Nick Saban had a chance to weigh in on the state of Alabama football after 2025 on Wednesday on the Pat McAfee Show.

McAfee questioned whether Alabama should have hired a Saban disciple to replace him considering all four coaches left in the playoff once worked for Saban at Alabama.

“I think if somebody was available, I’m not sure anybody was available that they could have maybe gotten to come here,” Saban said. “I do think that Kalen DeBoer is a really good coach and doing a good job here.”

Saban highlighted the “tough transition” DeBoer underwent with all of the players coming and going.

“So that’s a lot to overcome for anybody,” Saban said. “It would have been a lot to overcome for even for one of the guys that formerly coached for me.”

Saban then said he “fully supports” Alabama athletics director Greg Byrne, what he’s done and how the administrator has done it.

“I’m hoping they get the ship going in the right direction here,” Saban said. “It’s not bad to get in the playoffs and finish you know in the final eight, but not the expectation around here, which is tough to live up to sometimes.”

During his appearance on McAfee, Saban also talked some about Indiana and what the Hoosiers did to beat Alabama 38-3 in the Rose Bow.

“Indiana man, I mean they were impressive in the game,” Saban said. “Not that Alabama played great, and they made some mistakes early on that hurt them … These cats, man. Everybody talks about their offense. They’ve got some dawgs on defense now. These guys play hard, they play fast, they play together, they don’t make a lot of mental mistakes. They’re well coached. They fit the runs. This pop they put on Ty (Simpson) right here. …. Incredible the job they’ve done at Indiana. Curt Cig has done a fantastic job there.”

We loved our free-range childhoods. Now we’re fighting to make sure Hoosier parents won’t get arrested for giving their kids the same freedom.

Advertisement

It’s tempting to think Democrats and Republicans can’t agree on anything these days, but the two of us wholeheartedly agree on this:

Our childhoods were awesome.

In fact, we loved our childhoods so much, we are co-sponsoring a bill that would ensure Indiana parents can let their kids enjoy their childhoods just as much. Under our bill, parents can let their kids play outside, walk to the store, romp in the woods and stomp in the rain without worrying that this wonderful independence could be mistaken for neglect.

The so-called “Reasonable Childhood Independence” bill has been passed in 11 states so far — red, blue, and purple. It is not a free pass for abusive parents. It is reassurance for all decent Hoosiers that they don’t have to worry about being investigated or arrested for giving their kids some unsupervised time.

House Bill 1035 simply says that “neglect” is when you put your child in obvious and serious danger — not anytime you take your eyes off them. This helps parents who want to give their kids a longer leash. And it helps parents in poverty who have little choice but to do so — for instance, a single mom working two jobs who lets her kid come home with a latchkey.

It also helps all the parents desperate to get their kids off screens: You take away the phone — and open the door.

Jacob Stewart: Indiana’s phone ban wasn’t enough. We need technology-free schools.

Our own childhoods were as outdoors and free range as they come. Jake grew up in Michiana, running around, looking for trees to build tree houses in. Other times he’d jump on his bike and go to the ballpark with friends, or go get a burger or even, yes, some Big League Chew.

An LGBTQ advocacy group is once again suing Loogootee, Indiana, claiming the city is ignoring a recent court decision ruling its actions unconstitutional and is pushing its festival out of the public square illegally.

The Southern Indiana city of 2,600 people and festival organizer Patoka Valley AIDS Community Action Group have fought for years over LGBTQ expression on city property, specifically where the annual PrideFest would be held.

The city had enacted a special events policy that would prevent the group from holding the festival at the public square downtown. The U.S. District Court of Southern Indiana handed the city a major defeat in August, ruling that the policy was too broad and violated organizers’ First Amendment rights.

Now, Loogootee has enacted another special events policy that mirrors several measures in the one that the court struck down. In response, the Indiana chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents Pakota Valley, filed a new lawsuit against the policy and filed a motion alleging the city is disobeying court orders.

“Court orders must be complied with, and Loogootee, by enacting an ordinance that contains provisions enjoined by the Court, is in contempt of its lawful orders,” ACLU Indiana legal director Ken Falk said in a news release. “Moreover, the ordinance it has adopted continues Loogootee’s pattern of attempting to unconstitutionally restrict this celebration of the LGBTQ+ community.”

The new legal twist is the most recent development in what’s been a tense local culture war between the LGBTQ+ community seeking to publicly celebrate their identity and the strong, sometimes threatening, community pushback to their efforts.

Is Loogootee’s ‘new’ policy new?

Judge Richard L. Young listed three primary factors in his August ruling as to why he found Loogootee’s old policy unconstitutional: a 45-day event permit application deadline, small group thresholds, and event location limits. He also disagreed with the city’s health and safety reasoning for such rules.

Public institutions can legally establish restrictions on the time, place and manner of free expression as long as these restrictions are narrowly tailored.

Enacted Dec. 29, the new ordinance reuses the same language regarding the permit deadline and small groups but broadens the locations where an event can be held. Instead of limiting an event to one of two places, an event can now be held anywhere except within 240 feet of the town center’s fountain.

In its complaint, the ACLU argued that the “verbatim” measures and the new location restriction are all unconstitutional.

“The ‘new’ Ordinance is therefore ‘new’ in name only and, in reality, Loogootee has simply reenacted provisions that this Court has explicitly enjoined as unconstitutional,” the ACLU’s complaint reads.

Loogootee Mayor Brian Ader previously told IndyStar that the city planned to appeal the District Court’s decision, but an appeal was never filed.

The USA TODAY Network – Indiana’s coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.

Have a story to tell? Reach Cate Charron by email at ccharron@indystar.com, on X at @CateCharron or Signal at @cate.charron.28.