. As for the kid that got to play with the ankle bracelet, no one knows for sure, but what we do know is that it wasn’t a Judge that stopped him. That kid was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He is an A/B student that made a bad decision and he was never in Jail like a poster stated earlier he simply did not show up for court. Remember all the other teams only play Harding 1 time in football. If Harding dominated the MOAC like Alder has then I myself would have an issue. Problem is no leagues with like size schools are interested in HHS due to location which is why the MOAC fits perfectly. The OCC keeps adding schools around Columbus which pushes HHS out. Trust me the Harding faithful would love to be in the OCC but not gonna happen. Pleasant and Harding are done for this football season so can we get to Week 9. Rant over. Wait wait, and as for HHS kids being “sad and juvenile” that quote could not be further from the truth. One game, one game and mainly 1 kid (the kid tossed by pleasant coaches) before the season started. Ok now we move on to week 9.
|
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 18, 2016 12:34:51 GMT -5
Surely you jest. Since when do members of leagues and their people do nothing outside of what's in their Constitution? Schools in leagues are ALWAYS watching what other schools are doing. I saw NOTHING in that constitution that said schools COULD NOT "hide and watch", make notes, keep a book. What do you think was going on in the NCC when 8 schools just walked away from the other 4 schools? Secret meetings were held, not all schools were invited, a few schools were contacting other schools on the sly. The League President did not do what was best for the league. Made no attempt to hold the league together. Do you think those occurences were covered in their constitution? Don't be silly This post is conjecture, as most of your post are. But yet, you demand proof/facts from everyone else. Maybe you can let us in on who the "note keepers" are. Names and schools please. What was described HAPPENED, no conjecture. Answer the question. What happened in the NCC, was that in their constitution? It could happen anywhere. What is a league or school going to do EVEN IF, something not in the league constitution happens. File suit? Sue who? Sue for what? Please, reference the post where I proffered the words "note keeper". With that being said, YOUR "note keeper" could be anyone, could be you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2016 12:55:38 GMT -5
Eagles nest, NOOOOOOOO!! Don't poke the bear when it is sleeping.  |
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 18, 2016 13:30:12 GMT -5
Oh how I hate to prolong this post even further but….. I liked reading the banter between scooter and wf on different issues in other threads but wf come on man. Do you always have to be right or the you know more than let’s say everybody else! Again, I like reading your posts, some make me laugh and some you hit right on the head. So I will wait for a snappy comeback on my beginning statement. Back to the thread. Harding knew the MOAC was a lose lose for them in football, but logistically it makes since. Several MOAC AD’s said why we would drive past MH to play a game when they are right next door. If it came down to a vote I just don’t see enough votes to remove Harding. BV, Galion, Harding would vote no, RV could swing either way and Pleasant and NU would be the only yes from what I heard. If anyone remembers they did have a meeting before the season and only NU said yes to remove Harding. I just don’t understand the way some people think. All these kids have played against each other since youth football (MOACYFL) and Jr high (COAL), Harding hasn’t dominated those leagues. The Mid 90’s HHS teams are gone, I have watched all HHS games and they are outsized by every team in the league and it will continue with Ontario and CF. Do we have athletes in the system yes, burners like this year no. As for the kid that got to play with the ankle bracelet, no one knows for sure, but what we do know is that it wasn’t a Judge that stopped him. That kid was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He is an A/B student that made a bad decision and he was never in Jail like a poster stated earlier he simply did not show up for court. Remember all the other teams only play Harding 1 time in football. If Harding dominated the MOAC like Alder has then I myself would have an issue. Problem is no leagues with like size schools are interested in HHS due to location which is why the MOAC fits perfectly. The OCC keeps adding schools around Columbus which pushes HHS out. Trust me the Harding faithful would love to be in the OCC but not gonna happen. Pleasant and Harding are done for this football season so can we get to Week 9. Rant over. Wait wait, and as for HHS kids being “sad and juvenile” that quote could not be further from the truth. One game, one game and mainly 1 kid (the kid tossed by pleasant coaches) before the season started. Ok now we move on to week 9. Man, PLEASE show us my posts that make you think I "always have to be right". All I've done is read what others have said and joined the give and take. Just because one enjoys a good debate has nothing to due with "always have to be right". PLEASE, reference the post that makes you think I'm against Harding being in the MOAC. I'm not. Why should I give a rat's patootie about Harding, after being in the NOL for 4 years? A league with larger schools. A league Ontario was the next to smallest school. A league Ontario has competed bettered than anyone thought they would. A league with many schools with better overall programs than Harding has. I'd much rather compete against Harding in ALL sports compared to having to compete against Sandusky(a clone of Harding), Columbian, Norwalk, Bellevue and Shelby, in total. The biggest take away from this discussion? It is SILLY to be so concerned about ONE sport out of 19. Looking forward to compete against Harding in ALL sports. Heck, Ontario hasn't been significant in football, in any league, for over a decade. I'm hoping Hawkins can change that. |
|
hardingmavman
All Conference
Champions bleed scarlet and gray!
Posts: 194 
|
Post by hardingmavman on Oct 18, 2016 16:30:09 GMT -5
Oh how I hate to prolong this post even further but….. I liked reading the banter between scooter and wf on different issues in other threads but wf come on man. Do you always have to be right or the you know more than let’s say everybody else! Again, I like reading your posts, some make me laugh and some you hit right on the head. So I will wait for a snappy comeback on my beginning statement. Back to the thread. Harding knew the MOAC was a lose lose for them in football, but logistically it makes since. Several MOAC AD’s said why we would drive past MH to play a game when they are right next door. If it came down to a vote I just don’t see enough votes to remove Harding. BV, Galion, Harding would vote no, RV could swing either way and Pleasant and NU would be the only yes from what I heard. If anyone remembers they did have a meeting before the season and only NU said yes to remove Harding. I just don’t understand the way some people think. All these kids have played against each other since youth football (MOACYFL) and Jr high (COAL), Harding hasn’t dominated those leagues. The Mid 90’s HHS teams are gone, I have watched all HHS games and they are outsized by every team in the league and it will continue with Ontario and CF. Do we have athletes in the system yes, burners like this year no. As for the kid that got to play with the ankle bracelet, no one knows for sure, but what we do know is that it wasn’t a Judge that stopped him. That kid was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He is an A/B student that made a bad decision and he was never in Jail like a poster stated earlier he simply did not show up for court. Remember all the other teams only play Harding 1 time in football. If Harding dominated the MOAC like Alder has then I myself would have an issue. Problem is no leagues with like size schools are interested in HHS due to location which is why the MOAC fits perfectly. The OCC keeps adding schools around Columbus which pushes HHS out. Trust me the Harding faithful would love to be in the OCC but not gonna happen. Pleasant and Harding are done for this football season so can we get to Week 9. Rant over. Wait wait, and as for HHS kids being “sad and juvenile” that quote could not be further from the truth. One game, one game and mainly 1 kid (the kid tossed by pleasant coaches) before the season started. Ok now we move on to week 9. Man, PLEASE show us my posts that make you think I "always have to be right". All I've done is read what others have said and joined the give and take. Just because one enjoys a good debate has nothing to due with "always have to be right". PLEASE, reference the post that makes you think I'm against Harding being in the MOAC. I'm not. Why should I give a rat's patootie about Harding, after being in the NOL for 4 years? A league with larger schools. A league Ontario was the next to smallest school. A league Ontario has competed bettered than anyone thought they would. A league with many schools with better overall programs than Harding has. I'd much rather compete against Harding in ALL sports compared to having to compete against Sandusky(a clone of Harding), Columbian, Norwalk, Bellevue and Shelby, in total. The biggest take away from this discussion? It is SILLY to be so concerned about ONE sport out of 19. Looking forward to compete against Harding in ALL sports. Heck, Ontario hasn't been significant in football, in any league, for over a decade. I'm hoping Hawkins can change that. I can't wait till Galion and Ontario play lol |
|
hardingmavman
All Conference
Champions bleed scarlet and gray!
Posts: 194
|
Post by hardingmavman on Oct 18, 2016 19:14:41 GMT -5
Hey can this end. Hardings D is better because Slater is a great coach. Harding is in the league and they won. Ugly game but they won. Pleasant the last 2 years have been down.The deal with the kid in Jail... he broke the law by not showing up at court. The main case has not been decided so he is innocent. The selling points to keep them in the league with stadium and facilities are irrelevant to me as a reason for them staying or going. They won and in future years I am sure it will be a great game. Congrats on this years win. Good luck in the future. Ugly game that was won 41-21? And how in the world do you say Pleasant was down this year with a record of 6-1 well 6-2.... why do you consider a record that good a down year? |
|
|
|
Post by usa70pp on Oct 18, 2016 19:26:08 GMT -5
Partly because 13 of the last 20 years Pleasant has had records from 10-2 through 15-0.
|
|
|
|
Post by topwrestler on Oct 18, 2016 20:10:11 GMT -5
You absolute ignorant toolbag, you make the whole Harding community look really stupid, however, we know better. How is stating a fact making me a moron,toolbag or whatever you want to call me it's what haopened I am not sure where you get your information, but it is factually untrue. |
|
|
|
Post by babymaker on Oct 18, 2016 20:49:58 GMT -5
Hey can this end. Hardings D is better because Slater is a great coach. Harding is in the league and they won. Ugly game but they won. Pleasant the last 2 years have been down.The deal with the kid in Jail... he broke the law by not showing up at court. The main case has not been decided so he is innocent. The selling points to keep them in the league with stadium and facilities are irrelevant to me as a reason for them staying or going. They won and in future years I am sure it will be a great game. Congrats on this years win. Good luck in the future. Ugly game that was won 41-21? And how in the world do you say Pleasant was down this year with a record of 6-1 well 6-2.... why do you consider a record that good a down year? Like someone stated earlier 3 of those wins were against bad teams... They played Alter tougher than the score indicated and they played Harding closer as well. Say yes the score was 41-21 but if the final score was how you measure how well a team played they then you don't go for it 4 downs on your own side of the field and give up a short field late in the game. You punt, play defense, and try to limit scoring by making them drive the field. I also use the same excuses Harding used against JA. If they didn't turn the ball over 4 times its a different game. You can not have it both ways say it was a factor in your loss but not allow someone else to say it in your win. Fair? I also factor in the fact that they had 8 penalties and of those 7 were preventable (the out of bounds hit was crap imo) that made the game ugly and the score could have been worse with 4 TO and zero penalties. Thus ugly. Its not taking away from Harding if you took it that way. BUT If you thought it was a clean game I am a little puzzled. They are down Pleasant of old would have never started a sophomores much less more than 1. So there is depth issues. They have 2 Sophomores going both ways and while they are playing very well there is something to be said about having upperclassmen on the field. Maybe I am totally wrong, maybe if they can get in to the playoffs and win a game or 2 I will regret saying they are down at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 18, 2016 20:58:17 GMT -5
The MOAC has a process to where the majority members can remove an unwanted member. IF that would ever take place is doubtful in my opinion. With the NCC there were a majority of schools that wanted to form a new league without some of there conference members at that time. They had no intention for the NCC to survive. We're on the same side of the fence. WF brought the NCC into the conversation. Apples and oranges. I brought the NCC into the discussion to prove things happen that a league constitution doesn't cover. You were using the league constitution to say there was nothing in it to give permission for one school or schools to watch and scribe what another school or schools do. Grapefruits and grapes. |
|
|
|
Post by 4 on Oct 18, 2016 21:12:28 GMT -5
I can agree it would be different without turnovers. But isn't like pleasant was driving like Harding was against alder. Each turnover was after couple turnovers. The pick by Jefferson after long craycraft one is about only one they really drove hard. Without turnovers I'd say it's a 2 touchdown game. But also without all the penalties Harding coulda won by 40. So it goes either way.
|
|
|
|
Post by babymaker on Oct 18, 2016 22:23:28 GMT -5
I can agree it would be different without turnovers. But isn't like pleasant was driving like Harding was against alder. Each turnover was after couple turnovers. The pick by Jefferson after long craycraft one is about only one they really drove hard. Without turnovers I'd say it's a 2 touchdown game. But also without all the penalties Harding coulda won by 40. So it goes either way. With out TO is a 2 TD game it ended a 3 TD game... SMH 2 TO were inside Pleasant's 30 yard line so they may not have stopped drives they did give excellent field position. Which at that point was a key factor in the game. Putting your D in a bad spot Harding is too good to give them a short field. |
|
|
|
Post by blazer on Oct 19, 2016 7:27:10 GMT -5
We're on the same side of the fence. WF brought the NCC into the conversation. Apples and oranges. I brought the NCC into the discussion to prove things happen that a league constitution doesn't cover. You were using the league constitution to say there was nothing in it to give permission for one school or schools to watch and scribe what another school or schools do. Grapefruits and grapes. WF, I've played your game before. The NCC has no bearing on the MOAC. To use the NCC as an example, especially without facts, interjecting hearsay, and/or second hand info (unless of course, you were present at these super-secret meetings), is, as you say, "foolhardy". Provide facts, with names and schools involved, or your NCC example is trash. End results do not justify your means. Now, if you used the NCC example in proper context, you could have provided it as an example as to how the Blue division voted to leave the MOAC. That might of been an apples to applesauce comparison. As for my posting the MOAC constitution, I backed up my assertions with facts. Whether you wish to admit this fact into the conversation is entirely on you. I asked you for facts. Names and schools of, as you say, those who ""hide and watch", make notes, keep a book" on Harding. I, and I'm sure many others on this board, eagerly await your factless diatribe. <sarcasm> |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2016 7:39:19 GMT -5
I think you are spot on blazer. It would appear the MOAC has a method of removing an unwanted school from its membership. Which is what was being discussed. In the other mentioned situation it was a few schools wanting to form a totally new league with the intent of separating from league members at that time.
|
|
|
|
Post by usa70pp on Oct 19, 2016 10:34:39 GMT -5
Where can I buy a dish of this fruit salad you boys have been fixing?
|
|
|
|
Post by baseballdad on Oct 19, 2016 11:41:48 GMT -5
This thread is like a bad car wreck. Every time I drive by one, I promise myself I'm not going to look but I inevitably do. For the same reason, I can't seem to not click when this thread has "NEW" beside it.
|
|
|
|
Post by blazer on Oct 19, 2016 11:44:49 GMT -5
Where can I buy a dish of this fruit salad you boys have been fixing? It is a dis-service to the others on this board to argue back and forth with a certain poster, but HE has a history of being condescending to other posters (4, for example). It goes way back to the old NOSF boards. Of course, this will go on and on until I or anyone else drops it, because he must have the last word. Wash, rinse, repeat. So, I will let it go... |
|
