When do you think Lexington will compete?

[ram2003]

Not placed in the scenario so you can't say that about Lexington teams or that about Manual. First, they're being categorized in with the "Big 2/ Medium 1", then when that doesn't work, complaining about where they're palced. You don't hear the Lexington fans saying "oh, were on Trinity's side of the bracket". "I bet if we had those teams that run the ball most of the time or that depending on how good their best player is to determine their success on our side of the bracket instead of the team that beats us and goes on to win state", we would win or at least make it to the state championship game. That arguemant about where Manual is is really weak. Majority of the time, it's the Lexington schools who lose to the state champs in the playoffs, not Manual. Smart kids at that school though.

 

I think that the Manual fans on this site would be the first to say that we're not up there with the Big III. That's certainly where we'd like to be, and strides have been made in the 00's that are MUCH improved from the Manual of the 90's.

 

And I know it may seem like we're complaining when we say we've got one of the toughest roads, but is it not true? To play St X, Male, and PRP to get to the playoffs, then to play them again (minus PRP, usually), plus Trinity, well, that's one tough road for ANY team.

 

But to be honest, I'm not even one to complain about it, because how can you claim to be the best if you don't BEAT the best? As far as football goes, nothing would be more satisfying for me than for a Manual team to beat Male, then knock out St. X, beat Male again, then beat Trinity (and another team) and win the title (or whatever order it takes place). Seriously, what else could a 6A team accomplish to prove that they're the best? My Trinity friends can agree with me on this... they know how it is.

 

And you're absolutely right that Trinity come playoff time is a bigger badder monster that that of the regular season, but they're still going to be Trinity, and Trinity doesn't like to lose in ANY game, scrimmages included. Plus, if the Lexington schools also make it that far in the playoffs, then shouldn't they have that much more determination and experience as well? With the exception of injuries, how often is a team worse come playoff time than better?

 

I for one am in agreement with 02ram, that if Manual and PRP were in Lexington, they'd definitely be bigger names.

 

As far as Lexington schools competing against the Big 3, I believe it will happen, but it's going to take time, talent, and one heck of a driven team, and the school with said team will probably Dunbar.

[RockPride]

My question is has basketball taken a hit? There were so many good Louisville prospects in the past while now there just isnt many. I wonder why that is.

The interest just isn't there as much anymore....Football has room for virtually anyone, which is good, so all body types and sizes can find a niche somewhere...basketball has 13 spots...5 of which start....football also has the bigger crowds...the best atmospheres, etc...Football is king in Louisville, and I for one hope it stays that way...

[JFK]

In a selfish way...I can say this is one of my favorite posts that I have ever seen on BGP.

 

ROCK ON:dancingpa

[pldgreatno2]

I think that the Manual fans on this site would be the first to say that we're not up there with the Big III. That's certainly where we'd like to be, and strides have been made in the 00's that are MUCH improved from the Manual of the 90's.

 

And I know it may seem like we're complaining when we say we've got one of the toughest roads, but is it not true? To play St X, Male, and PRP to get to the playoffs, then to play them again (minus PRP, usually), plus Trinity, well, that's one tough road for ANY team.

 

But to be honest, I'm not even one to complain about it, because how can you claim to be the best if you don't BEAT the best? As far as football goes, nothing would be more satisfying for me than for a Manual team to beat Male, then knock out St. X, beat Male again, then beat Trinity (and another team) and win the title (or whatever order it takes place). Seriously, what else could a 6A team accomplish to prove that they're the best? My Trinity friends can agree with me on this... they know how it is.

 

And you're absolutely right that Trinity come playoff time is a bigger badder monster that that of the regular season, but they're still going to be Trinity, and Trinity doesn't like to lose in ANY game, scrimmages included. Plus, if the Lexington schools also make it that far in the playoffs, then shouldn't they have that much more determination and experience as well? With the exception of injuries, how often is a team worse come playoff time than better?

 

I for one am in agreement with 02ram, that if Manual and PRP were in Lexington, they'd definitely be bigger names.

 

As far as Lexington schools competing against the Big 3, I believe it will happen, but it's going to take time, talent, and one heck of a driven team, and the school with said team will probably Dunbar.

 

I agree with almost all of this statement. The part about Manual being in Lexington and being a bigger name is not true at all. For one, their talent would be dilluted by the district lines. I think that's the biggest part that people are missing when posting the comparisons. Manual gets kids from all over Louisville, Lexington has zoning districts, so that talent wouldn't be all in one bunch like it is now.

[pldgreatno2]

I am a bit of a latecomer to this portion of the debate. As I understand it, pldgreatno2 and the Louisville posters are in agreement that Trinity, X and Male are the big 3, at least in general. The issue is if "Manual, PRP, etc, while second tier in Louisville, would be top shelf in Lexington"....would they be A-list schools.

Even if there is not a base of games between Lexington schools and these two, perhaps the Lit ratings and Cantrell would shed light on the matter. Does anyone have access to the final Lit/Cantrell since around 2000? At least we would have an objective basis for the discussion.

 

Ratings really won't help. You can rate a team higher that goes out in the first round of the playoffs and plays in what supposed to be a tougher district, than a team that has two regional championship trophies and loses in the semi's to the eventual state champs. Scheduling is a big part of those ratings, win or lose.

[02Ram54]

I agree with almost all of this statement. The part about Manual being in Lexington and being a bigger name is not true at all. For one, their talent would be dilluted by the district lines. I think that's the biggest part that people are missing when posting the comparisons. Manual gets kids from all over Louisville, Lexington has zoning districts, so that talent wouldn't be all in one bunch like it is now.

If Manual were in Lexington everything about it would be different. I think what ram2003 meant was a scenario where Manual was somehow playing in the Lexington district, with no other difference. A sky hook appraisal, to borrow a term.

[onetoya]

http://www.khsaa.org/football/realignment/schoolenrollmentandnotesuseforrealignment.pdf

 

The proof is in the pudding there RRR. Thanks! As a coach I would love to have 200-400 more boys to pick from to field my team. I guess that population thing is not valid with the BIG 2?

[pldgreatno2]

If Manual were in Lexington everything about it would be different. I think what ram2003 meant was a scenario where Manual was somehow playing in the Lexington district, with no other difference. A sky hook appraisal, to borrow a term.

 

But you can't have one without the other. Also, the teams here would actually pay attention to who the are, their team identity, style of play, etc.. Right now, Manual is just a high school in Louisville and if my lil cous didn't live off fourth street in the area where the school is, I'd never known where it was.

 

They would probably be a bigger name here because there is only 5 public high schools. Is Manual's coaching staff really that good? I haven't heard much about them. To tell the truth, nobody here knows much about Manual, unless you are just a football junkie.

[JFK]

Male lost by 6 inches to T last year after being up almost the entire game. Other than that game, they haven't played T since '02, so definitely not "yearly."

 

X lost to Trinity last year 10-0 in a game that didn't make it to even the second quarter. In '05, X thumped Trinity 48-16 before losing by 8 in the state finals (in a game that came down to a 4th down stand for Trinity). In '04, X also thumped Trinity 36-18. So in the past 3 years, X is 2-2 against Trinity, with one of Trinity's wins coming from a rain-shortened game (in which they looked like they had clear control of the game).

 

Trinity has had a fantastic run this decade, there's no denying that, but to act like X (or Male) hasn't been competitive with them is just false.

 

Just to set the record straight - Male wasn't winning the whole game - THS was up 20-7 at Half. As far as the game coming down to a 4th down stand - IF St. X Scores and IF they get a 2 point conversion the game is tied. :thumb:

[RowdyRedRam]

Ratings really won't help. You can rate a team higher that goes out in the first round of the playoffs and plays in what supposed to be a tougher district, than a team that has two regional championship trophies and loses in the semi's to the eventual state champs. Scheduling is a big part of those ratings, win or lose.

Just because a team wins more games in a playoff system doesn't mean they are better than another team that wins fewer, it only means they went farther on the road that was laid before them.

No two teams, in any playoff scenario, have the same difficulty ahead of them. To assume that judgement of a team's strength should be based only on playoff outcome, especially a playoff that is as that is as unbalanced as the one we are speaking of, is poor judgement.

 

By your reasoning it would be the same to say that all 1A teams that go past the first round are better than all 6A teams that lose in the first round. Granted all those 1A teams accomplished more, it doesn't mean they are better football teams.

 

I don't say that playoff performance is not an indicator of strength. But it is only one of many others that allow us to make judgements. Others being observation, relative scores, and measurable talents.

[PepRock01]

Just to set the record straight - Male wasn't winning the whole game - THS was up 20-7 at Half. As far as the game coming down to a 4th down stand - IF St. X Scores and IF they get a 2 point conversion the game is tied. :thumb:

 

Already covered it. :thumb:

[westsider]

I am a bit of a latecomer to this portion of the debate. As I understand it, pldgreatno2 and the Louisville posters are in agreement that Trinity, X and Male are the big 3, at least in general. The issue is if "Manual, PRP, etc, while second tier in Louisville, would be top shelf in Lexington"....would they be A-list schools.

Even if there is not a base of games between Lexington schools and these two, perhaps the Lit ratings and Cantrell would shed light on the matter. Does anyone have access to the final Lit/Cantrell since around 2000? At least we would have an objective basis for the discussion.

Cantrall ... final 4A regular season ratings in 2004:

1. St. Xavier 89.1

2. Trinity 88.0

3. Henderson Co. 87.3

4. Conner 82.9

5. Dixie Heights 82.8

6. Male 82.7

6. Manual 82.7

8. Scott Co. 82.5

9. Christian Co. 82.4

10. Madison Central 81.2

11. Ballard 80.5

12. Henry Clay 76.6

13. Apollo 74.8

14. Boone Co. 74.3

15. North Hardin 74.2

16. Paul Dunbar 74.1

17. Tates Creek 72.4

18. Butler 71.9

19. Graves Co. 71.2

20. Ryle 71.0

 

Final Cantrall ratings in 2005:

1. St. Xavier 90.1

2. Trinity 88.4

3. Male 87.6

4. Henderson Co. 85.6

5. Manual 83.9

6. Warren Central 83.8

7. Henry Clay 80.7

8. PRP 80.5

9. John Hardin 78.5

10. Paul Dunbar 77.1

11. Ryle 77.0

12. Scott Co. 76.3

13. Dixie Heights 76.1

14. Christian Co. 75.2

15. Madison Cent. 75.0

16. Marshall Co. 74.3

17. Fern Creek 73.6

18. Lafayette 72.1

19. Ballard 71.1

20. Boone Co. 70.3

 

Final Cantrall ratings in 2006:

1. Male 94.3

2. Trinity 91.0

3. St. Xavier 90.7

4. Owensboro 83.9

5. Henry Clay 83.8

6. Warren Central 83.2

7. Manual 81.8

8. Christian Co. 81.5

9. Henderson Co. 80.2

10. Ryle 80.1

11. Scott Co. 79.8

12. Lafayette 78.1

13. John Hardin 77.2

14. Campbell Co. 75.5

15. PRP 74.3

16. Lincoln Co. 73.5

17. Dixie Heights 73.4

18. Graves Co. 72.2

19. Boone Co. 71.8

20. Ballard 71.1

20. Marshall Co. 71.1

 

Final Masseys in 2006:

1 Male 9 0 0 2.216 49.16 ( 1)

2 St Xavier 8 2 0 1.891 44.43 ( 2)

3 Trinity 9 1 0 1.750 40.40 ( 3)

4 + 1 Owensboro 8 1 0 1.390 31.03 ( 4)

5 - 1 Henry Clay 9 1 0 1.314 28.41 ( 5)

6 + 2 Lafayette 10 0 0 1.298 23.39 (12)

7 - 1 DuPont Manual 6 4 0 1.286 28.10 ( 6)

8 + 3 Warren Cent 8 2 0 1.277 28.09 ( 7)

9 + 3 Ryle 8 2 0 1.175 25.62 (9)

10 Pleasure Ridge Pk 7 3 0 1.156 23.89 (11)

11 - 4 Christian Co 7 3 0 1.088 24.74 (10)

12 - 3 Scott Co 7 3 0 1.079 25.91 ( 8)

13 Lincoln Co 9 1 0 1.077 22.03 (14)

14 + 1 Boone Co 6 4 0 0.934 21.44 (16)

15 - 1 John Hardin 6 3 0 0.906 22.05 (13)

16 + 2 Campbell Co 7 3 0 0.900 21.79 (15)

17 - 1 Henderson Co 7 2 0 0.863 18.36 (18)

18 + 3 Graves Co 8 2 0 0.839 17.24 (19)

19 - 2 Dixie Hts 5 5 0 0.835 19.53 (17)

20 + 4 Woodford Co 7 3 0 0.713 13.69 (26)

[The Golfer]

Cantrall ... final 4A regular season ratings in 2004:

1. St. Xavier 89.1

2. Trinity 88.0

3. Henderson Co. 87.3

4. Conner 82.9

5. Dixie Heights 82.8

6. Male 82.7

6. Manual 82.7

8. Scott Co. 82.5

9. Christian Co. 82.4

10. Madison Central 81.2

11. Ballard 80.5

12. Henry Clay 76.6

13. Apollo 74.8

14. Boone Co. 74.3

15. North Hardin 74.2

16. Paul Dunbar 74.1

17. Tates Creek 72.4

18. Butler 71.9

19. Graves Co. 71.2

20. Ryle 71.0

 

Final Cantrall ratings in 2005:

1. St. Xavier 90.1

2. Trinity 88.4

3. Male 87.6

4. Henderson Co. 85.6

5. Manual 83.9

6. Warren Central 83.8

7. Henry Clay 80.7

8. PRP 80.5

9. John Hardin 78.5

10. Paul Dunbar 77.1

11. Ryle 77.0

12. Scott Co. 76.3

13. Dixie Heights 76.1

14. Christian Co. 75.2

15. Madison Cent. 75.0

16. Marshall Co. 74.3

17. Fern Creek 73.6

18. Lafayette 72.1

19. Ballard 71.1

20. Boone Co. 70.3

 

Final Cantrall ratings in 2006:

1. Male 94.3

2. Trinity 91.0

3. St. Xavier 90.7

4. Owensboro 83.9

5. Henry Clay 83.8

6. Warren Central 83.2

7. Manual 81.8

8. Christian Co. 81.5

9. Henderson Co. 80.2

10. Ryle 80.1

11. Scott Co. 79.8

12. Lafayette 78.1

13. John Hardin 77.2

14. Campbell Co. 75.5

15. PRP 74.3

16. Lincoln Co. 73.5

17. Dixie Heights 73.4

18. Graves Co. 72.2

19. Boone Co. 71.8

20. Ballard 71.1

20. Marshall Co. 71.1

 

Final Masseys in 2006:

1 Male 9 0 0 2.216 49.16 ( 1)

2 St Xavier 8 2 0 1.891 44.43 ( 2)

3 Trinity 9 1 0 1.750 40.40 ( 3)

4 + 1 Owensboro 8 1 0 1.390 31.03 ( 4)

5 - 1 Henry Clay 9 1 0 1.314 28.41 ( 5)

6 + 2 Lafayette 10 0 0 1.298 23.39 (12)

7 - 1 DuPont Manual 6 4 0 1.286 28.10 ( 6)

8 + 3 Warren Cent 8 2 0 1.277 28.09 ( 7)

9 + 3 Ryle 8 2 0 1.175 25.62 (9)

10 Pleasure Ridge Pk 7 3 0 1.156 23.89 (11)

11 - 4 Christian Co 7 3 0 1.088 24.74 (10)

12 - 3 Scott Co 7 3 0 1.079 25.91 ( 8)

13 Lincoln Co 9 1 0 1.077 22.03 (14)

14 + 1 Boone Co 6 4 0 0.934 21.44 (16)

15 - 1 John Hardin 6 3 0 0.906 22.05 (13)

16 + 2 Campbell Co 7 3 0 0.900 21.79 (15)

17 - 1 Henderson Co 7 2 0 0.863 18.36 (18)

18 + 3 Graves Co 8 2 0 0.839 17.24 (19)

19 - 2 Dixie Hts 5 5 0 0.835 19.53 (17)

20 + 4 Woodford Co 7 3 0 0.713 13.69 (26)

 

I hate thes polls. For example 2005 PRP, is ahead of John Hardin and Dunbar and PRP lost to these two schools by a combined 38pts. Its hard to imagine PRP deserves to be a head of both of those schools.

[02Ram54]

I hate thes polls. For example 2005 PRP, is ahead of John Hardin and Dunbar and PRP lost to these two schools by a combined 38pts. Its hard to imagine PRP deserves to be a head of both of those schools.

But they played two of the best teams in the state (H & X) tight that year. I'm pretty sure these ratings also don't figure in the John Hardin loss since it was in the playoffs.

[pldgreatno2]

Just because a team wins more games in a playoff system doesn't mean they are better than another team that wins fewer, it only means they went farther on the road that was laid before them.

No two teams, in any playoff scenario, have the same difficulty ahead of them. To assume that judgement of a team's strength should be based only on playoff outcome, especially a playoff that is as that is as unbalanced as the one we are speaking of, is poor judgement.

 

By your reasoning it would be the same to say that all 1A teams that go past the first round are better than all 6A teams that lose in the first round. Granted all those 1A teams accomplished more, it doesn't mean they are better football teams.

 

I don't say that playoff performance is not an indicator of strength. But it is only one of many others that allow us to make judgements. Others being observation, relative scores, and measurable talents.

 

I never said that it makes one team better than another. Was just proving a valid point that ratings mean nothing really. As for harder bracket, that is garbage. Playoffs means best of the best, and nothing else, regardless of where you are. I'll say it again. We usually play the state champs when they are at their best. The only two teams who should really be arguing about it are X and Male, because they have to play them not only at full throttle, but when the stakes are the highest. Ryle could argue for this past season also. Playoff performances are an indicator of strength. Alot more of an indicator than those regular season games, especially the ones in the first 5 weeks.