And if Scott Co. wins the state tournament, Jackson has great stats, then what will be the excuse that he doesn't deserve it? He had too many good players around him then? He couldn't do it for Rose Hill? Please...

 

IF Scott Co. wins the state tournament and IF Jackson has great stats, then MAYBE he will belong in this discussion before next season.

 

He's a very good player, no doubt, but he just hasn't done enough to be considered one of the top point guards in the state at the current time.

IF Scott Co. wins the state tournament and IF Jackson has great stats, then MAYBE he will belong in this discussion before next season.

 

He's a very good player, no doubt, but he just hasn't done enough to be considered one of the top point guards in the state at the current time.

 

Does Jackson have offers from West Virginia and Xavier?

IF Scott Co. wins the state tournament and IF Jackson has great stats, then MAYBE he will belong in this discussion before next season.

 

He's a very good player, no doubt, but he just hasn't done enough to be considered one of the top point guards in the state at the current time.

 

:thumb: Agree with this. I would offer if every one of these Scott County guys is as good as their hype, then they should win all of their games by 50 or so in state and go undefeated across the board.

Does Jackson have offers from West Virginia and Xavier?

Obviously not, he hasn't done enough.

Obviously not, he hasn't done enough.

 

I agree. He hasn't done enough yet, but the potential is there :thumb:

Obviously not, he hasn't done enough.

 

Being athletic, having good size for a point guard, having good college potential and being offered scholarships to good colleges doesn't mean that he's proved to be one of the best point guards in the state for the upcoming season. My point is that when you put his accomplishments as a high school player against those of a point guard like Ethan Faulkner, Ethan has accomplished more thus deserves to be mentioned as one of the top in the State for the upcoming season. I'm not downing Jackson nor am I saying that he's not a very good player, I'm only saying that I do not feel that his accomplishments in KY High School Basketball do not warrant him being mentioned as one of the best point guards in the state at the current time.

Well, I suppose I'll opine away on the subject. Of course it's no secret that I'm partial to Mr. Jackson. Having seen him play on numerous occasions as well as some of the others mentioned, I feel like my opinion here is as valid as many others who've posted in this thread. So, without further ado, I'll try to be a good ringside reporter here......(in my best Howard Cosell voice) I think what we have here are opinions from biases anti-Jackson regional slants. If you'll notice, those who offer their opinions with Elliott county ties have knocked Mr. Jackson and pointed out his flaws. Similarly, those from central regions who have been caught up in the middle of the Euton/Jackson transfer saga have no doubt downplayed the young man's ability simply out of what I'd refer to as envy and strife. However, I believe that Mr. Jackson does have offers from WVU and Xavier as well as interest been shown by the likes of Indiana. Now, I mean no disrespect to Mr. Faulkner. I've been in arenas where off the court he and his brother are very polite, respectful young men and on the court, he is a very heady player and a delight to watch. But in my most humble opinion, most unbiased observers would agree that Mr. Jackson is not only more skilled but will play at a higher level past high school. We can argue what both have done in the past. We can argue what their teams have done. But since this is opinion only, I can't see how there is a wrong answer. The only thing that I find interesting is that Elliott folk believe that Mr. Jackson doesn't even belong in the discussion and that is ludicrous. Remember, a blind eye will be the first one blacked. Ask Buster Douglas!

 

Only in America, baby!

The best I'v seen are Ethan Faulkner, Vee Sanford, Chad Jackson and Russ Middleton and I'm sure there's others that would rate with these. I think that Sanford would be the hardest to defend.

I go with Ethan. My bias and prejudice rests solely with favoring point guards that defend, ball handle, score, distibute, lead and perform in the clutch.

I go with Ethan. My bias and prejudice rests solely with favoring point guards that defend, ball handle, score, distibute, lead and perform in the clutch.

 

You're probably correct if you include all aspects of the game.:ylsuper:

I would say that Vee Sanford is 1 followed closely by Faulkner.

 

Agree.

Whenever I have seen Chad Jackson, I have been impressed.

I can definately understand that Jackson is "high" on many observer's lists, but I still have to take Faulkner as the best all-around PG in the state :thumb:

 

Don't get me wrong - Jackson is definately a load of potential. I haven't seen the LexCath PG play in person, so its hard for me to give my opinion on him.

Jackson is a very gifted player who can play 4 positions. But if you had Faulkner and Jackson on the same team, would you play them both?Which one would you play at the point? But the thread was not about who was the most versatile player, it was who was the best POINT GUARD

Case closed

Jackson is a very gifted player who can play 4 positions. But if you had Faulkner and Jackson on the same team, would you play them both?Which one would you play at the point? But the thread was not about who was the most versatile player, it was who was the best POINT GUARD

Case closed

 

That's my point exactly. Faulkner is the best PG. Jackson would definately have a big role on my team, but I'm starting Ethan at the point. :thumb: