Jump to content

Big Three Talent Over the Years


Diogenes

Recommended Posts

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.