A Sea Of Red

Since it certainly would have been made a big deal of had she accepted, obviously she did not. Do you mind sharing her reasons?

ballcoach15 wrote:I know there is, at both high school and college level. And most have a "bad attitude" and bad sportsmanship, compared to "straight" coaches. I have dealt with them as a coach at high school level. I have also talked with several gay college coaches in my lifetime. They don't even register on the personality meter.

I dont know how to even react to this. I'm not asking you to endorse the lifestyle but to think all gay people are the same is just insanity. Not surprising from you but it's still insanity.

oldflame wrote:Since it certainly would have been made a big deal of had she accepted, obviously she did not. Do you mind sharing her reasons?

Have you seen ballcoach' attitude? Why put up with that?

thepostman wrote:

ballcoach15 wrote:I know there is, at both high school and college level. And most have a "bad attitude" and bad sportsmanship, compared to "straight" coaches. I have dealt with them as a coach at high school level. I have also talked with several gay college coaches in my lifetime. They don't even register on the personality meter.

I dont know how to even react to this. I'm not asking you to endorse the lifestyle but to think all gay people are the same is just insanity. Not surprising from you but it's still insanity.

Snowflake

ballcoach15 wrote:In my opinion no school should hire a gay coach.

ballcoach15 wrote:I know there is, at both high school and college level. And most have a "bad attitude" and bad sportsmanship, compared to "straight" coaches. I have dealt with them as a coach at high school level. I have also talked with several gay college coaches in my lifetime. They don't even register on the personality meter.

These types of comments would not be tolerated on most message boards. I feel sorry for you.

Purple Haize wrote:

thepostman wrote:

ballcoach15 wrote:I know there is, at both high school and college level. And most have a "bad attitude" and bad sportsmanship, compared to "straight" coaches. I have dealt with them as a coach at high school level. I have also talked with several gay college coaches in my lifetime. They don't even register on the personality meter.

I dont know how to even react to this. I'm not asking you to endorse the lifestyle but to think all gay people are the same is just insanity. Not surprising from you but it's still insanity.

Snowflake

I am in the Air Force after all. We lead the way in diversity!

ballcoach15 wrote:In my opinion no school should hire a gay coach.

Proverbs 17:28 - "Even fools are thought wise if they keep silent; with their mouths shut, they seem intelligent." (New Living Translation)

And that will be my only response to ballcoach15's opinion.

I'm being critical of how he somehow thinks gay people can't coach not liberty's religious views on homosexuality.

Also what ballcoach did went beyond speaking out against sin. There is a huge difference.

BuryYourDuke wrote:Y'all are criticizing what would have been a no brainer matter of policy at your school, bc Ball Coach said it, I guess?

And no, I won't be doing anything about comments critical of sin. Maybe you can get another mod to enforce your cultural Marxist agenda...

ballcoach's comments were not directed at LU. They were directed at every school and was a rather broad in its coverage

ballcoach15 wrote:In my opinion no school should hire a gay coach.

It's his opinion and he can have it. I don't think he should be banned but it was a dick move to say it. Then he only compounded it by saying

ballcoach15 wrote:I know there is, at both high school and college level. And most have a "bad attitude" and bad sportsmanship, compared to "straight" coaches. I have dealt with them as a coach at high school level. I have also talked with several gay college coaches in my lifetime. They don't even register on the personality meter.

Based on his personality here and on his previous statement it sounds more like it a him problem then a gay coach problem. I have dealt with a fair number of coaches in my time. Whether they were gay our not had no bearing on their level of d----- baggery. Of which ballcoach has shown himself being on a high level.

BuryYourDuke wrote:

ballah09 wrote:NHL and the NHLPA are pushing for more NCAA teams and are helping five schools do studies. They announced yesterday at the draft that they're going to purse schools with the resources and facilities so you would have to believe they're going to pursue Liberty. If they do, would they have any influence with the administration?

http://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/1971 ... -add-teams

BYD what are your thoughts on this?

I don't expect Liberty to come up in these discussions unless we insert ourselves into them. This is all about putting NCAA teams in markets the NHL thinks are viable, primarily in B1G country. They are thinking about all the big name schools that don't have NCAA hockey. The P5 wants to find another profit center, and ice hockey could easily tuck itself in behind basketball if it is established across a lot of the P5. Look for Illinois, Nebraska, and Syracuse to get thrown around a lot in this first round. Rhode Island will get some attention as well.

FWIW, the top echelon of ACHA D1 has now surpassed NCAA D3 hockey (remember there is no NCAA D2 hockey) in level of play.

So I'm going to get back to what was being discussed here since it was transitioned to some emotional discourse. I'll have to agree with you on this matter. The Flames will have to insert themselves in order to just exhibit themselves on the topic of expansion. It may not be this time around that LU may be part of the NHLPA D1 study, but I could see LU getting a chance sometime in the future.

I do see some reasons of how the Flames would be a nice fit. Firstly, we are in between three NHL organizations even though they may not be extremely close by (Washington Capitals, Carolina Hurricanes and Nashville Predators). Secondly, hockey and lacrosse is still a growing sport in the state of Virginia, so a college team would be very beneficial for an increase in youth programs. Thirdly, we have that connection with players from Canada since one of the former coaches is back in his home place coaching hockey.

From the looks of it, I see the NHLPA observing only schools in the BIG and possibly the PAC-12/West schools (since the new franchise in Vegas). If it was an option that we were involved in this study, would LU considered taking the next big step and accept the move up?. If so, I can only see us joining the Atlantic Hockey conference or the Hockey East Conference (if we're lucky, since Notre Dame is an affiliate with the BIG from now on).

If it involves scholarships it's a non starter

Purple Haize wrote:

BuryYourDuke wrote:Y'all are criticizing what would have been a no brainer matter of policy at your school, bc Ball Coach said it, I guess?

And no, I won't be doing anything about comments critical of sin. Maybe you can get another mod to enforce your cultural Marxist agenda...

ballcoach's comments were not directed at LU. They were directed at every school and was a rather broad in its coverage

ballcoach15 wrote:In my opinion no school should hire a gay coach.

It's his opinion and he can have it. I don't think he should be banned but it was a dick move to say it. Then he only compounded it by saying

ballcoach15 wrote:I know there is, at both high school and college level. And most have a "bad attitude" and bad sportsmanship, compared to "straight" coaches. I have dealt with them as a coach at high school level. I have also talked with several gay college coaches in my lifetime. They don't even register on the personality meter.

Based on his personality here and on his previous statement it sounds more like it a him problem then a gay coach problem. I have dealt with a fair number of coaches in my time. Whether they were gay our not had no bearing on their level of d----- baggery. Of which ballcoach has shown himself being on a high level.

Snowflake

d-----' errr Touche'

BuryYourDuke wrote:Y'all are criticizing what would have been a no brainer matter of policy at your school, bc Ball Coach said it, I guess?

And no, I won't be doing anything about comments critical of sin. Maybe you can get another mod to enforce your cultural Marxist agenda...

You are just as bad as ballcoach. No wonder this board is dying.

adam42381 wrote:

BuryYourDuke wrote:Y'all are criticizing what would have been a no brainer matter of policy at your school, bc Ball Coach said it, I guess?

And no, I won't be doing anything about comments critical of sin. Maybe you can get another mod to enforce your cultural Marxist agenda...

You are just as bad as ballcoach. No wonder this board is dying.

I'm glad h es not enforcing anything. I'm a fan of the free flow of ideas. I couldn't disagree more with ballcoach's statements and have let it be known. But I certainly don't advocate banning the old fellow. Mocking? Sure. Fire away. His comments were directed at coaching, not morals. How anyone can say a persons sexual orientation makes them a good or bad coach is laughable and should be out there to be laughed at.

Marxist

thepostman wrote:Marxist

Guilty

[youtube]ySqec8WrEQQ[/youtube]

BYD - I'll stand with you in your position of non censorship. Put forth your position and defend. The Public Square is where ideas are heard and judged on merit

I completely agree that ballcoach's thoughts shouldn't be censored just like my thoughts on him being completely misguided shouldn't be censored. Censorship and the attempt to do so has never ended well.

I know it is confusing when our President attacks the 1st amendment every day

On the topic of censorship, I am against it in this case.

thepostman wrote:I completely agree that ballcoach's thoughts shouldn't be censored just like my thoughts on him being completely misguided shouldn't be censored. Censorship and the attempt to do so has never ended well.

I know it is confusing when our President attacks the 1st amendment every day

I think you're confusing the right of an opinion and a deliberate attempt of accusing a person or group with no evidence in order to destroy their credibility and even to harm the individual(s). That is not included in the 1st amendment and there's a huge difference between such actions.

dude, I used a stupid winking emojicon...

thepostman wrote:dude, I used a stupid winking emojicon...

You winked at him? Hmmm.

It was actually a wink directed at you....