gopunahou wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 9:51 pm
poidog wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 9:05 pm
rrforlifebaby wrote: ↑Wed Jun 15, 2022 1:31 pm
If true, greedy OIA bureaucrats. But what else can you expect in a state dominated and run by Democrats.
There isn't enough money to go around in public school sports for anyone to be "greedy". What a ridiculous comment.
Are you saying "it ain't greed, it's survival"?
Yes, is it survival?
I'm not a private school guy, BUT, if the what was said earlier about the OIA wanting 100% of the gate is true, then how is that not greed?
Alright, lets keep the Democrat/Republican part out for the moment. The fact that the OIA(a state agency) supposedly wants to keep 100% of the gate is shameful. The mantra of the OIA is reflected in how the football tournament is run....the need to have this ratio of representation based on the number of schools per league. WE ALL KNOW that in most years, the 3rd place OIA team has no business being in the state tournament. But the OIA (a state agency) wants to make it all FAIR and EQUAL....sounds alot like Liberal Democratism(I know, this isn't word...lol).
But, I do apologize for bringing politics into this forum. Let's just get back to the point that if true, I believe the OIA to be in the wrong for supposedly wanting 100% of the gate.
I think one solution is if the hosting field is at an OIA site, then the ILH school should be alloted a certain amount of tickets in advance so the funds can go to that school/ILH, and vice versa.
Then, to me, it makes sense for the hosting field/school to keep 100% of the gate to cover costs...imho.
RRFL!!