Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Cheerleaders "gone wild"

Culture Cheerleaders Incorrigible teens 2007

  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#41 Tricia

Tricia

    To err on the side of kindness is seldom an error.

  • Islander
  • 10,245 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 01:24 PM

^^^^

Depends on what her contracted salary was...

You might or might not be surprised how much money school principals and adminstrators make.

And according to reports the mom/principal had a two years remaining on her contract.

In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. --Thich Nhat Hanh


You don't need to attend every argument you are invited to


Do not ask that your kids live up to your expectations.  Let your kids be who they are, and your expectations will be in breathless pursuit.


#42 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 01:38 PM

View Posttrikay, on Jan 9 2007, 01:13 PM, said:

But even with teaching history, how receptive the children are to learning the lessons of the past is up to each individual child.

It's sort of one of those situations where "You can lead a horse to water but you can not make them drink"  Either they get it or they don't.  

Empathy sometimes is something that you can not  necessarily teach.

Plus a lot depends upon the teacher and their methods.  Do they make their subject come to life or is it just another boring hour to get thru?  I guess I got lucky when I was growing up.  In one small country school I had some amazing teachers who inspired me.  Not every child gets so lucky.

And not every teacher can get thru to every child.

Oh-I agree with all this! My POV as well. But the thing is this: empathy is something a kid will HAVE to learn, one way or the other. And better to learn it the easy way than the HARD way-and the latter is more often how you learn things in this life.

And there is also the self-motivation factor, which becomes increasingly important as you get older. You can't wait for people to teach you things, or limit your learning to a classroom.
Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#43 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 01:47 PM

View PostCheile, on Jan 9 2007, 01:03 PM, said:

Quote

The bottom line isn't cheerleading and sports. The bottom line is-

TEACHING KIDS RESPECT FOR OTHER FOLKS.

yes DM, as i said, the problem is largely the parents' fault.  but the activities they are in add to the attitude problem.  they think because they are a football player or a cheerleader that they are better than the other kids.  you don't see members of the band or the drama company or the chess club or debate team acting like that on a constant basis.

Actually...I've run across some rather egotistical nerds myself, who thought their sh!t was ice cream. The activities are a separate issue, as I see it. If the kid's a bad seed from the start, that kid's gonna STAY a bad seed. I don't dispute the kinds of kids you talk about, because I've run across them as well-high n' mighty jocks, and diva bee-otches too! But I've also come across geeks who were full of themselves. And I've come across people who were heavily into sports who ended up being nice people.

It all depends on the circles you travel in.

:eh:

Edited by Digital Man, 09 January 2007 - 01:50 PM.

Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#44 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 03:36 PM

View PostCheile, on Jan 9 2007, 06:19 PM, said:

View PostRhys, on Jan 9 2007, 10:13 AM, said:

Actually, sound business logic is to invest in the areas that make you money, and the money-losing facets of your business only get supported inasmuch as they either support the money-makers, or contribute to possible future money-makers.

fine arts makes plenty of money for schools.  if there's thousands in donations coming in for the damn sports teams, they have no business stealing from other areas of the school.  they need to use the donations they are given for what it was given for.

I'm not sure I'm following your logic. What fine arts make "plenty of money" for schools? Do you have any examples? Boston Universtiy disbanded their football team when they decided they couldn't afford to keep it up. If fine arts are "making money", then why would the school close down the fine arts programs? Wouldn't that just be more money they could spend on football? If you shut them down, then all that "extra" money goes away and more money would have to come from the tuition money.

#45 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 04:39 PM

Quote

fine arts makes plenty of money for schools

Fine Arts make nothing. They may bring some donations from some good people who care more about education then sports, but football accually makes money.

I've never seen anyone so hostile to high school sports before, what started it?
Can't Touch This!!

#46 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 04:55 PM

Maybe with continued hard work and just a dash of talk show nonsense, "cheerleading and sports" can replace "violent movies and videogames" as America's favorite scapegoat for bad behavior.

-scherzo
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#47 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 06:23 PM

Quote

I'm not sure I'm following your logic. What fine arts make "plenty of money" for schools?
Drama - putting on shows for money
Art - Gallery Exhibitions
Music - Concerts

Also - The Arts are just as valuable as sport from an educational point of view. I would argue the sciences are MORE valuable. Maybe I'm biased :whistle:

How do sports generate money? :eh: Is this some government policy or something? :unsure: I don't understand that quite - i know the problem of people getting in because they are good at sport is an America thing, it doesn't SEEM to happen over here (if it does I've not come across it or heard of it).

Quote

I'm not sure if it's a slang thing here, but a "jock" is a person who plays sports. Though usually the "jock" is the athletic type who plays sports well, it's just a generic term. It's like if you said that there would still be "football" without goalies and linesement and whatnot - "jock" just takes the place of a team member of a sport. But there are plenty of sports without cheerleaders, too.

Ok, my bad Broph. Thanks for the clarification. I thought a jock referred specifically to the stereotypically steroid-taking guy who gets in on sport despite bad grades. The point I was making is that you don't need cheerleaders - they have no function. On the other hand, from an American perspective - I don't know how much you consider them a part of your culture- and how much that comes into it.

Quote

Your homework is to watch the movie "Bring it On".
The film's name is enough to put me off (uh...no offence...), but if you are alluding to the fact that cheerleading is a lot more difficult than it looks and more gymnastic with all the timing and everything - yep, that's true, but to have a sport which is so combined with looks - I think if you start to combine looks with anything there enters into it this artificial quality of stardom and status which is not necessary and is divisive. If it could really be it's own sport, why not combine it with dance and/or gymnastics and give it its own stage rather than sitting on the sidelines of another?

Quote

I have no idea what sixth form was, but in high school we played various sports. In college I took badminton, volleyball, fencing and one other that I can't recall right now.

(Sixth Form: Last two years of secondary/ high school, students have more privileges, have their own building usually (if their school offers sixth form that is), because A-levels are the most important high school exams. In the last year you don't have to do PE at all. Yippee!)

Wow! Badminton was starting to be offered as I was leaving, but we didn't have any kind of choice in the matter until very late in the game. Fencing is like Archery and Squash, very much a university sport.

Only public schools (private schools) would have those kind of sports, not state schools. For our schools that is a major problem with the way it's done. There should be a range and choice of interesting sports, instead of crappy hockey, football, rugby and netball/basketball.  :sarcasm:

Quote

Choice is good, but it's hard to do with large groups.

By doing it later on they proved it could be done. Even just having one that was more like, say, dance - a non-team or non-competitive sport would be good. And PE teachers are SOOOO unsympathetic to those who don't like or aren't good at sport it's unbelievable.

I feel the main point of this (aside from my personal ranting about my former school's PE specifics, that is) is that any sport for which good looks is a criterion is inevitably going to be rife with superficial values, which is in direct conflict with the moral values the school is trying to teach about looks being irrelevant. If that makes sense :unsure:

Now some of you said looks aren't an issue, others imply it goes beyond looks even to personality and charisma, that "superstar quality" - well that's going to lead, imho, to conflict between students.

Sparky

Edited by SparkyCola, 10 January 2007 - 12:14 PM.

Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#48 Shoshana

Shoshana
  • Islander
  • 4,033 posts

Posted 09 January 2007 - 10:11 PM

I think cheerleading is quite different in the US than the UK - or at least the perception is. The cheerleaders go out and cheer for the football team and the basketball team, but at least among high school cheerleaders that I've met, it's the cheer competitions where they can win ribbons and trophies that they really work for.

So it is very much like gymnastics except they compete only as a team. And when I was in high schools, they had a dance team competition too.

In the US our 'free' schools are the public schools, private schools here are paid for by parents and scholarships. (In case of cross Atlantic confusion)

I went to a public high school (no tuition fees). We had alot of sports to choose from in PE especially in 11th and 12 grades when it wasn't mandatory to take PE. That's not saying I was an athlete in high school - but I did like athletic stuff. I chose to take PE instead of study hall. So I got to take lots of classes in different sports - volleyball, tennis, archery, fencing, softball, gymnastics (where I almost failed when I fell off the balance beam and refused to try the parallel bars - can you say vertigo?), golf and badminton. They has soccer and basketball too but I found out when I took track that I didn't do well in sports where there was alot of running. I liked fencing so much I took it when I went to college.

So it really depends on the high school - we had a big speech and drama department and I took classes there too. About the only kinds of classes I didn't take were vocational/business classes. Things like shop, drafting, welding, home ec and typing. I should have taken typing!!!

My parents always moved to school districts that were highly rated - and those were the ones where we had alot of opportunities to have different classes. My high school wasn't one of the smaller schools - there were about 2500 students in 9-12th grade. (We had 600+ in our graduating class, I know people who had 12 people and one who had over 1000 people graduating with him)

edited to add

At least at university level, football and basketball can bring in a boatload of money. The alumni and fans buy tickets to the events, buy season tickets, donate gobs of money.

Millions of dollars a year.

Much more than concerts, galleries and plays can.

Edited by Shoshana, 09 January 2007 - 10:16 PM.


#49 Cheile

Cheile

    proud J/Cer ~ ten years and counting

  • Islander
  • 10,776 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 12:30 AM

Quote

If fine arts are "making money", then why would the school close down the fine arts programs?
when they steal money from the fine arts programs, that can happen.  then they can use the "oh we don't have any money!" bulls*** line when in fact they took it to buy the baseball team new jerseys they didn't need or some other unnecessary sports item.

View PostKosh, on Jan 9 2007, 01:39 PM, said:

Quote

fine arts makes plenty of money for schools

Fine Arts make nothing.

bulls***.  concerts.  plays.  musicals.  recitals.  other varied fine arts events.  don't tell me these things do not make money.

Quote

I've never seen anyone so hostile to high school sports before, what started it?
because i'm tired of seeing the favoritism shown towards sports and the money stealing done by the schools and districts.  and yes it DOES happen.  it happened at my school and the fine arts department was making the school PLENTY of money.  i'm sure it happens at others.

Quote

At least at university level, football and basketball can bring in a boatload of money. The alumni and fans buy tickets to the events, buy season tickets, donate gobs of money.

Millions of dollars a year.

Much more than concerts, galleries and plays can.

only because of the BLATANT favoritism.  if they spend a crapload of time promoting the football games and the university band's spring concert is barely given a mention (if it's given one at all!) in the alumni newsletter, don't you think more people would go see the stupid game because most aren't aware the concert is taking place??

Posted Image


"Andromeda may be over but it's not dead. Not as long as we have fanfic writers dedicated to keeping it alive.  Whether you accept everything as canon or stop at a certain point. Whether you accept and enjoy Nu Drom or only accept Classic Drom, it will never be over.  Not as long as we have each other [and Beka], who binds us all together." ~ Mary Rose

Twitter * Facebook * ExIsle at Facebook

icon by mercscilla @ LJ

#50 Raina

Raina

    Cpt. Raina 'Starlee'

  • Validation Team
  • 6,009 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 04:42 AM

View PostShoshana, on Jan 9 2007, 08:11 PM, said:

At least at university level, football and basketball can bring in a boatload of money. The alumni and fans buy tickets to the events, buy season tickets, donate gobs of money.

Millions of dollars a year.

Much more than concerts, galleries and plays can.
I don't know about other universities, but mine charges admission for concerts.

"First thing they tell you is to assume you're already dead... dead men don't get scared or freeze up under fire. Me, I'm just worried that hell's gonna be a lonely place. And I'm gonna fill it up with every toaster son of a bitch I find." -Racetrack

"I believe what goes around comes around and if I am the instrument of 'coming round' then I'll do it happily. " -Shal


Viper Squadron CAG
Roman Warrior
Browncoat

#51 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 06:55 AM

View PostSparkyCola, on Jan 9 2007, 11:23 PM, said:

Quote

I'm not sure I'm following your logic. What fine arts make "plenty of money" for schools?
Drama - putting on shows for money
Art - Gallery Exhibitions
Music - Concerts

Drama - what would they put on: 2 maybe 3 plays in a year? Plays that run for about 5 shows each to an audience of about 500 at a time?

Aren't art gallery showings free most of the time? And if they sell art, would the money go to the students?

Music - concerts - possibly, but I guess it would depend on the type of music and the frequency of the concerts.

Quote

Also - The Arts are just as valuable as sport from an educational point of view. I would argue the sciences are MORE valuable. Maybe I'm biased :whistle:
Value is great.

Quote

How do sports generate money? :eh: Is this some government policy or something? :unsure: I don't understand that quite - i know the problem of people getting in because they are good at sport is an America thing, it doesn't SEEM to happen over here (if it does I've not come across it or heard of it).

Selling tickets; alumni donating money; selling concessions and memorabilia at the games. In football season, there's a game every week, though only half of those are "home" games.

Quote

Ok, my bad Broph. Thanks for the clarification. I thought a jock referred specifically to the stereotypically steroid-taking guy who gets in on sport despite bad grades. The point I was making is that you don't need cheerleaders - they have no function.
Well, they get the crowd excited and cheering. Sometimes a positive crowd can have an amazing effect on the players on the field.

Quote

but to have a sport which is so combined with looks - I think if you start to combine looks with anything there enters into it this artificial quality of stardom and status which is not necessary and is divisive.

Isn't there an attempt to make anything look as good as it can? The uniforms that the players wear are meant to look good. Newscasters - whose job is only to read the news - are expected to have good looks and to be presentable on camera. The entire movie industry is based on good looks.

Quote

If it could really be it's own sport, why not combine it with dance and/or gymnastics and give it its own stage rather than sitting on the sidelines of another?
Your homework is again to watch the movie "Bring it On"!

Quote

(Sixth Form: Last two years of secondary/ high school

Ah.

Quote

By doing it later on they proved it could be done. Even just having one that was more like, say, dance - a non-team or non-competitive sport would be good. And PE teachers are SOOOO unsympathetic to those who don't like or aren't good at sport it's unbelievable.
In the high school level, they try to get students to be well rounded. In PE, they don't want us to play only one sport; they show a variety of sports to broaden our minds and our experiences. But a single teacher with a single class of say 30 students can't have 2 students doing badminton, 4 students fencing, 9 students swimming in the pool, etc.

Quote

I feel the main point of this (aside from my personal ranting about my former school's PE specifics, that is) is that any sport for which good looks is a criterion is inevitably going to be rife with superficial values, which is in direct conflict with the moral values the school is trying to teach about looks being irrelevant. If that makes sense :unsure:

I think there's more to it than that. I'm not dismissing what you're saying, but I do think that there's more.

#52 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 07:04 AM

View PostCheile, on Jan 10 2007, 05:30 AM, said:

Quote

If fine arts are "making money", then why would the school close down the fine arts programs?
when they steal money from the fine arts programs, that can happen.  then they can use the "oh we don't have any money!" bulls*** line when in fact they took it to buy the baseball team new jerseys they didn't need or some other unnecessary sports item.

Again, I'm not following here. You say that fine arts generates money, but that fine arts are shut down. If they make money that can be used by sports (not should be, I'm saying can be), then what sense comes from shutting down the fine arts?

Did you see the commercial that ran a year or so ago? The guy is wheeled into the operating room because he's got money coming out the wazoo? Someone asks if he has insurance and the surgeon replies that he doesn't need insurance; he's got money coming out the wazoo. Now, granted, I may not like money coming out the wazoo, but it's money - I may think twice of fixing that "problem".

Quote

bulls***.  concerts.  plays.  musicals.  recitals.  other varied fine arts events.  don't tell me these things do not make money.

I answered that above. How many plays, concerts, etc., per year? How many attendees per event compared to, say, football?

Quote

only because of the BLATANT favoritism.  if they spend a crapload of time promoting the football games and the university band's spring concert is barely given a mention (if it's given one at all!) in the alumni newsletter, don't you think more people would go see the stupid game because most aren't aware the concert is taking place??

No, it's not only because of blatant favoritism. Do you see that college football is played on TV on weekends? The networks pay millions of dollars to air those games. That money goes to the school in exchange for the rights to broadcast the games. The schools don't just say "sure, air my game". They don't need to promote the game - the network does that for them.

Then there are alumni who give lots of money to their schools. Schools with good, winning teams often inspire larger donations. And this money doesn't just go back to football - this money goes to build buildings and outfit labs and buy new monitors for classrooms.

If more people go to the game than the concert, it's probably because more people want to go to the game than the concert. In fact, I would think that the band, or at least the marching band, is right at the game, too.

#53 Tricia

Tricia

    To err on the side of kindness is seldom an error.

  • Islander
  • 10,245 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 07:11 AM

Nevermind



Broph said it better. :D

Edited by trikay, 10 January 2007 - 09:56 AM.

In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. --Thich Nhat Hanh


You don't need to attend every argument you are invited to


Do not ask that your kids live up to your expectations.  Let your kids be who they are, and your expectations will be in breathless pursuit.


#54 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 01:07 PM

Quote

I think cheerleading is quite different in the US than the UK
I'm going by what I read here, Shoshana, because we don't have cheerleading in the UK at all, really, it's very much a US thing, just as we don't play baseball here and you guys don't really play football.

Quote

So it is very much like gymnastics except they compete only as a team. And when I was in high schools, they had a dance team competition too.
Ah that's interesting, thanks for the info I didn't know they competed separately as well.

Quote

In the US our 'free' schools are the public schools, private schools here are paid for by parents and scholarships. (In case of cross Atlantic confusion)
I know ;) that's why I put private schools in brackets when I said public schools. I really have no idea why we call private schools public. What you would call public schools though we call state schools. You guys are using far more sensible terminology!

Quote

I chose to take PE instead of study hall.
:eh: I don't know what study hall is though. PE is on our curriculum, so it's mandatory, we had to take a total of 2 1/2 hours PE altogether and we had no choice what we did :glare: I went to a state school so the facilities were more limited. A Special Sport status school like the school next door to us would probably have more choice too.

Quote

So I got to take lots of classes in different sports - volleyball, tennis, archery, fencing, softball, gymnastics (where I almost failed when I fell off the balance beam and refused to try the parallel bars - can you say vertigo?)
Our school was just... "This year we're doing hockey in PE and Athletics in Games." and that was that. I think vertigo is dizziness, if you're afraid of heights it's called acrophobia :unsure:.

Quote

Things like shop, drafting, welding, home ec and typing. I should have taken typing!!!
Whoa you're high school was amazing! Sounds like you had loads of choices. I don't even know what drafting is. I agree it does depend on the school. A friend of mine who joined in Sixth form went to a Technology specialist school and she's pretty handy with the old woodwork and metalwork and that kind of thing, our school focused more on Maths, Science and English on the whole. About as varied as it got was having A-levels in Art History and Geology. Gee :sarcasm: I wanted to do Ancient history :( And my school was a grammar school that was a good school. It's like Oxbridge though - the best unis we have - they have the most limited range of subjects out of anyone. Just the basic subjects. :eh:

Quote

At least at university level, football and basketball can bring in a boatload of money. The alumni and fans buy tickets to the events, buy season tickets, donate gobs of money.
And this is where UK/USA culture REALLY splits off into two. The only parallel I can think of is the Oxbridge rowing races. Our unis are government funded so they don't need to have all these "sport scholarships" and that kind of nonsense. Over here sport generates about as much money for unis as fine arts. No where near the "boatload" of the USA. There's not as much emphasis put on it. Frankly, thank goodness. I wouldn't want every single university to be effectively a "Sport special status" uni.

Quote

Drama - what would they put on: 2 maybe 3 plays in a year? Plays that run for about 5 shows each to an audience of about 500 at a time?
Ok Broph, it's YOUR maths I'm working with here- 3 plays a year, (one for each term). Our uni did Sweet Charity recently. Tickets a fiver, equivalent to $10 each. Usually run for more than 5 shows each (don't forget they do matinee and evening performances on some days) more like 10. The actors and actresses and lighting etc. is all done for free by students. Ok audience of 500. 500 x 10 performances = 5000, x $10 each = $50,000 If they only put on 5 shows like you think that's still $25,000 and that is for 1 of 3 performances. I would hardly call that "nothing" in terms of profit. I'm not debating the fact that sport brings in more in America, but I refute the claim that the arts bring in "nothing". Perhaps it would help if they had more funding of course...

Quote

Aren't art gallery showings free most of the time? And if they sell art, would the money go to the students?
Unis and the student unions are trying to raise money. Many art galleries charge an entry fee. Buckingham Uni often puts on exhibits with an entry fee.

Quote

Music - concerts - possibly, but I guess it would depend on the type of music and the frequency of the concerts.
Mostly Classical music concerts I imagine, but again, the players are for free, the entry fee brings a lot of profit margin.

Quote

Isn't there an attempt to make anything look as good as it can? The uniforms that the players wear are meant to look good. Newscasters - whose job is only to read the news - are expected to have good looks and to be presentable on camera. The entire movie industry is based on good looks.
Yes it is. But a school is not a movie industry. Nor should it pretend to be a modelling agency. How shallow is that? It seems like to Americans pretty=good ugly=bad and that's that. Well in the UK our newsreaders have to be reporters first and some of our reporters have faces like brown paper bags and that's the way it should be in my eyes. Schools are supposed to teach that it's not what's on the outside that counts but on the inside. That would seem to be the exact opposite of the cheerleading criterion "must be pretty" and that's unacceptable imo. It's just as shallow as saying "only chinese people can join." or "whites only". It's out of order.

Quote

But a single teacher with a single class of say 30 students can't have 2 students doing badminton, 4 students fencing, 9 students swimming in the pool, etc.
Why would a single class be doing it like THAT? Who would organise it so poorly? Get the whole year, organise sport specific time slots- i.e. Badminton is on Friday period 1 and monday 2, and then let the students choose. Obviously if only one person chooses hockey, they will have to take it out, but 180 students are unlikely to ALL choose football. There will more likely be enough to do at least SOME variety. Like I say, they DID it, it CAN work. That's not to mention our PE classes were classes of 90 students.

I understand Cheile's frustration because I feel the same way - that sport gets far more attention that it deserves, and money and attention should be distributed fairly between the departments - not because of who generates more money at ALL, but because EACH of them has an EQUAL educational value, and in the end, schools and unis should be about education not money. Especially high schools which are supposed to encourage talented mathmaticians and physicists just as much as the Year 9 Senior Blue Team Rugby player followed by the Year 9 Junior Blue Team Rugby player and on and on and on for hours on end, then finally, 5 minutes at the end there's a single prize for 'maths' and every other subject. There's no "Maths colours Junior Algebra prize" or "Maths year nine geometry prize" - and that takes the biscuit as far as I'm concerned.

So to summarise: Sports shouldn't get so much attention, prettiness should not be one of the criteria for joining the cheerleading squad.

Sparky

Edited by SparkyCola, 10 January 2007 - 01:13 PM.

Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#55 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 10 January 2007 - 01:37 PM

View Posttrikay, on Jan 10 2007, 12:11 PM, said:

Nevermind



Broph said it better. :D

You said some good stuff in there - didn't you mention stuff like the social aspect of the game and tailgating and things like that?



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Culture, Cheerleaders, Incorrigible teens, 2007

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users