I guess the only way I can explain is make an analogy... A bad analogy, but another way to look at it...

 

If Murray State had Joe Montana at QB and played Texas in football, Texas would win 100/100 times.. could name the score, play the reserves, etc....

 

In basketball, if Murray State had Michael Jordan on their team, I would like my chances a lot more for the Racers to beat the Longhorns.

 

I am not saying everyone is as good as Michael Jordan, but it is nothing to have insanely good high school basketball talent and can ride this person as long as you want. In football, one cannot do that. There are other factors, but just another way to convey a point stressed already by some.

 

Well put. . . Basketball does not benefit a much from numbers as it does from individual talents. The larger private schools get their biggest benefit from numbers in football and the "meet" (swimming, track, cross country) sports where every point counts.

I guess the only way I can explain is make an analogy... A bad analogy, but another way to look at it...

 

If Murray State had Joe Montana at QB and played Texas in football, Texas would win 100/100 times.. could name the score, play the reserves, etc....

 

In basketball, if Murray State had Michael Jordan on their team, I would like my chances a lot more for the Racers to beat the Longhorns.

 

I am not saying everyone is as good as Michael Jordan, but it is nothing to have insanely good high school basketball talent and can ride this person as long as you want. In football, one cannot do that. There are other factors, but just another way to convey a point stressed already by some.

 

 

I understand what your saying bugatti but it's just shocking to me that a school that has large numbers of students...sometimes 2 or 3 times of other schools can't find 12/14 good b-ball players and 1, 2 or 3 exceptional players.

I understand what your saying bugatti but it's just shocking to me that a school that has large numbers of students...sometimes 2 or 3 times of other schools can't find 12/14 good b-ball players and 1, 2 or 3 exceptional players.

 

That is what I cannot figure out.

Consider how basketball works in high school you just dont show up and make the team (too often anyway). You usually have to be a member of a summer AAU team attend summer camp and so on. Alot of the hall walking kids dont make the team because they have not done these things all year long as most coaches expect. That along with the simple fact that you have tryouts is a huge benefit it does give you some leverage with players. VS. Football most schools will take anyone they can get to fill spots for practice, defense, special teams, JV freshman, and so on. Most football coaches; even though they would love to cut or be srtict have to relax there requirements to keep kids involved and numbers up.

That is what I cannot figure out.

 

Gentlemen, first of all, the private school feeder system in general turns out more football players in quantity and quality, especially since there are no cuts locally. Basketball is for "everyone" and the level of play is not as competitive as AAU or Metro Parks leagues. Locally, greater emphasis is placed on football in the private school arena. You don't have to be 6'8" to play football. You don't have to dunk or be able to make a 20 foot jumper.

 

The private high schools simply do not attract the better athletes for basketball as well as football or baseball or wrestling, etc. The tradition of winning isn't there. If the privates ever do turn this corner, it will be more like Ohio, where private schools win across the board (Ohio does have many classes in all sports).

 

As in other posts, football is more of a numbers game. Basketball takes two talented players and it's over in many cases. Sacred Heart had Carly Olmerod and Crystal Kelly and won three consecutive titles in girl's basketball. As soon as one was gone, they couldn't win their district! This year's district was redrawn(with Assumption removed) and Sacred Heart did make the regional final. BTW, one girl mentioned was a product of the usual feeder system and the other was not and created a huge outcry from several local schools when she received a legitimate scholarship to attend SHA.

Another thing that people seem to overlook is the fact that traditionally sucessful programs get more practice time than other schools. Because of post season play and practice, some players could have as much as 2 seasons worth of practices extra by the end of their senior year because their team perennially go deep in the playoffs while other teams don't.

I think the only answer is Private Basketball teams need to work harder.

Trininty does not have 17 Varsity Coaches...

I think the only answer is Private Basketball teams need to work harder.

 

:laugh: :laugh:

 

 

Don't worry...that's what we're doing. We realize it takes time though!

 

We'll be knocking at the championship doors soon!

I think the only answer is Private Basketball teams need to work harder.

What is the plan in working harder to make our 5'7" center guard a 6'3" center?

What is the plan in working harder to make our 5'7" center guard a 6'3" center?

 

 

 

too funny.

 

You deserve a

Trininty does not have 17 Varsity Coaches...

 

I don't think RockPride said they were all varsity, just football coaches. I assumed he was included Freshman coaches also.

(NOT that this is necessarily THE answer...I don't claim to have that on ANY subject, but...)

 

...I'm thinking it might have MOST to do with Administrative support.

 

Like ChiefSmoke mentioned, the sport of football -- to be done FIRST-CLASS -- requires more than other sports. And not JUST in funding (though that is the BIGGEST thing it requires more). But it also relates to attention and praise to exceptional performance being allowed to be given; realization that football generally requires more equipment, space, time, off-season preparation, etc. than any other sport; etc.

 

In some places I've been, the PARADIGM seemed to be to consciously implement policies that make sure NOT to set athletes and athletics in general "up on a pedestal" out of fear that non-football players might feel treated "less important" in doing their activity (or INactivity).

 

The reason this is more of a PUBLIC school problem than private? The over-emphasis by college teacher-education programs on students' almighty "SELF-ESTEEM." Teachers are trained to believe that it is almost a mortal sin to do anything that might hurt a child's feelings (even if that child's behavior is wrong)...the belief in "equality of outcome" as well as "equality of opportunity" (as it SHOULD be)...that you as an authority figure should not be too "demanding" on kids and have too high "expectations" of them (might "stress them out" or "burn them out").

 

Private schools -- to their benefit -- just simply don't allow themselves to be as hamstrung by this over-emphasis. If a kid's a bad apple, you don't give him 80 chances to get better. He gets a warning and told if he does it again, it'll mean SERIOUS consequences (and they FOLLOW-THROUGH with them!). That trickles down to the athletics programs -- coaches put up with less bad behavior, less "me-first" attitude, less "what about MY playing time" issues -- and they get BACKED UP by their administrators where at publics, a lot of times, they don't for fear of lawsuit or upsetting the wrong "important community person."

 

Similarly, if a kid that's not in football or not in a sport at all WHINES about "how much the football team gets," the private school is less likely to bend over backwards to make sure that child (and his parents) is appeased (which usually means, something must be TAKEN AWAY from football).

 

Seems to me, that in almost ALL private schools that have football, and in the much smaller relative percentage of public schools with EXCEPTIONAL football programs , the ADMINISTRATION is willing to admit that football has different needs -- and GREATER needs than other sports and other activities AND they are willing to give football what it needs (be that funding, numbers of coaches, facilities, etc.).

 

These administrations realize the value of a GREAT football program to overall student morale at the BEGINNING of the school year (a CRUCIAL time for setting the tone with POSITIVE school spirit) as well as the FINANCIAL value of having a team that many people WANT to come pay to see. So, they wisely refuse to "cow-tow" to whiners and they give football more support because of the extraordinary nature of the NEEDS of the sport.

 

I strongly believe it's easier to have a successful program with average athletes, coaches, facilities, etc. but a SUPPORTIVE administration than to have GREAT athletes, coaches, facilities, etc. a NON-supportive administration coachesYou can have average great athletes and coaches but have a non-supportive administration. It is the NUMBER ONE thing a coach should look at in my opinion before taking any head coaching job.

My simple answer ... football can't be compared the basketball. The two sports are inherently different in so many aspects.

 

As for Guru's original statement about Covington Catholic, the premise is very debatable. Bowling Green laid an egg in the finals, and that can't be overlooked. I suspect that if you ask LexCath's coaches and players the question of which team was better, they'll be looking toward the north.