How? Did you guys work harder now than you were?

 

I am not slamming just wondering how you pulled an Emeril and ratch it up a notch. BAM!!!!!!!!!

 

I do know that we changed gears all together in 1999, then got our current coach in 2000....things have been night and day around here since then. n

You know while the state hates us, no one hates us more than the X contingent as they would have 4 state titles this decade if not for us.

 

Ouch.

I do know that we changed gears all together in 1999, then got our current coach in 2000....things have been night and day around here since then. n

 

Not trying to be dense, but what does the bolded mean?

We got a new coach in 1999, that changed our offensive philosophy, he happened to bring with him a man named Andrew Coverdale, who I feel is the most talented offensive mind in the Commonwealth. Then in 2000 Coach Beatty arrived, and the intensity stepped up drastically......it was a match made with titles.

:lol::lol:

 

You all need to change your names to the sheep and have Dolly as the school mascot.:lol:

 

Yeah you had great football history for many years but something changed in the last 5. As T and X has both been dominating at the same time.

 

I have longed contended and don't think anyone will convince me different that come mid- to late-90's when all of the fallout of KERA been occurring, privates benefitted from a mass exodus of good students and good athletes from public schools. They wanted their kids concentrating on education and ACT/SAT scores and not open response questions, portfolios, on-demand questions and the like.

 

I believe KERA had as much to do with the rise of the private schools as anything.

 

I am so glad to hear someone say this. The late 90's is where all the change occurred and it was a direct result of KERA. And like anything else, when something is hot, go with it, and that is what has been happening. Parents have seen good things in private schools and have taken their kids out of public and into private. Regardless of their reasons, a parents job is to do whats best for their kid and it should also be their right.

We got a new coach in 1999, that changed our offensive philosophy, he happened to bring with him a man named Andrew Coverdale, who I feel is the most talented offensive mind in the Commonwealth. Then in 2000 Coach Beatty arrived, and the intensity stepped up drastically......it was a match made with titles.

 

Good answer. Thanks for the information. Good discussion.

Not trying to be dense, but what does the bolded mean?

 

I am not sure what he means by that either because T won 7 State Chamionships from 1980 - 1994. He might be referring in 1995-1999.

^

But everything I hear is that this is a Trinity and ST X issue. Those are the two teams people don't want to meet for the Title every year.

If you want to be in the title game, then beat them!! It is that simple.

Another interesting tidbit.

 

T has only lost 3 times in its history of making it to the State Chamionship.

 

1970 to Butler

1997 to X

2000 to Male

I think next year Trinity and St. X are on the same side and would meet in the final four if I'm not mistaken. I think Male is on the opposite side though and would meet a Lexington or Northern Kentucky winner in the final four.

I think next year Trinity and St. X are on the same side and would meet in the final four if I'm not mistaken. I think Male is on the opposite side though and would meet a Lexington or Northern Kentucky winner in the final four.

 

 

 

Hope Papa John's is available on that weekend.

I know the coaches were pushing for the Playoff format to go back to playing opposite districts in the first round at their meeting the other day ago. I heard it was suppose to go in affect this year but I'm not positive.

I'm still trying to figure out what is bad about having the two best teams in the championship. Isn't that good for football as a whole? Isn't it equitable?

 

I realize you can't plan it out that way every year, but when it happens, I like it.

 

I would even be in favor of having the first two rounds of the playoffs and then seeding the final 8 teams to try and get this to happen in all classes every year. I know the seeding method would be debated and a bit subjective, but it would be fair to me. It might require using some neutral fields to cut on travel but in the end, if the best two teams met in the finals, wouldn't it be great for every class?

I'm still trying to figure out what is bad about having the two best teams in the championship. Isn't that good for football as a whole? Isn't it equitable?

 

I realize you can't plan it out that way every year, but when it happens, I like it.

 

I would even be in favor of having the first two rounds of the playoffs and then seeding the final 8 teams to try and get this to happen in all classes every year. I know the seeding method would be debated and a bit subjective, but it would be fair to me. It might require using some neutral fields to cut on travel but in the end, if the best two teams met in the finals, wouldn't it be great for every class?

You are assuming that the two best teams win out in a tournament. That does not always happen.

 

Unless you think George Mason was one of the top 4 teams in the nation in collegiate basketball last year.