View Single Post
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Sat Sep 12, 2015, 10:55pm
Mregor Mregor is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 769
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
Is this any different than a state saying which ball must be used in a state? Is it any different than requiring certain procedures to be followed with eligibility of players? Is it any different than what a state might require for what kind of procedure is followed player uniforms? If you live in a state that has none of these requirements, that is great. But I do not see why this is any different than any requirement. I also agree that wearing a state patch does not mean you are licensed. But when you do not wear one, it is certainly noticed, even for us when it is not a sanctioned state game.

Peace
No, no difference and all for the same reason. Money. Or to be more clear, separating you from your money. For example, our state association came out with an authorized vendor a few years back. The very next year they made the wide stripes mandatory for football. Mass purchase from the only authorized vendor resulted in $77 + s&h football shirt. Next year, new sole authorized vendor and magically the state logo changed to acknowledge their 50 year anniversary. Result was new shirt purchase from new vendor. Everything is about money or more accurately, separating you from your money.
__________________
Some people are like Slinkies...
Not really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs.
Reply With Quote