It should only tell you that he doesn't play at a big HS in Lex or Louisville. If Kasey was at one of these schools he would be right there in the mix of all the names. Put Kasey at St. X or Trinity and let him run behind those O-lines and let him play the whole game. His stats would be through the roof. PERIOD!!!! You may not think that means much but it does. Those backs run behind lineman who go on to play college ball. Now, bring one of those top backs your thinking of and bring him to Russell and run behind an eastern KY line and then play only 2 quarters of the game. Kasey only plays 2 quarters a game until he reaches the playoffs and you saw what he did last year in the playoffs. Well, maybe you didn't because if you did I don't think you'd be doubting him at all. Kasey is hindered because of where he plays and who he plays for. If you don't live in Lex or Louisville, you don't get much recognition. That's a fact.... And he plays for a coach who doesn't pad stats and a coach who has class and will not run up a score just to see a kid reach 200yds a game. He just won't do it. I'm really glad a few D-1 big-conference schools have been able to find Kasey and I think a few more will as time goes on. Kasey Clark is legit, he as good if not better than any back in the state. PERIOD Those of you who doubt him don't get to see him play every week. You don't see what he does week in and week out.

 

This thread was not meant to be a Kasey Clark vs. the state topic. I don't think anyone is doubting that he is good and should be mentioned with the other top backs in the state such as Vic Anderson, Doug Beaumont, and Jordan Kramer.

 

The whole idea of Mountain football as the red-headed step child is played out. Teams in that part of the state are getting more publicity than ever thanks to things such as BGP. Clark may play behind a smaller line at Russell then he would at St. X, but Russell isn't playing the same caliber of teams as the other backs mentioned. I don't think you could say that Clark would have done better against Elder or St. X than Jordan Kramer did.

 

If a player doesn't make this All-Star game then it isn't the end of the world. There will be some states who have no one represented, KY may be one. If you try and make a case for Clark, why not make one for Chase Minnifield? He already has a commitment to Virginia. Or what about Brad Durham? He is U of L bound. The point is there are a bunch of great players in this state and you don't have to play in Lexington or Louisville to get noticed.

This thread was not meant to be a Kasey Clark vs. the state topic. I don't think anyone is doubting that he is good and should be mentioned with the other top backs in the state such as Vic Anderson, Doug Beaumont, and Jordan Kramer.

 

The whole idea of Mountain football as the red-headed step child is played out. Teams in that part of the state are getting more publicity than ever thanks to things such as BGP. Clark may play behind a smaller line at Russell then he would at St. X, but Russell isn't playing the same caliber of teams as the other backs mentioned. I don't think you could say that Clark would have done better against Elder or St. X than Jordan Kramer did.

 

If a player doesn't make this All-Star game then it isn't the end of the world. There will be some states who have no one represented, KY may be one. If you try and make a case for Clark, why not make one for Chase Minnifield? He already has a commitment to Virginia. Or what about Brad Durham? He is U of L bound. The point is there are a bunch of great players in this state and you don't have to play in Lexington or Louisville to get noticed.

 

Exactly, I agree that a case could be made for many athletes, if you aren't recognized then oh well look at all of the other kids who weren't selected. Nice post!

Several Big-Conference(Big East,Big Ten,SEC) schools are recruiting Kasey.

If there truly are "several", they shouldn't be that hard to name, should they?

 

Right now, thanks to Blue Blazer, I am aware of Arkansas, Illinois and Cincinnati.

 

I'm sure the kid is a great high school player, but I think a dose of reality may be needed here.

This thread was not meant to be a Kasey Clark vs. the state topic. I don't think anyone is doubting that he is good and should be mentioned with the other top backs in the state such as Vic Anderson, Doug Beaumont, and Jordan Kramer.

 

The whole idea of Mountain football as the red-headed step child is played out. Teams in that part of the state are getting more publicity than ever thanks to things such as BGP. Clark may play behind a smaller line at Russell then he would at St. X, but Russell isn't playing the same caliber of teams as the other backs mentioned. I don't think you could say that Clark would have done better against Elder or St. X than Jordan Kramer did.

 

If a player doesn't make this All-Star game then it isn't the end of the world. There will be some states who have no one represented, KY may be one. If you try and make a case for Clark, why not make one for Chase Minnifield? He already has a commitment to Virginia. Or what about Brad Durham? He is U of L bound. The point is there are a bunch of great players in this state and you don't have to play in Lexington or Louisville to get noticed.

 

I'm sorry, but I have to laugh :lol: at the thought that the offensive line at Russell is smaller than any high school. Have you seen the sizes of these young men? They are giants...and I'm very familar with one of them who is 6-6, 330, and played at St. X. last year! :scared:

 

Having an OL this massive and athletic is a definite positive, not a negative, in adding to Kasey Clark's offensive effectiveness.

Jusk ask Tim Couch, Leonard Gordon, Micah Johnson, & Justin Miller. The big time programs never found them.

 

Sarcasm?

I'm sorry, but I have to laugh :lol: at the thought that the offensive line at Russell is smaller than any high school. Have you seen the sizes of these young men? They are giants...and I'm very familar with one of them who is 6-6, 330, and played at St. X. last year! :scared:

 

Having an OL this massive and athletic is a definite positive, not a negative, in adding to Kasey Clark's offensive effectiveness.

 

I'm not familiiar with Russell's line, I'm not even familiar with St. X's line this year but I was just responding to a previous post that said how many more yards Clark would have if he played with a line like X's. All I was trying to say is that Russell doesn't play the same competition as St. X or Highlands, therefore it is hard to say whether a 200 yard game against Boyd County is better than a 100 yard game against Elder.

I'm not familiiar with Russell's line, I'm not even familiar with St. X's line this year but I was just responding to a previous post that said how many more yards Clark would have if he played with a line like X's. All I was trying to say is that Russell doesn't play the same competition as St. X or Highlands, therefore it is hard to say whether a 200 yard game against Boyd County is better than a 100 yard game against Elder.

 

By clarifying the fact that Russel's line is bigger than St. X.'s, and probably bigger than any other OL in the State of Kentucky, and adding the difference in difficulty of schedule which you presented, I'm only supporting your contention that Kasey Clark actually has some advantages over Doug Beaumont and Vic Anderson in compiling big numbers.

 

The other point that has been often made about Clark playing only half the game is also true about Beaumont and Anderson. Because the Russell, Male, and St. X. teams are so good, all three of these superb backs spend a lot of time on the bench in the 2nd half, which doesn't help any of their personal stats.

It should only tell you that he doesn't play at a big HS in Lex or Louisville. If Kasey was at one of these schools he would be right there in the mix of all the names. Put Kasey at St. X or Trinity and let him run behind those O-lines and let him play the whole game. His stats would be through the roof. PERIOD!!!! You may not think that means much but it does. Those backs run behind lineman who go on to play college ball. Now, bring one of those top backs your thinking of and bring him to Russell and run behind an eastern KY line and then play only 2 quarters of the game. Kasey only plays 2 quarters a game until he reaches the playoffs and you saw what he did last year in the playoffs. Well, maybe you didn't because if you did I don't think you'd be doubting him at all. Kasey is hindered because of where he plays and who he plays for. If you don't live in Lex or Louisville, you don't get much recognition. That's a fact.... And he plays for a coach who doesn't pad stats and a coach who has class and will not run up a score just to see a kid reach 200yds a game. He just won't do it. I'm really glad a few D-1 big-conference schools have been able to find Kasey and I think a few more will as time goes on. Kasey Clark is legit, he as good if not better than any back in the state. PERIOD Those of you who doubt him don't get to see him play every week. You don't see what he does week in and week out.

 

You could take out Clark and insert Gross and it would be the same thing everyone heard last year. How many great backs are people talking about in Lexington? 1? How many great backs are people talking about in Louisville? 2 and they are both studs. I get so tired of hearing "no one respects the eastern players, we never get any attention". I will say it one more time. I DON'T DOUBT CLARK IS A VERY GOOD RUNNING BACK. I only questioned him being the best in the state. If he was that good I guarentee you he would get the attention he deserves.

You need to check your info!!!

 

What did I post that wasn't true?

This was not a slam towards Nick quit trying to make it that way...he is a good player.

I didn't take it as a slam. I was just trying to explain how some voters that have not seen any of these kids may have picked him. He had a pretty good year. And while everyone seems to be focusing on how these kids will do "at the next level", it isn't the Army all star potential game. I agree that Nick is a good player, but lets not forget that more important than that is the fact that he is a winner. Of the guys nominated, he is the only one wearing a 2005 state championship ring.

Sarcasm?

 

Isn't it obvious.

I didn't take it as a slam. I was just trying to explain how some voters that have not seen any of these kids may have picked him. He had a pretty good year. And while everyone seems to be focusing on how these kids will do "at the next level", it isn't the Army all star potential game. I agree that Nick is a good player, but lets not forget that more important than that is the fact that he is a winner. Of the guys nominated, he is the only one wearing a 2005 state championship ring.

 

I disagree the Army game seems to me to be mainly about showcasing kids for the next level. Especially since they try to get so many of them to wait and give their verbals live during the game. I would suspect that they only take kids going to the elite universities and that all things equal they would favor an uncommitted kid over a kid who verbal early. Although the top recruits such as Jimmy Clausen will be there regardsless of their commitment status. I think the same things happen on rivals and scout that kids who don't commit early move up in the rankings to keep interest high on their site.

Isn't it obvious.

 

I was a little worried

Having seen Victor Anderson last week on TV and Petrino in 2005 state champ game , both these kids can clearly compete - immediately in the national Army game. Having watched all the state games last year , it's clear the dominate group of kids on each of the smaller Class teams could have played - been on the field at the 4A level. That's about all you can say for sure about the kids from smaller schools. No doubt Kasey as an all around athlete would excel on any of the elite 4A teams in Ky. And that's all you can say for sure right now.

 

Good luck to all the kids , I agree with some earlier post that Kentucky will be lucky to get one kid in this game ... The only thing impressive last year about Jones in this game was his size and speed.

I disagree the Army game seems to me to be mainly about showcasing kids for the next level. Especially since they try to get so many of them to wait and give their verbals live during the game. I would suspect that they only take kids going to the elite universities and that all things equal they would favor an uncommitted kid over a kid who verbal early. Although the top recruits such as Jimmy Clausen will be there regardsless of their commitment status. I think the same things happen on rivals and scout that kids who don't commit early move up in the rankings to keep interest high on their site.

I don't disagree. I doubt that Nick will be selected (in fact I won't be shocked if none of them are). I was just pointing out to a previous poster that it really wasn't a shock to me that Nick was nominated. These kids aren't seen by any of the national guys. They go by stuff they hear from coaches and the media. I simply stated that Nick had a pretty good year in the media. Congrats to all of them, now lets get back to the work of winning ballgames.