A cursory count of 1st team All-Staters since 1968, the year that the Big Three started dominating football in Kentucky's largest classification, shows the following number of individual 1st team All-Staters for each team:

 

Trinity 51

St. X 38

Male 19

 

Surprising?

I think it would be even more interesting to find out how many D1 players there were from each school from that time period, and then compare

I am actually suprised by that number, but when I start to think about it, I think that we are much more soundly coached than the other 2, and we have had substantially more success, than the others, as well...so it sounds right to me.

Breakout of total All-Staters is as follows:

 

T - 54 1st, 32 2nd, 19 3rd (105 Total)

X - 40 1st, 28 2nd, 24 3rd (92 Total)

H - 24 1st, 18 2nd, 15 3rd (57 Total)

 

To take it further, T has 6.2 All-Staters per championship in that timeframe, X has 9.2, and H has 14.3. Not sure if it means anything (doing more with less, or what have you), but those are the numbers.

More evidence that the "Big 3" is actually more like the "Big 2" ...

More evidence that the "Big 3" is actually more like the "Big 2" ...

or the "Big 1". Trinity has as many titles as X (11) and Male (6) combined.

I think it would be even more interesting to find out how many D1 players there were from each school from that time period, and then compare

 

 

D1 caliber players sometime pass football offers to play other sports in college.

Despite the adherents of each school sometimes loudly clamoring about the high caliber of each school's coaches, in light of these facts, is it time to admit what many posters have contended, that talent often plays a significant role in a team's success? During the same period, how many 1st team All-Staters has PRP or Manual or Eastern or Clark County had? Put another way, without the talent gap how many titles would the big three have? For example, subtract a Bush or a Brian Brohm. Thoughts?

Don't be so quick to discount coaching at the Big 3. I wonder how many of those kids that left as All-State, entered the program with that tag? I contend that a lot of the All-State talent at T, X and H isn't talent as much as the result of coaching and hard work. Just a thought. FYI, this isn't meant to say that no other schools work hard.

Don't be so quick to discount coaching at the Big 3. I wonder how many of those kids that left as All-State, entered the program with that tag? I contend that a lot of the All-State talent at T, X and H isn't talent as much as the result of coaching and hard work. Just a thought. FYI, this isn't meant to say that no other schools work hard.

 

You make a good counterpoint. Is it, in the end, the old nature/ nurture question? So far we have opinions from fans of the big three, but have yet to hear from other posters. Do X, T, and Male win more often than not because of a talent discrepancy or is it, as LSURock posits, the result of coaching and hard work?

I'm not saying its an "or" situation. I think the Big 3 (and other top programs) win with or without superior talent. The Big 3 are in the mix just about every year. When they have big time talent they are able to do special things i.e. Three-peats, fifty game winning streaks, etc. The coaching and the program equals wins. Special talent is the icing on the cake some years.:thumb:

Good post, LSU, I think you are right on... the big 3 win with superior coaching and the system they use. T wins more because the Beatty system is far more superior and the T kids buy into it! Proof is in the pudding (17)!!

I think what is left out by most, is the fact of how hard these kids at these schools work, because their coaches push them the right way and get them to become all they can be. Sure , 4 kids make first team all-state at Trinity , but those kids know that there are many on their team that can play with anyone . It is because of the commitment that everyone has involved in the program more than having a sprinkling of exceptional players. I think that any honest person would tell you that this Trinity team wasn't as talented as last years team, but played with tremendous heart and LISTENED to their coaches. They did more than listen, THEY BELIEVED IN THEIR COACHES ! Did they have more talent than every opponent? Absolutely NOT ! But they did listen and believe in everything the coaches did and prepared them for and executed and gave 110 %. You won't lose too much at a place like Trinity with that type of effort.