Perspective

Venice:  original sponsor of the "Don't Say Away" bill.  

Venice:  original sponsor of the "Don't Say Away" bill.  

Venice:  original sponsor of the "Don't Say Away" bill.  

Jambun, let me break this down in a way that even you can understand:
1.  Darter posted a post in which he described a poster from another site/message board.  Darter stated the guy was a piece of work . . . and then jokingly added "kind of like NoleBull on steroids." 
2.  Nolebull obviously understood Darter's humor and responded to Darter's comment by jokingly stating:  "You hate me cuz I'm beautiful."  We all know Nolebull was kidding around, because he ended his post with this emoji: " " ,which is generally understood to convey a sense of wackiness, buffoonery or joking around. 
3.  Darter knew Nolebull was kidding around, as Darter responded with the LOL emoji (). 
4.  Continuing the playful banter, Darter then replied to Nolebull's post, essentially saying:  hey, I've never met you so I don't know what you look like, but "even if you were an Adonis, it would mean naught to me."  Now, you don't even have to remember your Greek mythology to know that the term Adonis generally describes a handsome or beautiful man.  So, what I believe Darter was saying is, 'hey, I don't care if you're great looking or not; you're a guy and I'm a guy and therefore I would not be interested in you no matter how attractive you are.'   But Darter cleverly made his point without using the term "homosexual" or "gay" or anything similar to that. 
5.  I happen to appreciate people who can make a point in a subtle way (something you may not be able to comprehend).  So, I decided to post something showing my appreciation to Darter's ability to get his point across without using certain words. 
6.  As a reminder, the Florida legislature recently enacted legislation, and the governor of Florida signed into law, a bill that precludes educators from discussing the concept of homosexuality with children under a certain age/grade.   This law has been generally referred to, by and in the media and elsewhere, as the "Don't Say Gay" law.  Some people agree with it; some people don't.  That is irrelevant.  My opinion on the law is irrelevant, as is yours and everyone else's on this board.  What is relevant is that unless you've been living under a rock the past year, most everyone is familiar with the "Don't Say Gay" law. It has even sparked a war between our governor and the largest single-site employer in this state's largest industry.  But I digress.
7.   In my post, I jokingly (note the use of the emoji) congratulated Darter for being able to say he wasn't gay without using the word gay, as the use of the word could, under certain circumstances, be considered by some to be a violation of Florida law.  Darter obviously appreciated my humor as evidenced by his reply.  My post was not a commentary on the law itself, but simply Darter's ability to communicate in a way that didn't violate the commonly-used title of the law. 
8.  I'm really not sure how or why my post bothered you so much.  There is, admittedly, a side of me that's curious.  But, the "larger side" of me doesn't really care.   I'm tired of your shtick.  It was funny for a while, but I'm afraid that you have been emboldened by some early, positive responses and have taken it to an extreme.  Actually, I can only hope that it's a shtick and that you've simply adopted this "I'm the smartest man in the world and you should all bow down to me" alter ego for purposes of posting on this site.   Because, if that's not the case, man, I would sure hate to have you as an official in one of my games. 
(By the way, if you're going to continue to chastise or threaten me, it's probably not a good idea for you to DM me and ask me for legal advice again). 
As always, just my perspective. 

What I have learned from reading your various posts is a new appreciation for the ignorance and arrogance that humanity seems capable of exhibiting. I am not sure that one should be grateful for that, as, frankly, I find it depressing. 

Pinstripes, you can make all the "confused" faces that you want, but you know that when I stare a fact, command, or order, I mean business. I know very well how to handle people in your profession Pinstripes, whether ambulance-chasers or out-of-control, Empire State, Cesspool-City District Attorneys.  I don't want to read that fiction again from you on this message board Pinstripes. 

You were told to knock that crap off Pinstripes. I will state this again since, you didn't read correctly last time: KNOCK THAT CRAP OFF PINSTRIPES!   

It's just this site's way of preparing you for promotion and relegation.    Just hope you don't get "relegated" back down to Pop Warner. 

Not trying to get in the middle of you and Nolebull, literally or figuratively, but I couldn't help but notice how you artfully sidestepped Florida's "Don't Say Gay" law, while still getting your point across.  

Reportedly, Patrick Murphy, formerly at Sickles (with a short layover at Chamberlain), has been named head football coach at Bloomingdale. 

Agreed. 
That said, it would be interesting to know which category each opening falls into:
A.  Coach leaving for another high school football coaching position in Florida.
B.  Coach leaving for a high school football coaching job in another state.
C.  Coach resigned, retired or was fired (or not rehired) by the school.
D.   Other. 
(P.S., Gatorman-UF, I'm not asking you to go back through your list and designate which is which; you've done too much already . . . just responding to your "so many" comment and wondering if there's a common reason).

Gatorman-uf, I appreciate the coaching updates.   Thank you.

Will note that for next year, but I think it is an even spread of those things. Lots of dominoes falling (School A loses coach to a job someplace else (out of state or Florida), which hires coach at School B, and school B hires head coach at School C and this continues.

Some of the stuff was due to internal reasons that we may never know (a mix of C and D).

I'd say "yes."  
Remember, last year, when he moved from the west coast of Florida to the east coast, he left a team that he had guided to a state championship as a sophomore.  A team that was good enough to win it's district this past year and win its first three playoff games by a combined score of 128-10, before getting beat by eventual state champs, the University of STA. 
This time around, he's leaving a team that went 6-5, tied for 2nd in the district and lost an opening round playoff game.  And he's headed to a team that went 4-6, finished 4th in a 5-team district, did not make the playoffs, and lost their best player to graduation (a WR who committed to Ohio State).  That said, I know very little about what Wiregrass Ranch has coming back and even less about what Merritt Island has coming back.   Suffice to say, if the kid just wanted to play on a good team next season, there are plenty of teams in the Tampa Bay area that he could have gone to that likely will have better seasons than Wiregrass will. 

I've found I get into fewer arguments when I answer my own questions.  

I do not know the Knight family, but from what I understand, the move last year from Tampa to the Space Coast was prompted by a job situation with the father (transfer/promotion/new position . . . something like that).  Yes, there was speculation that he might lose his job to the kid who was a freshman last year, but to my knowledge, that had not yet happened.  So, it remains speculation.  Similarly, the move back to the Tampa Bay area also has been prompted by the father's job situation (another transfer/promotion/new position . . . something like that).  Early in my career, I worked with a bunch of bankers and such moves were not unusual in that industry.  I don't know what line of work the father is in, or even if he has been staying with the same company.  But I have known plenty of people who move away from an area (like Tampa Bay) only to decide the grass wasn't really greener elsewhere, and that they miss their friends, family, church, etc., so they return.  Sometimes it would take 4-5 years; sometimes a year. 
Anyone on this board who has a son who has played sports would understand this:  if your family had to move, you would look for the best opportunity for your son to succeed at his new school.  You would balance out quality of school, the success/tradition of the particular athletic program your son wants to be involved with, etc.  From an outsider's standpoint, that's how Luke Knight ended up at Merritt Island last year. 
Now, for reasons none of us fully know, the family is coming back to the Tampa Bay area.  Did they sell their house a year ago?  Did they buy a new house in Merritt Island?  Or did they keep their Tampa house, rent it out and lease in MI?   Who knows?  I certainly don't.   But, they've made the decision to return to Tampa.  Now it gets interesting.  Do you return to a school where you lead the team to a state championship as a sophomore?  Football aside, would he even be able to return to Jesuit?  I'll go out on a limb and take the position that while Jesuit typically/historically does not allow rising seniors to transfer in, they would have allowed this kid to re-enroll (call it the Pesansky Rule).
But now we have to look at from the family's standpoint:  how close was the kid to losing his starting job a year ago?   Regardless, if you're Matt Thompson (Jesuit head coach), you either made the choice to move on to another guy or that choice was made for you.   And that 'other guy' stepped in as a freshman and had success.  And that kid is likely to end up a 4-year starter.  As the head coach, do you want to bring back in the previous starter, bench your rising star (and possibly run the risk of losing him to informal high school transfer portal) or do you stick with stick with the taller, bigger, younger kid who has the potential to break all of Jesuit's career passing records by the time he graduates?
I don't know if the dad spoke with Thompson or if they could just see the writing on the wall.  And I think I saw something in the article (before the firewall and/or PDQ ad kept me from reading it all the way through) that indicated the kid would be playing on the same field that he played on in his youth football days.  Nostalgia can be a strong motivating force sometimes.  So, it looks to me like non-football forces brought the family back to the Tampa Bay area and the family did the same thing they did when those non-football forces took them to the Space Coast - they made a school decision that provided their son with the best opportunity to have success. 
Just my perspective. 

I've found I get into fewer arguments when I answer my own questions.  

From my perspective, sounds like you answered all your own questions. 

I do not know the Knight family, but from what I understand, the move last year from Tampa to the Space Coast was prompted by a job situation with the father (transfer/promotion/new position . . . something like that).  Yes, there was speculation that he might lose his job to the kid who was a freshman last year, but to my knowledge, that had not yet happened.  So, it remains speculation.  Similarly, the move back to the Tampa Bay area also has been prompted by the father's job situation (another transfer/promotion/new position . . . something like that).  Early in my career, I worked with a bunch of bankers and such moves were not unusual in that industry.  I don't know what line of work the father is in, or even if he has been staying with the same company.  But I have known plenty of people who move away from an area (like Tampa Bay) only to decide the grass wasn't really greener elsewhere, and that they miss their friends, family, church, etc., so they return.  Sometimes it would take 4-5 years; sometimes a year. 
Anyone on this board who has a son who has played sports would understand this:  if your family had to move, you would look for the best opportunity for your son to succeed at his new school.  You would balance out quality of school, the success/tradition of the particular athletic program your son wants to be involved with, etc.  From an outsider's standpoint, that's how Luke Knight ended up at Merritt Island last year. 
Now, for reasons none of us fully know, the family is coming back to the Tampa Bay area.  Did they sell their house a year ago?  Did they buy a new house in Merritt Island?  Or did they keep their Tampa house, rent it out and lease in MI?   Who knows?  I certainly don't.   But, they've made the decision to return to Tampa.  Now it gets interesting.  Do you return to a school where you lead the team to a state championship as a sophomore?  Football aside, would he even be able to return to Jesuit?  I'll go out on a limb and take the position that while Jesuit typically/historically does not allow rising seniors to transfer in, they would have allowed this kid to re-enroll (call it the Pesansky Rule).
But now we have to look at from the family's standpoint:  how close was the kid to losing his starting job a year ago?   Regardless, if you're Matt Thompson (Jesuit head coach), you either made the choice to move on to another guy or that choice was made for you.   And that 'other guy' stepped in as a freshman and had success.  And that kid is likely to end up a 4-year starter.  As the head coach, do you want to bring back in the previous starter, bench your rising star (and possibly run the risk of losing him to informal high school transfer portal) or do you stick with stick with the taller, bigger, younger kid who has the potential to break all of Jesuit's career passing records by the time he graduates?
I don't know if the dad spoke with Thompson or if they could just see the writing on the wall.  And I think I saw something in the article (before the firewall and/or PDQ ad kept me from reading it all the way through) that indicated the kid would be playing on the same field that he played on in his youth football days.  Nostalgia can be a strong motivating force sometimes.  So, it looks to me like non-football forces brought the family back to the Tampa Bay area and the family did the same thing they did when those non-football forces took them to the Space Coast - they made a school decision that provided their son with the best opportunity to have success. 
Just my perspective. 

I do not know the Knight family, but from what I understand, the move last year from Tampa to the Space Coast was prompted by a job situation with the father (transfer/promotion/new position . . . something like that).  Yes, there was speculation that he might lose his job to the kid who was a freshman last year, but to my knowledge, that had not yet happened.  So, it remains speculation.  Similarly, the move back to the Tampa Bay area also has been prompted by the father's job situation (another transfer/promotion/new position . . . something like that).  Early in my career, I worked with a bunch of bankers and such moves were not unusual in that industry.  I don't know what line of work the father is in, or even if he has been staying with the same company.  But I have known plenty of people who move away from an area (like Tampa Bay) only to decide the grass wasn't really greener elsewhere, and that they miss their friends, family, church, etc., so they return.  Sometimes it would take 4-5 years; sometimes a year. 
Anyone on this board who has a son who has played sports would understand this:  if your family had to move, you would look for the best opportunity for your son to succeed at his new school.  You would balance out quality of school, the success/tradition of the particular athletic program your son wants to be involved with, etc.  From an outsider's standpoint, that's how Luke Knight ended up at Merritt Island last year. 
Now, for reasons none of us fully know, the family is coming back to the Tampa Bay area.  Did they sell their house a year ago?  Did they buy a new house in Merritt Island?  Or did they keep their Tampa house, rent it out and lease in MI?   Who knows?  I certainly don't.   But, they've made the decision to return to Tampa.  Now it gets interesting.  Do you return to a school where you lead the team to a state championship as a sophomore?  Football aside, would he even be able to return to Jesuit?  I'll go out on a limb and take the position that while Jesuit typically/historically does not allow rising seniors to transfer in, they would have allowed this kid to re-enroll (call it the Pesansky Rule).
But now we have to look at from the family's standpoint:  how close was the kid to losing his starting job a year ago?   Regardless, if you're Matt Thompson (Jesuit head coach), you either made the choice to move on to another guy or that choice was made for you.   And that 'other guy' stepped in as a freshman and had success.  And that kid is likely to end up a 4-year starter.  As the head coach, do you want to bring back in the previous starter, bench your rising star (and possibly run the risk of losing him to informal high school transfer portal) or do you stick with stick with the taller, bigger, younger kid who has the potential to break all of Jesuit's career passing records by the time he graduates?
I don't know if the dad spoke with Thompson or if they could just see the writing on the wall.  And I think I saw something in the article (before the firewall and/or PDQ ad kept me from reading it all the way through) that indicated the kid would be playing on the same field that he played on in his youth football days.  Nostalgia can be a strong motivating force sometimes.  So, it looks to me like non-football forces brought the family back to the Tampa Bay area and the family did the same thing they did when those non-football forces took them to the Space Coast - they made a school decision that provided their son with the best opportunity to have success. 
Just my perspective. 

Wait, are you being serious????    Venice is traveling to play an away game?  

Dang, that might put a dent in their recruiting budget.  

I just wish there weren't so many. 

Gatorman-uf, I appreciate the coaching updates.   Thank you.

Wait, are you being serious????    Venice is traveling to play an away game?