Kidwell named COY in the 16th Region

[aayswimfan]

I could care less what you question me about. Obviously, we all have our own opinions. I have no allegiance to anyone as you put it. I just thought Gray was the best player, voiced opinion accordingly, as did the voters.

 

So, are you going to fill the rest of us in about the 16th region as to why everyone is against RH?

 

If you aren't in politics you should consider a career change! I would probably vote for you but fortunately I do not live in the area!

That's pretty easy. We loved our Christian neighbor when we were beating the fire out of them every year, then O. J. Mayo showed up and changed things. Then the Faulkners transfered and allowed Rose Hill to win again. We like the easy wins better.

[scooterbob]

I could care less what you question me about. Obviously, we all have our own opinions. I have no allegiance to anyone as you put it. I just thought Gray was the best player, voiced opinion accordingly, as did the voters.

 

So, are you going to fill the rest of us in about the 16th region as to why everyone is against RH?

 

If you aren't in politics you should consider a career change! I would probably vote for you but fortunately I do not live in the area!

 

Sorry for the confusion, 3ptshooter, and, although I usually try to check my spelling and grammar, I should probably use spell check. You must be the Boone Countian.

 

I don't recall stating that everyone in the 16th Region is against RH. There are certain nuances that naturally go with being the only private school in the area and I know that there is no need to spell those out for you. Suffice it to say that you learn to deal with being the minority and all that goes with that.

 

As I have stated several times, and no one has remotely disputed it, when RH played LexCath in the state championship game last year, only sixteen schools in the state rooted for LexCath. Those 16 were, of course, LexCath and the other 15 teams in the 16th Region. It is not just a catchy statement. It is also a true statement.

 

Much of RH's "dispute" with its "neighbors" originates from what I call the "Ovinton Era". It was very difficult for others to adjust to the doormat becoming the nationally covered basketball team with the best player, though a middleschooler, to ever play for a region school. The resentment has not subsided and, to be honest, many RHers vocally enjoyed the riches. Our neighbors were often poor losers and we were often poor winners. Nothing has been forgotten by either side.

 

Of course, there is a lot more and no one is "without sin" around here. However, I believe that is a fair analysis and you can fill in the blanks.

 

By the way, Rose Hill's boys's team has two ninth graders, Euton and Jackson, who have been named second and third team all-state. Although Elliott County will rightfully be the regional favorite for the next two years, the RH boys should fair quite well in the 64th District and the 16th Region for the next few years. If so, look for a lot more combat and animousity from this area. There is not much neighborly love around here. The girls will be a different story. RH will be like a middle school team agewise so our neighbors will change their policies and be eager to schedule our girls again.

 

I hope this somewhat answers your question.

[scooterbob]

That's pretty easy. We loved our Christian neighbor when we were beating the fire out of them every year, then O. J. Mayo showed up and changed things. Then the Faulkners transfered and allowed Rose Hill to win again. We like the easy wins better.

 

And that, 3ptshooter, is the real story of the 16th Region.

[aayswimfan]

I still think COY should have been Bradley or Euton with Trimble as a dark horse. Ashland and Rose Hill both over achieved with the over all team talent they had. Raceland had a lot of good players but no winning tradition. Russell was just plumb loaded with upper classmen.

[3ptshooter]

And that, 3ptshooter, is the real story of the 16th Region.

 

 

This was is what I figured but I did not want to guess. Unfortunately, as you well know, happens all over the state. I appreciate the explanation. Until we agree/disagree again, have a nice day.

 

By the way, what did I say to make me a Boone Countian?

[scooterbob]

This was is what I figured but I did not want to guess. Unfortunately, as you well know, happens all over the state. I appreciate the explanation. Until we agree/disagree again, have a nice day.

 

By the way, what did I say to make me a Boone Countian?

 

When there is a discussion with a BGPer who is not known to me, I often check that person's past posts. For some reason, I placed you in Boone County. I may have narrowed that too much but you are clearly a Northern Kentuckian.

 

From my viewpoint, that area is marvelous for followers of high school athletics- both public and private. You have a fine group of schools of all sizes. Best wishes to you and I hope next time we are in full agreement.

[Intentional Foul]

While I disagree with the conclusions reached by you above, for the sake of the exercise, I will attempt to answer your query.

 

It is my belief that Euton should have gotten the award which should surprise no one. I actually like the winner and have a lot of regard for him, his coaching staff, and his program. I don't believe that he deserved the award.

 

A reasonable argument can be made for Bradley and, maybe, Trimble. For sake of space, I'll leave that to the Blazerites and the Racelanders.

 

While it is pointed out that RH was ranked third statewide in preseason, I would submit that that was done based on last year and the fact that two outstanding players were returning. At the same time, the local voters placed RH third in the region. I would think it is reasonable to believe that locals were far more aware of the overall RH talent level than were those not in this area.

 

By tournament time, RH was not remotely rated statewide, as was Russell, and was not expected to win the region, as was Russell. I would think that one would not need to be particularly astute to realize that the rankings at year end are far more important than are the preseason rankings. If that were not true, we may well have a President Howard Dean.

 

It could be argued that RH benefitted from a lucky draw in the region. While that may be true as to the first round, that was not true in the semifinals. Russell got Ashland while RH got East Carter. Russell clearly had, and the results indicate, the easier game.

 

Rose Hill defeated the favored Russell handily in the finals. I would point out that RH was never behind in the game. I believe the only tie was 0-0. RH won by 10 and were never really threatened. That is why I say they won handily.

 

While it is true that RH lost in the first round of the state tournament, I would point out that the Lexington and Louisville newspapers rated RH 16th of the 16 teams in the tournament.

 

Russell won neither the district nor the region. Earlier in the season, they won the EKC tournament. RH won a tournament around Christmas at Boyd County. In light of the teams participating, I would generously call that a wash. Russell won the EKC regular season championship. RH is not in the EKC.

 

I would say that Queen and Terry are, overall, a little better than are Fortman and Okora. However, it is closer than you posters want to admit. I think that most anyone, if honest, would say that Russell had more talent, top to bottom, than did RH.

 

Euton was overlooked last year because the pundits said she had the best talent and should have won. This year, she didn't have the best talent and still won. The winner, on the other hand, had the talent but won neither the district nor the region.

 

I continually read about how the regular season is merely an exercise in preparing for March. Some of you who have used this theory are now backtracking and claiming that it is otherwise. That is not being honest.

 

The goal is to get to Bowling Green. RH got there in spite of the fact that it did not have the best talent in the region. For whatever reason, RH overachieved and Russell underachieved. I wouldn't want to remotely insinuate that the winner caused the underachievement. However, I will state that Euton had a lot to do with the overachievement.

 

Since most feel that March is what counts, I believe the proper choice was obvious. I also believe, for solid reasons, that the choice was much more subjective than objective. You can interpret that however you choose.

 

I realize that this is quite verbal. However, you asked for it. I hope you will take time to read it.

 

Thanks for the explanation. I actually feel that you have some valid points for your position-although I don't entirely share your viewpoint. Only why did you bother posing the "puzzle" to begin with? By posting this explanation first you would have saved us a lot of time and effort:lol:

[scooterbob]

Thanks for the explanation. I actually feel that you have some valid points for your position-although I don't entirely share your viewpoint. Only why did you bother posing the "puzzle" to begin with? By posting this explanation first you would have saved us a lot of time and effort:lol:

 

Actually, Intentional Foul, since the weather has been so bad the last couple of days, I thought if I drug all of this out it might keep some of you from getting sick from being out in the cold rain. I was performing a public service. Have a good week.

[Intentional Foul]

Actually, Intentional Foul, since the weather has been so bad the last couple of days, I thought if I drug all of this out it might keep some of you from getting sick from being out in the cold rain. I was performing a public service. Have a good week.

 

Ah, just being a good samaritan....I can respect that!

[Nets]

I'm absolutely amazed at how in depth this thread is with various posts. Are people that tore up about Merle Kidwell winning the Coach of the Year?

 

1) He won the award and congratulated. Of the times I saw his teams play, they are athletic, fundamental, and disciplined. They run some great quick hitting offensive plays. Their size helped them defeat many teams this season. And any coach that has a clue will tell you that talent and athletes makes coaches of the year. I doubt Coach Kidwell will disagree.

 

2) The game of basketball is actually quite simple. No need for huge words or hidden meanings. Teams can be perfect all year, zero problems, play to potential and then one night lose to a team they should drill. It's sports. The basketball gets deflected, rolls around a rim, etc...multiple things occur that lead to a end result.

 

3) Sometimes coaches can simply stand around during timeout, cross legs on the bench, or basically say absolutely nothing...and all the while one of their players shakes free, shoots a leaner off one leg or yanks one from about 25 feet and hits nothing but the bottom of the net...you get the idea....

 

Basically, high school basketball has many, many variables to it. Coaching is important...sometimes it's even over-rated, sometimes credit is not given to the coach who makes their "programs" better....a good coach builds and sustains a good program over the course of time and does so the right way in all facets of the sport.

 

Give credit to the deserving person in this case.

 

If not, then spill out X and O, motivation, player development, practice structure and fundamental coaching points and then evaluate who does what....that is if we have all been to the practices of all of these coaches and know the inner-workings of how they approach the game, teach the game, and motivate the game....

[Big Slick]

I'm absolutely amazed at how in depth this thread is with various posts. Are people that tore up about Merle Kidwell winning the Coach of the Year?

 

1) He won the award and congratulated. Of the times I saw his teams play, they are athletic, fundamental, and disciplined. They run some great quick hitting offensive plays. Their size helped them defeat many teams this season. And any coach that has a clue will tell you that talent and athletes makes coaches of the year. I doubt Coach Kidwell will disagree.

 

2) The game of basketball is actually quite simple. No need for huge words or hidden meanings. Teams can be perfect all year, zero problems, play to potential and then one night lose to a team they should drill. It's sports. The basketball gets deflected, rolls around a rim, etc...multiple things occur that lead to a end result.

 

3) Sometimes coaches can simply stand around during timeout, cross legs on the bench, or basically say absolutely nothing...and all the while one of their players shakes free, shoots a leaner off one leg or yanks one from about 25 feet and hits nothing but the bottom of the net...you get the idea....

 

Basically, high school basketball has many, many variables to it. Coaching is important...sometimes it's even over-rated, sometimes credit is not given to the coach who makes their "programs" better....a good coach builds and sustains a good program over the course of time and does so the right way in all facets of the sport.

 

Give credit to the deserving person in this case.

 

If not, then spill out X and O, motivation, player development, practice structure and fundamental coaching points and then evaluate who does what....that is if we have all been to the practices of all of these coaches and know the inner-workings of how they approach the game, teach the game, and motivate the game....

:thumb:

[scooterbob]

As always, Nets, your analysis is excellent. However, it seems that you are saying that all coaches are prisoners to the luck of the bounce, the deflection, etc. and, once the game starts, are reduced to becoming pretty much spectators watching an uncontrollable human drama.

 

You are probably correct for the most part. Coaches cannot shoot, rebound, and play defense. Therefore, I believe your post adds credibility to the argument that result should be a determining factor in choosing COY. At least that criteria is verifiable whereas all the other nuances are strictly subjective.

 

When the money was on the table and the lights were focused (ie: the truly meaningful championship games in district and region), the ball didn't "bounce" in favor of Russell. It "bounced" in favor of others. Now, if the award were like some of those Hollywood awards like "lifetime achievement", then I believe your analysis could apply. However, the award was for COY and that is Coach of the Year meaning this year.

 

I always respect your opinions over most of the others expressed on BGP. However, I must disagree with this one. I believe that the objective evidence is on my side and that a "jury of our peers" would clearly agree. Of course, I would assume that the area girls's coaches would not be a part of the jury. Surely, they would be successfully challenged for cause.

 

Best wishes to you and everyone in your part of the region.

[scooterbob]

My posts are far too long and, for that, I apologize. However, I feel I should add that nothing I post is meant to be taken as negative toward the winner. I have not posted anything negative in that area although I think some are taking it that way. That is not the case.

 

I feel positive that the winner has read everything I have posted on the subject and I know that he, as well as all his cohorts at Russell, know my identity and have known it for a long time. On occasion, I see some of them at various athletic events and I always look forward to that.

 

My posts are, as Vito Corleone would say, strictly business. Nothing personal and nothing derrogatory is intended. I believe the winning coach knows this and I hope others can discern between debate and undue character attacks. I would also hope those posting from a different viewpoint would follow the same practice.

 

The winning coach is most deserving of accolades. I applaud him. I just don't believe, from the facts, that the COY for this year should be included in the accolades.

[Nets]

:thumb:

[spindoc]

Wow, this has been great fodder for my slow morning, thanks to all who've contributed.:lol: :argue: