WA private HS school team has 3 forfeit wins this season

IllegalContact · Oct 7, 2016

another point to be made is that these powerhouse teams typically schedule their most challenging non conference games early in the season........from the sounds of things, the hard part of AM's schedule is already over

people may not want to say it, but there seems to be the air of cobra kai dojo with the team.......

Kontradiction · Oct 7, 2016

IllegalContact said:
it's really not that hard to understand.......but to give it some details,

AM won it's first game 73-0.......which was the score at halftime
AM won it's 2nd game 59-0 .... against a team that was a 3A state semifinalist last year
AM won it's 3rd game 38-0 ..... against a team that was a 1A finalist

then there's south whidbey.......they forfeited because they've been suiting up 14-15 players per game, are 0-3 and have been outscored 109-22.......there's absolutely no point to playing that game....

I am sure the disparity is similar with the next 2 forfeitures........the safety issue is real and there are liability issues with even allowing the game to be played

again......sport is played with competition in mind.......this is not competition

AM even though it has 1A enrollment numbers AND is a private school, insists on being in 2A.....they are classic sandbaggers

Competition is what you make of it, IC. That said, I'm still wondering why these kids are playing one of the most violent contact sports in the world when they're this concerned about injuries. Can anyone answer that for me? I haven't gotten an answer on it yet.

BSR · Oct 7, 2016

IllegalContact said:
another point to be made is that these powerhouse teams typically schedule their most challenging non conference games early in the season........from the sounds of things, the hard part of AM's schedule is already over

people may not want to say it, but there seems to be the air of cobra kai dojo with the team.......

I have no problem with the school complaining about the powerhouse team being unfairly in their conference and protesting those games. In this case, strangely, they players made the decision. Its odd to me that the parents or the administration didn't take the decision out of their hands so they wouldn't have to.

A Defiant Goose · Oct 7, 2016

JarOfMayo51 said:
Using analogies and references to sports that have strict weight classes is counter productive to your argument

But football has varsity vs junior varsity, divisions, and you play teams in the same age range

Real World · Oct 7, 2016

It seems like some of these schools should not be playing each other in the first place. Respectfully, this isn't checkers or chess they're playing, and these are kids, not adults. Football is violent, and as a parent, and former HS football player, I wouldn't want my undersized son playing against college and pro sized behemoths. Forfeiting in most cases is for wussies, but in this case I get it. This is football. It isn't basketball or soccer, or even baseball, where one's physical size is unlikely to seriously injure someone. That "someone" in this case being 15 and 16 year old kids.

Dorito Dink · Oct 7, 2016

JarOfMayo51 said:
Important question: Have you ever played football?

Yes, played from 6th-9th grade. Not sure I understand the point of your question.

QuantumMechanic · Oct 7, 2016

KontradictioN said:
I'd just like to know why they're playing football if they're that concerned about injury. Perhaps one of the parents posts here (I know we have Pats fans all over the U.S.) and can answer that question for me. It would seem that football is not a good sport to play if you have those types of concerns.

You (and DI) continue to act as if risk is a pure binary. It isn't.

Parents and kids signed up expecting a risk level of R of serious injury (and having a risk level of R is one of the whole points of having separate divisions, just like you have weight classes in boxing, wrestling, etc.) Now say playing this one team in the division -- which many of you concede should be in a separate division -- results in a risk of 2R of serious injury.

There is nothing irrational or wrong about being fine with a risk R but not being fine with a risk 2R.

Your "all or nothing" argument makes no sense.

mikejd · Oct 7, 2016

I don't really know the details, but maybe Archbishop Murphy should look into playing teams of their own caliber instead of repeatedly throttling lesser opponents. Perhaps this is the best the state has to offer and they're playing the best they can. But they're clearly playing by a different set of rules and if they are playing down a class, that's on them and pretty weak in its own right. If they are playing the best teams on offer, then my comment is invalid but it doesn't sound like they're doing that if 114 lb freshman are on varsity opposition.

Kontradiction · Oct 7, 2016

QuantumMechanic said:
You (and DI) continue to act as if risk is a pure binary. It isn't.

Parents and kids signed up expecting a risk level of R of serious injury (and having a risk level of R is one of the whole points of having separate divisions, just like you have weight classes in boxing, wrestling, etc.) Now say playing this one team in the division -- which many of you concede should be in a separate division -- results in a risk of 2R of serious injury.

There is nothing irrational or wrong about being fine with a risk R but not being fine with a risk 2R.

Your "all or nothing" argument makes no sense.

This does nothing to answer my question either. There is a definite risk of serious injury no matter what level of competition you're playing against in the game of football. Lowering your helmet and sustaining a spinal injury will happen regardless of size or strength. They know this going in. If they're forfeiting games because of injury concerns, they are in the wrong sport and should definitely get out while the getting is good.

WaterfallJumper · Oct 7, 2016

QuantumMechanic said:
Just want to make sure I'm understanding some people's "argument" here.

So some of you are really, seriously saying (a) yeah, the team in question may well dangerously physically outclass the other teams, and (b) yeah, it really should be in another division since one of the reasons for separate divisions is to prevent/reduce injury from exactly those sorts of mismatches, and (c) despite (a) and (b) , other teams' kids and their parents are f**king loser wimpy p***ies for not playing them.

Oooookayyyyyyy.

Here's the problem that I have with this story: some of the kids were already injured. So that means that they were willing to play in previous games, even though they risked injury. What made that injury risk okay? I have a hard time with these details. What I infer from the available information is that injury risk is acceptable, as long as they think that they have a chance, right? I have to then assume that they looked at how dominating the team was, and gave up.

Now, long term, this might be the right choice for these people. I will not disagree with them or give them grief, because I don't have all the facts. I'm certainly not going to call them wusses (even if that's my gut reaction), because ultimately, we're talking about people. Their lives matter. Their health matters. I'm not blind to that fact. This particular case may have extenuating circumstances.

As a general rule, however, I find the idea of giving up just because the challenge -- which, by the way, you signed up for and understood ahead of time -- is too hard, quite despicable. I wouldn't want teammates like that.

EDIT: I should add that I'm 5'8 185. I'm not a big guy. But I've ALWAYS been the most physical player in every sport and activity I've been involved in, as a matter of pride. I have to try harder to win against someone that much bigger than I am. It's also why we root for players like Dion Lewis and Danny Woodhead, because they're the classic underdog story, but they find success anyway due to hard work and determination.

IllegalContact · Oct 7, 2016

KontradictioN said:
Competition is what you make of it, IC. That said, I'm still wondering why these kids are playing one of the most violent contact sports in the world when they're this concerned about injuries. Can anyone answer that for me? I haven't gotten an answer on it yet.

the answer is looking you in the face........a team of 14-15 players against AM is not whatever you make of it....it's a f*cking safety issue, get it?

neuronet · Oct 7, 2016

KontradictioN said:
I'd just like to know why they're playing football if they're that concerned about injury. Perhaps one of the parents posts here (I know we have Pats fans all over the U.S.) and can answer that question for me. It would seem that football is not a good sport to play if you have those types of concerns.

I don't have a kid in football (I have a six year old girl whose idea of sport is pretending to be a unicorn). But I know that in HS sports in general they have safeguards in place (divisions etc) to make sure that we don't end up in a pee-wee plays Patriots type situation. When those safeguards fail, then we no longer have the same expectation of injury -- the expectations drastically change compared to what I signed up for.

These are probably kids that love football, and love the game, but not so much that they want to elevate the risk of concussion above a certain threshold. Frankly this seems perfectly reasonable, given the sport we are talking about. If they quit just because they were worse, and it was chess, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Everyone has a line where pride becomes folly. Deus/Kontradiction, where are your lines? Or would you rather die than give up? Would you rather your child die than forfeit? I'm saying this to make the conceptual point that there has to be a line (unless you are just crazy or morally beyond reach). The question is where is it for you? If you were in MMA would you rather have your arm broken than tap out?

Frankly it seems this School of Giants needs to go to a different division, because this is the third school they were scheduled to play that is forfeiting. This suggests something has gone wrong with the system. Problem is there may be no other options in the area: they are playing everyone they can, but they also have recruited everyone in the sphere of elibigle players. So it is pretty much an unfair advantage. Everyone else is pretty much like OK screw you you can go play with yourself in the corner if you are going to just recruit every above average player in the region. We will play each other and you can go jerk each other off.

Sort of a nice ironic twist. This is sort of the underground storyline here it seems.

neuronet · Oct 7, 2016

BSR said:
How is a 117lb 14 year old making varsity? And when is he going to be playing a game that isn't an injury concern? There is more than likely going to be a person that over matches him in every game played. At that point you say maybe this isn't the right sport for them.

How does the team/players approach the rest of the season. If there are "dangerous" individual matchups do they forfeit or do individual players refuse to play? Hey the other team has a big LB and my son is playing RB, I better hold them out?

A good coach will see those matchup disparities and work around them, I would hope he wouldn't let the kid get destroyed every play. That would be the Peyton Manning school of coaching. :O

WaterfallJumper · Oct 7, 2016

Teams who played Archbishop Murphy speak out

So, in the three games played this year, no one got hurt. The story mentioned normal bumps and bruises. I'm really having a hard time imagining that this team is a bunch of killers. They might have some big kids, but that doesn't mean they're trying to go out there and hurt people.

Archbishop Murphy H.S. responds after schools refuse to play their football team

JarOfMayo51 · Oct 7, 2016

Dorito Dink said:
Yes, played from 6th-9th grade. Not sure I understand the point of your question.

Thats cool man, I was just making sure

If you hadn't ever played i would have given you a kidney punch (figuratively speaking) for having the opinion you do, but thats not the case so I respect your opinion and agree with it on some level but we just disagree on a few nuances with this particular case

No big deal, we'll both be rooting for the same laundry on Sunday!

IllegalContact · Oct 7, 2016

neuronet said:
I don't have a kid in football (I have a six year old girl whose idea of sport is pretending to be a unicorn). But I know that in HS sports in general they have safeguards in place (divisions etc) to make sure that we don't end up in a pee-wee plays Patriots type situation. When those safeguards fail, then we no longer have the same expectation of injury -- the expectations drastically change compared to what I signed up for.

These are probably kids that love football, and love the game, but not so much that they want to elevate the risk of concussion above a certain threshold. Frankly this seems perfectly reasonable, given the sport we are talking about. If they quit just because they were worse, and it was chess, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But it is football.

Everyone has a line where pride becomes folly. Deus/Kontradiction, where are your lines? Or would you rather die than give up? Would you rather your child die than forfeit? I'm saying this to make the conceptual point that there has to be a line (unless you are just crazy or morally beyond reach). The question is where is it for you? If you were in MMA would you rather have your arm broken than tap out?

Frankly it seems this School of Giants needs to go to a different division, because this is the third school they were scheduled to play that is forfeiting. This suggests something has gone wrong with the system. Problem is there may be no other options in the area: they are playing everyone they can, but they also have recruited everyone in the sphere of elibigle players. So it is pretty much an unfair advantage. Everyone else is pretty much like OK screw you you can go play with yourself in the corner if you are going to just recruit every above average player in the region. We will play each other and you can go jerk each other off.

Sort of a nice ironic twist. This is sort of the underground storyline here it seems.

not only that, but then there's the liability of what happens when adults put kids into a situation like that.....since they are all minors, it should not be up to the kids anyway and in my digging have not been able to identify a single parent who complained about the decision

I guess it comes down to actually having kids and then seeing if you get parent of the year award for putting the kids in harms way due to an excess of testosterone

Dorito Dink · Oct 7, 2016

Regardless of your opinion on the forfeiture by these high schools, I think we can all agree that Archbishop would be better off playing teams that are a bit more competitive. Maybe start off the season with a few tune up games against the Jets and Colts before beginning their schedule in a tougher conference?

neuronet · Oct 7, 2016

reamer said:
Teams who played Archbishop Murphy speak out

So, in the three games played this year, no one got hurt. The story mentioned normal bumps and bruises. I'm really having a hard time imagining that this team is a bunch of killers. They might have some big kids, but that doesn't mean they're trying to go out there and hurt people.

Archbishop Murphy H.S. responds after schools refuse to play their football team

Ugh videos. Can someone please transcribe or summarize so I don't have to spend 24 minutes watching videos?

Dorito Dink · Oct 7, 2016

JarOfMayo51 said:
Thats cool man, I was just making sure

If you hadn't ever played i would have given you a kidney punch (figuratively speaking) for having the opinion you do, but thats not the case so I respect your opinion and agree with it on some level but we just disagree on a few nuances with this particular case

No big deal, we'll both be rooting for the same laundry on Sunday!

Amen, brother. You know, the more responses I read the more I understand both sides. I don't have kids yet but I think it's safe to say I would worry about my child's health going up against these beasts but I also know it's football (I was very undersized in middle school and got the snot kicked out of me on the regular. I was of the Welker/Edelman type. Used as a punching bag by linebackers but got right back up and gave it back when i had the opportunity). I think there are so many benefits to the game that translate to intangible skills in the real world, but parents know the dangers of football when they sign their kids up. I'm just not so sure I agree with picking and choosing who you play based on the perceived level of danger because I think it can send the wrong message (bad intangibles can be taught as well).

Regardless, I think high school sports have gotten ridiculous with the level of recruiting that is done for private schools. I understand trying to set them up to be recruited by a big school but if you have talent, you'll be recognized no matter how bad your team is (hi, Jamie Collins). Acquiring talent by recruiting 100+ miles away and scamming the system by having them live at different addresses is just ridiculous at that age.

A Defiant Goose · Oct 7, 2016

IllegalContact said:
the answer is looking you in the face........a team of 14-15 players against AM is not whatever you make of it....it's a f*cking safety issue, get it?

I think we're beyond this specific instance and are on anew argument of principle now. Still, the 14 or 15 active players would like to play against a lesser team, right? Then the point still stands. Don't pick and choose what games to play based on risk assessment.

WA private HS school team has 3 forfeit wins this season

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

On my retirement tour.

In the Starting Line-Up

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Moderator

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Burn it all down!

Practice Squad Player

On my retirement tour.

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Homer Little

Homer Little

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Homer Little

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Similar threads