Possible rules changes for 2009

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is the most accurate statement you have made the entire time have been here.

I just want you to show one comment that someone said that was out of line or inappropriate or a lie.

Here are things you have not been able to dispute: Kurt is selling A-11 materials after claiming he was not. Kurt lied about approval with the NF for this offense when there was no such approval by the NF. Kurt has repeated these lies on this website or other websites. Kurt claims that officials all over the country approve of the offense. The last is not true just by the simple fact of what people are saying on this board alone.

Peace

Now, you're just being silly. Do you really expect me to wallow through all the garbage that's been laid out to prove to you where the smell comes from. Not likely.

Let's look at these "sins" you're so positive and worked up about. "Kurt is selling A-11 materials after claiming he was not" What you decry as being so negative as "selling", might just as accurately be seen as distributing and recurring the cost of doing so. KB obviously believes (right or wrong) in his idea, and has every right to try and promote it and try and persuade others to accept and believe it.

"Kurt lied about approval with the NF for this offense when there was no such approval by the NF. Seems like a really insignificant semantics argument. Is suggesting a declaration that something is "not illegal" a whole lot different than being "approved", possibly a poor choice of words, but does it make ANY real difference?

"Kurt has repeated these lies on this website or other websites." Without a lot more specifics, I can't comment, other than to suggest very often the word "lie" is a really poor choice of words and a n excessive exaggeration. You might consider other words like; mistake, exaggeration, misunderstanding, stretch, spin that don't include the connotation of a deliberate and intentional effor to deceive or mislead.

"Kurt claims that officials all over the country approve of the offense." After spending some time on this, and other forums, I might question whether there is ANYTHING "officials all over the country approve of". Would this observation be an exaggeration? Yes, but would it have misled any official, who has been awake for the past 2 years, doubtful, so what difference does it make (advantage/disadvantage)?

Be honest, you can stack these, and other, transgressions on top of each other and they pose the same hazard as tripping over a sheet of paper. The indisputable fact is there is nothing that has been stated, suggested or inferred that amounts to anything more than someone trying to promote an idea, he apparently believes in.

It may very well be an idea that is wrong, an idea that may yet be judged not in the best interest of the game and ultimately prohibited. All that would prove is that it was a bad idea. The personal attacks, negative remarks about integrity and dishonesty, accusations of lying and deliberately trying to deceive, with assessments and claimsthat were so slanted no official on the planet could be misled by them, were all over blown, grossly exaggerated and excessive.

Sorry Rut, but when the blood first hit the water, several of you lost control of your emotions and went in for the kill, which was totally unnecessary and added nothing to the discussion. All this huffing and puffing and demands for evidence is not going to wipe the blood off your chin. Intentional or not, all this bullying, attempt to coerce or intimidate and insistence on turning every minor detail and phrase into it's worst imaginable conspiracy has simply gotten out of hand. It is what it is, and how you deal with it is not going to change what it is.

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Now, you're just being silly. Do you really expect me to wallow through all the garbage that's been laid out to prove to you where the smell comes from. Not likely.

Let's look at these "sins" you're so positive and worked up about. "Kurt is selling A-11 materials after claiming he was not" What you decry as being so negative as "selling", might just as accurately be seen as distributing and recurring the cost of doing so. KB obviously believes (right or wrong) in his idea, and has every right to try and promote it and try and persuade others to accept and believe it.

"Kurt lied about approval with the NF for this offense when there was no such approval by the NF. Seems like a really insignificant semantics argument. Is suggesting a declaration that something is "not illegal" a whole lot different than being "approved", possibly a poor choice of words, but does it make ANY real difference?

"Kurt has repeated these lies on this website or other websites." Without a lot more specifics, I can't comment, other than to suggest very often the word "lie" is a really poor choice of words and a n excessive exaggeration. You might consider other words like; mistake, exaggeration, misunderstanding, stretch, spin that don't include the connotation of a deliberate and intentional effor to deceive or mislead.

"Kurt claims that officials all over the country approve of the offense." After spending some time on this, and other forums, I might question whether there is ANYTHING "officials all over the country approve of". Would this observation be an exaggeration? Yes, but would it have misled any official, who has been awake for the past 2 years, doubtful, so what difference does it make (advantage/disadvantage)?

Be honest, you can stack these, and other, transgressions on top of each other and they pose the same hazard as tripping over a sheet of paper. The indisputable fact is there is nothing that has been stated, suggested or inferred that amounts to anything more than someone trying to promote an idea, he apparently believes in.

Now, taking into account all that you stated above, why do you think he would join an officials forum in order to promote and make those claims?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ajmc

The indisputable fact is there is nothing that has been stated, suggested or inferred that amounts to anything more than someone trying to dishonestly promote an idea, he apparently believes in will make him money.

I cut out all the BS, then I fixed it for you. You're welcome.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I cut out all the BS, then I fixed it for you. You're welcome.

"The indisputable fact is there is nothing that has been stated, suggested or inferred that amounts to anything more than someone trying to dishonestly promote an idea, he apparently believes in will make him money"

OK Snagwells you now have the opportunity to lay out the facts that would validate the changes you've added, and charges you've made, or you can slink back under the rock of unsubstantiated character assassination. Your choice.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

"The indisputable fact is there is nothing that has been stated, suggested or inferred that amounts to anything more than someone trying to dishonestly promote an idea, he apparently believes in will make him money"

OK Snagwells you now have the opportunity to lay out the facts that would validate the changes you've added, and chatges you've made, or you can slink back under the rock of unsubstantiated character assassination. Your choice.

Snaqs,

Do not answer one damn question until he answers our questions first. He has made claims that there is a pack mentality and that people are being unfair, but he cannot come up with one damn answer to what comments specifically apply to his claims.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ajmc

OK SnaQwells you now have the opportunity to lay out the facts that would validate the changes you've added, and charges you've made, or you can slink back under the rock of unsubstantiated character assassination. Your choice.

wow, it's tempting to quote the self-appointed moral arbiter of the football forum.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Now, you're just being silly. Do you really expect me to wallow through all the garbage that's been laid out to prove to you where the smell comes from. Not likely.

I don't slink, however. This is really simple.

Kurt claimed he was not selling anything.
Kurt is selling stuff directly related to A-11, and his profit potential would be significantly diminished (that means he won't make as much, in case you live in Rio Linda) if the A-11 loophole is closed.

I believe this satisfies both of my assertions.

FWIW, I'm all for making a profit off of an idea; just be honest about it. There's a reason we demand full disclosure from information sources.

People don't trust lung cancer studies paid for by tobacco companies.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I believe this satisfies both of my assertions.

Do you think it's just possible that Coach Bryan is so enamored with his idea that he wants to spread it, and extoll it, as fast as possible as far and wide as he can, and believes distributing tapes, disks and other visual aids is the best way to do that. Such a distribution clearly requires funding, which perhaps the good coach doesn't have access to, so he acquires what he needs to be able to distribute his idea from those who show an interest in his idea.

Then again he could simply be looking to make millions of dollars from the pure sale of his idea. That's just one, of an endless list of alternate possibilities that might be accurate. I have no idea which is correct, but NEITHER DO YOU.

A difference being you have chosen to presume the worst possible ulterior motive, and based on nothing more than pure speculation, whim and conjecture, declare what amounts to nothing more substantial than just pure gossip based on what you have presumed and conjured up through your own imagination.

Is that your idea of acceptable behavior?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Do you think it's just possible that Coach Bryan is so enamored with his idea that he wants to spread it, and extoll it, as fast as possible as far and wide as he can, and believes distributing tapes, disks and other visual aids is the best way to do that. Such a distribution clearly requires funding, which perhaps the good coach doesn't have access to, so he acquires what he needs to be able to distribute his idea from those who show an interest in his idea.

And when pressed about it he lied about that fact and claimed he was only doing what he was doing for the good of the game. I have ideas, but I am not trying to sell them. And if I was asked if I was trying to profit on them, I would clearly state that reality if I expected people to not further question my motives. Also, I would not go places that are not receptive to my point of view and continually come back to those places if I know people are not "buying" what I am selling.

Originally Posted by ajmc

Then again he could simply be looking to make millions of dollars from the pure sale of his idea. That's just one, of an endless list of alternate possibilities that might be accurate. I have no idea which is correct, but NEITHER DO YOU.

And whether we know or not is never the issue. This is why this is called a discussion board and people discuss things. We tend to discuss the motives or coaches, players, committee members, fellow officials, fans or administrators all the time here. And we do so based on our experiences and circumstances that took place in a particular thread or story. If that is a problem for you, then you better be preaching all the time because this issue only scratches the surface as to how things are often discussed here or in our local association meetings.

Originally Posted by ajmc

A difference being you have chosen to presume the worst possible ulterior motive, and based on nothing more than pure speculation, whim and conjecture, declare what amounts to nothing more substantial than just pure gossip based on what you have presumed and conjured up through your own imagination.

Is that your idea of acceptable behavior?

Honestly, no one assumed anything. We asked a question and found the answer. And all you have to do is a Google search and you will find Kurt's name is associated with all kinds of things are about selling products or the self promotion of this offense. And you do not have to look at this website to find that information. There is nothing wrong with selling things or this offense, but it is not gossip when you find the information on a link. Just like if you were to do the same thing with my name, you would easily find specific information that shows things about me as it relates to officiating and you would be able to see things I am directly involved in. And if I were to claim I was associated with something I was not, it would be exposed easily. And there are many people here that know me personally or belong to the same associations I belong to. I am confronted all the time by people that I know that I post here or ask me am I the same person they see on this site. I am very cognizant that when I say things here, there are people that are watching. If I were to say something that was blatantly false, I would be called on it in so many ways.

Now I can accept that reality and relish in that reality (I have been on here for over 10 years BTW). Why is that something you cannot handle? And BTW, I have had many people over the years try to discredit things I have said, only to find out that I was telling the truth by searching the internet or talking to someone that knows me personally. If you do not want to have people question your integrity, do not come here with your real name and do not say where you live and who you know. It is that simple.

I am done now.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Is that your idea of acceptable behavior?

The problem is that there's a conflict of interest that's so obvious it's silly.

I can deal with that, though. I deal with it everytime I shop for a used car. The difference is, the used car salesman is at least open about the fact that he will be making money off of my purchase.

Yes, I do think it's acceptable to question someone's motives when a glaring conflict of interest has been hidden and even denied.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Yes, I do think it's acceptable to question someone's motives when a glaring conflict of interest has been hidden and even denied.

AMEN!!!!

Peace

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Do you think it's just possible that Coach Bryan is so enamored with his idea that he wants to spread it, and extoll it, as fast as possible as far and wide as he can, and believes distributing tapes, disks and other visual aids is the best way to do that. Such a distribution clearly requires funding, which perhaps the good coach doesn't have access to, so he acquires what he needs to be able to distribute his idea from those who show an interest in his idea.

Then again he could simply be looking to make millions of dollars from the pure sale of his idea. That's just one, of an endless list of alternate possibilities that might be accurate. I have no idea which is correct, but NEITHER DO YOU.

A difference being you have chosen to presume the worst possible ulterior motive, and based on nothing more than pure speculation, whim and conjecture, declare what amounts to nothing more substantial than just pure gossip based on what you have presumed and conjured up through your own imagination.

Is that your idea of acceptable behavior?

Kurt Bryan's behavior and yours are both unacceptable.

When will you and Kurt Bryan understand there are fundamentals to the game and a procedure for making changes to the game and that procedure does not include publicizing in the New York Times or ESPN or even writing position papers and degrading anyone who disagrees?

And, for starters try being civil on this forum without resorting to degrading anyone. Most threads on this forum are respectful even when people disagree. Personally, whatever you opine has no credibility because of the descriptive language you choose to bully everyone whose opinion is different. I've learned a lot from listening and being respectful, it is time for you to do the same.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Kurt Bryan's behavior and yours are both unacceptable.

When will you and Kurt Bryan understand there are fundamentals to the game and a procedure for making changes to the game and that procedure does not include publicizing in the New York Times or ESPN or even writing position papers and degrading anyone who disagrees?

And, for starters try being civil on this forum without resorting to degrading anyone. Most threads on this forum are respectful even when people disagree. Personally, whatever you opine has no credibility because of the descriptive language you choose to bully everyone whose opinion is different. I've learned a lot from listening and being respectful, it is time for you to do the same.

Excuse me, is this a bit of the pot calling the kettle black? Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what I've said that has been so "unacceptable"? Does ganging up on an individual because he had the audacity to suggest something a special few don't like or agree with, is that acceptable? Or when the argument being raised is not gaining sufficient support on it's merits, does shifting to personal attacks, innuendo, rumor, pure speculation and a series of really dopey accusations based on empty hot air, rise to meet your description of acceptable?

Perhaps repeating or cheering for outlandash accusations and repeatedly mocking someone and denigrating his intentions simply because you resent the fact that he sees the issue differently is acceptable to you. Despite the gallons of pure garbage that has been dumped on this subject, by members of this forum, I haven't noticed any disrespect, any insult, mocking or abject sarcasim coming from the opposite direction. I've seen futile attempts at answering a gaggle of obviously loaded questions, being, twisted with absurd, irrelevant nitpicking and shoved back with an arrogance that has been truly amazing, and embarrassing.

Someone else, with a better graphic appreciation for reality than me, characterized the responses, of the few, as the feeding frenzy of a pack of hyenas. For those of you too stupid to know better, that wasn't a compliment.

I have not criticized anything, anybody has said regarding any fundamentals of this approach as it applies to the game I have repeatedly indicated that I personally doubt the A-11 approach will survive because I think it lacks the staying power, under it's own weight, for practical reasons. That's not the question and the A-11 is no longer the issue. That will be handled in due course by those who are authorized to deal with it, as has been recognized for some time.

My original intent, regarding this issue was to simply alert some that their comments were getting off track and unnecessarily personal and excessively derogatory. Now, after you might fast forward a lot of smart a$$ remarks, ridiculous assertions, absurd presumptions and assorted accusations based on absolutely nothing that was said or intended, my tone may have adjusted, downward, to stay with the flow of traffic.

Spare me your suggesting that the wetness all over my leg, right where you and a few others have been standing with your zippers down, is due to rainfall. I'm not buying your righteous indignation and I recognize who, and more importantly, what I'm responding to. I tried suggesting that wallowing in mud wasn't the smart thing to do, I never hinted it was something I didn't know how to do. You want to live in a glass house, don't throw rocks and don't be surprised when rocks get thrown back.