SandhillshuskerW

19 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

There are mentally ill people in every country. America has no greater amount than anywhere else.

 

What we do have more than anywhere else are guns. That's the problem.

 

No other country in the world has the same problems that we do. Guns have been around for a long time and even the guns that are being used by these crazies. If you don't think that we need to look at mental problems in our country, you are in denial.

12 hours ago, teachercd said:

That guy on the show that John Stewart used to host said it best...the 2nd Amendment was about protecting people.  Gun dorks are dorks...you don't need anything more than pretty much a shotgun or musket...that is it.  The rest of the crap should be banned, that is not a violation of rights it is a smart move.  If you hunt, awesome (I know nothing about hunting) but rambo hunted with a knife or you can use a shotgun (do you hunt with those?) or a single shot rifle (is that a thing?)

 

and if you hunt and don't eat what you kill...you don't need to hunt because you can just go to the supermarket to get your freaking meat.  

 

Fishing is okay.

I'm big in to hunting and do it as much as I can. I also shoot sporting clays and blue rock as much as I can. I use semiautomatic shotguns for all of my shooting. I don't own any rifles or anything similar to an AR. I'm also about as Republican as one can get. I'm all for stiffer background checks, I just don't think it's going to change a whole lot. I'm to the point though, that I hope that legislation passes and sitting back and seeing what people are going to blame if it doesn't seem to work.If it does pass through and things do magically change, then I'll be more than happy to admit that I was wrong.

I'm a firm believer that we need to look more in to the mental health of our country. I've been a teacher for 18 years and I've seen a big change in students over that time. Stiffer background checks are all well and good, but we need to work on violence in these kids every day lives that desensitizes them to it. I also hate how much the Democrats and Republicans use things like gun control to try to politicize every little thing in this country. I'm probably not making much sense with most of this, I have two kids screaming for a snack while I type this.

On a different note, good luck this school year. We start teacher meetings tomorrow.

12 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

I definitely want Harris to stay. I think he has potential and could fit in well with what Hoiburg is going to do.

31 minutes ago, Minnesota_husker said:

Minnesota paper met with Miles. Nothing too insightful but in case anyone wanted to check in on Timmy

 

http://www.startribune.com/the-long-drive-ex-nebraska-coach-tim-miles-on-getting-fired-and-what-comes-next/508388732/

I would love to see Miles end up somewhere and have some success. I'm not sure where that will be, but I'll be interested to see if he coaches Division 1 again.

55 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I didn't finish it just yet but I did have a hard time paying attention as I watched it.

I started it last night and finished it this morning, but I had a hard time paying attention as well. 

9 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

The scenes have been great but I lost track of the timeline.  I barely know why there are moving from one camp to another.

The season finale was a little bit meh for me. They do seem to be jumping around a lot time wise. I'm hoping that next season focuses on a battle between the Whisperers and everyone else. 

17 hours ago, The Dude said:

The season has been one of the very best of the series.  Which is crazy to say with all that it has going against it, losing key players left and right.

I'm convinced that Daryl is the only one that's going to be alive when the series is over. He will just wander around by himself and survive.

I agree that it's been a very good season. It kind of stinks that Sunday is the season finale.

30 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Here is something I don't get...if you are a whisper and you live "like that" but then you see that other people are living sort of normal...how would you not be like "Yeah...here is your mask back...I am gonna go live in a f#&%ing house and eat stuff that isn't f#&%ing bugs, peace out!"

 

 

Yeah, I don't get that either. Are they that scared of Alpha that they just continue to live like animals? I would think that I would pick living in a house over eating worms and walking with the dead, but that's just me.

I really liked this weeks episode. Last weeks was definitely not that good IMO. Things are starting to get good with The Whisperers. It's just too bad that next episode is the season finale.

Just now, funhusker said:

I was talking more about our students.  I don't know how many times I had to break up conversations/arguments....

I'm a math teacher, so I have never really had political conversations in my classes. I'm sure that they do happen in other areas though. 

Just now, funhusker said:

This was already bad enough in 2016.

Like I said, I can't speak for all schools, but the schools that I have been involved with have always done a great job of staying unbiased when it comes to politics.

18 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

 

Changing the voting age to 16    --  (no poll for this one as the poll only allows for 3 questions) This goes in to my 'ugly' category.  I have to agree wt the GOP on this one - this is  a vote grab by Dems on impressionable young skulls of mush (yes - stolen from Rush).  I'm not willing to have my well thought out vote countered by someone who is more concerned wt how many 'likes' they have or whether their acne med is really working.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house-rejects-democratic-push-to-let-16-year-olds-vote

 

This is the main one that just makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. I have taught for 19 years and I have seen 16 year olds up close for many years. They are absolutely not ready to make a choice like this yet. I know that there are immature, uninformed people of all ages but I just think this would be a terrible idea. Most 16 year olds are struggling with who they are going to prom with and other high school related issues. This would lead to politics bleeding in to high schools all over the nation and lead to a lot of teachers sharing their opinions more with students. I can't speak for all schools, but our teachers all do a great job of teaching kids about politics rather than trying to teach them about which party they are in favor of. 

#1 Duke

#2 Tennessee

#2 Michigan

#6 Villanova

#6 Iowa State

#10 Seton Hall

#12 Oregon

#13 UC Irvine

#14 Yale

Is there any chance at all that Amir Harris would play today? I haven't heard anything about how severe his injury was.

2 hours ago, teachercd said:

C1 Final

 

Auburn:  30

North Bend:  29

 

I guess I don't know but would a shot clock have resulted in more or less scoring?

I watched the whole game and there were only a few times when a shot clock violation would have even happened. I don't think a shot clock would have caused much more scoring, if at all. Both teams shot poorly for most of the first half and both teams looked a little nervous. I didn't get a chance to watch much of the D1 game, but it looked a little more fast pace than C1. 

3 hours ago, teachercd said:

I coach and my positive for a shot clock would be if it speeds up the game.  I coach reserve...so I want those freaking games over with FAST!  Hahaha

I do agree with that! Some of those games can seem painfully long.

7 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

 

Shouldn't have to come down to that. Teams should have more opportunities like college and the NBA. Only argument I've seen is "doesn't happen often" 

 

I've watched games on the east coast with it implemented and it makes for a much better game. It will come down the pipe eventually 

I agree with you that it will eventually come to it, I'm just saying that it's not as big of an issue that a lot of people are trying to turn it in to. And even with a shot clock teams will still have the stall game going on at the end of a half and teams will still have to foul or get steals. It happens all the time in college.

14 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

I know for a fact that it happens way more often than you think. If you have a 35 second shot clock teams are going to shoot the ball within 30 seconds which only helps the flow of the game as I mentioned before. There have been many many times in on year where a team is up lets say 6 points with under 3 minutes left. The only option is to hope to get a steal otherwise it is a complete foul fest the last several minutes when it shouldn't have to be that way. Shot clock creates more possessions overall for a HS game that only has 8 minute quarters. I don't get why people would be against it when I see 500 positives and little or no negatives. 

I know for a fact that it happens way less than what you think. There would not be close to 500 positives, there would be 1 which would be that teams couldn't stall as easily at the end of a quarter. If a team is up by 6 with 3 minutes to go and they start to stall, then you go for steals or foul. It's called game play and some teams are better at it than others.

42 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

I'm sorry but anyone against implementing a shot clock in HS is delusional. It does nothing but HELP the game of basketball. That is the way it is intended to be played. The flow of the game would be so much better and keeps the crappy teams from holding the ball all the time. I've watched several games this state tournament in Iowa with real low scoring. It shouldn't matter if it only would come up 'x' amount of times during a season. It also rewards teams that play hard defense, no one wants to run around for 50 seconds on a possession.

 

35 High School (40 girls) 

30 College
24 Pro 

I could be wrong, but I'm guessing that you don't coach. This is wrong for many reasons. I'm not totally against a shot clock but it is far from what you state that it does nothing but help the game. It would only really be an issue of a shot clock violation very few times in the season any way. I would be willing to guess that most high school teams in the state of Nebraska shoot the ball within 40 seconds of their possession at least 90% of the time. I would have said higher, but I think it's at least 90%. The only reason that people dwell on the times that some teams stall is because it is at a point in the game where it is really memorable. As a coach, I encourage my players to get the ball if the other team is stalling. That means go for a steal or get a foul and stop the clock.

31 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I'm not sure what defense has to do with this.  No matter if you have the shot clock or not, you teach good hard defense.  

 

Again, from the discussion earlier, this really isn't an issue in HS basketball other than maybe a few minutes through out the entire game.  And, I did acknowledge defense in the following quote.

 

 

 

I think that he is saying that a shot clock could reward good defense, which I do agree with. I would only be on board with a shot clock if it was 40 seconds or more. 

33 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

This is another big issue.

 

My son just got done playing 4 years of HS basketball.  I really don't think time to put up a shot is a major issue in HS basketball right now.  In fact, we have a hard enough time to get kids to actually run a play instead of trying to hotdog it like some NBA player they see.

 

Offenses in HS should be encouraged to be developed instead of pushed out with a shot clock.  Teach the skill of understanding offensive philosophy.  

 

The only time I see an issue is when one team tries to run out the clock on the last few minutes of half or the game.  So what???  Go play defense or foul them.  Make them shoot free throws to win it?

 

I just really don't see a need for this.  If they do put this in, it needs to be a lot of time like 40 seconds or more.  DEFINITELY shouldn't be shorter than college.

I agree with everything you said. I coach and I'm definitely against a shot clock. It's just not enough of an issue in my mind. I agree that teams just need to learn to get steals or foul if they need the ball at the end of a game. 

1 minute ago, teachercd said:

Why don't you quit yelling at them during the game!  Then it would not be difficult for them at all!  hahaha

I've only received one technical in all of my years of coaching basketball and it wasn't for yelling at the ref. I was "politely" asking him to start calling fouls when my girl is shoved three or four feet in the lane and he told me to be quiet. I rolled my eyes and looked away and he gave me a technical and said that he wasn't going to let me roll my eyes at him! Needless to say that I almost got thrown out at that point because I was once again "politely" arguing about his call and he almost threw me out. 

2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

There should be a shot clock.  I think 40 seconds would be appropriate for high school, especially initially.  Maybe shorten it after it's been around for awhile.

I would be ok with 40 seconds if it had to be added. Thinking back to our season though, and we played 25 games, I can only think of about 2 or 3 games and only a few times when a shot clock violation would have even come in to play. It doesn't happen as much as some people think. 

4 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I think that once it was in...it would change the game a bit.  I think the excuses as to why it can't work are lame but I get it.  

 

Most teams don't just milk the clock like back in the day.

 

I get the "who would run the clock" but it really isn't that hard to either have a ref do it with a remote clicker and/or a teacher do it for 20 dollars a game.  Could there be mistakes?  Sure...but it happens all the time on every single play where a ball goes out of bounds or a TO is called.  It is not like it is ever 100% in sync.  

I don't know about having a ref run the clock with a remote clicker. They have enough to worry about without having to remember to restart the shot clock every time.

19 minutes ago, The Murphinator said:

There needs to be a shot clock in high school. It should be either 24 seconds or 30 seconds. It will help increase the flow and stop teams from just playing keep away for the last 3 minutes of the game.

If there is a shot clock, it definitely needs to be longer than 24 seconds. At the high school level, we are still trying to teach skills and how to effectively run an offense. There would be a lot of teams that would have to chuck up shots and that would definitely hinder the game.