Why are St. Xavier and Trinity so dominant in Football

[RowdyRedRam]

You are somewhat misinformed. Have you ever attended a Coach Beatty run Trinity practice? Ask the players how much time they put in at Dear Old Manual.I was a player so I think I would know.

Do your in house coaches meet with their players daily before school begins to discuss game plans, etc.? There were no scheduled meeting school started but I don't see how that justifies that the coaches aren't trying.

How is the time spent within the scheduled practice at Manual? Every legal hour that we could practice we would practice. Every month available for conditioning, we would condition.

Trinity is in constant motion and has a very scripted practice session. As it was at Manual.

How much work did the Crimsons put in on Saturdays duirng the season? We had practice on Sat.

 

The fact the JCPS forces you to cancel practice when school is out is something you all need to remedy. You lost a whole week of practice due to the wind damage. Sure sounds like you don't deal JCPS much.

When I played for St Margret Mary noticed the same mantra of "We work harder" spread around all the time. It is a smart mindset to create among the players and coaches. I sure they work very had over there in St Matthews and maybe they do work the hardest. But you have no place to say that others simply aren't working hard enough.

[leatherneck]

When I played for St Margret Mary noticed the same mantra of "We work harder" spread around all the time. It is a smart mindset to create among the players and coaches. I sure they work very had over there in St Matthews and maybe they do work the hardest. But you have no place to say that others simply aren't working hard enough.

 

Working "hard enough" isn't the issue is it? The issue is: are they working as hard as the coaches and kids at X and T? If not, then they are falling behind those programs. And make no bones about it, all coaches do not work as hard as every other coach; all players do not work as hard as every other player; all lawyers do not work as hard as every other lawyer, etc. etc. All coaches and players may work hard hard but not as hard as those at other progams. Those that work harder than the rest have a tendency to be the most successful.

[barrel]

thsrock: Thank you for the information. I think those answers explain a number of issues that for a public school rural or urban would be very difficult to over come.

 

Public schools are not going to get around title IX without be very creative. It is going to limit where money can be spent.

 

I think it is great that you have a strength coach. Getting a true S&C coach is very hard to do for most public schools. Most of the time it is one of the coaches on staff just getting another title as opposed to it being his job.

 

I do not know how many public schools would allow a HC to have half a day. Now I think Redman at Male does but that has to do with how long he has been teaching I think. Now of course public schools do create or place HC in jobs at times such as in school suspension etc to free up time for them to focus more on football. Not sure how much private schools have room in the create a job/position department. I would say how they are funded would make it hard for them.

 

7 Frosh coaches is a good number. A number of schools have that for their entire staff. I do think it must be tough for the Frosh coaches sense there are around 100-120 or so Freshman players. 20 something players a coach is not a great ratio but it is better than 2 to 25 or so. What happens to all the freshman after their freshman year? If you have 100 freshman but only 200 in the total program then you are only retaining about 1/4-1/3 of your freshman class.

 

Elective weightlifting is great. I know some schools have it. I also know in a public school you have to open it up to both male and female which can cause issues. You also have to have someone that can teach it which can be very hard to fit in. Your PE teacher is teaching a number of basic PE courses that students have to take.

 

The transportation example is a little bit more extreme. The two students mentioned (The Franfort player's father is a coach correct? I think I saw them last year at a MS game) both have to have transportation just to get to school. A QB a year a head of me in school transfered to T after his freshman year (from Shelby Co.). How he got to school I have no clue nor does it matter.

 

Does T have an open lunch (can leave campus)? If so I am surprised players can not go and eat lunch while they watch film. It is a common practice at schools outside KY that have very good programs.

 

Now all public schools are going to have issues getting even close to what T and X have available. They just can not do it due to funding, structure, and laws to name a few. I do not agree with the X Warren Co. about rural schools not being able to compete. They use to be able to do so but over the last 10-15 years T and X have pushed forward into raising their programs in all ways to the level of great programs around the nation not just KY. It is a much harder for the public schools to follow.

[doubledeuce]

As far as T and X having better coaching, maybe maybe not. Beatty is a great coach but how well does anyone think he would fair at let's say Daviess Co? How about Glaser at Grayson? Any titles coming from either of those with the coaching change? What if you take Jackson from Ballard and gave him Trinity's team? Think he could probalby come up with a few titles.

 

When you get 100+ freshman every year you have the advantage from the start. How many sophmores/juniors/seniors do both programs average? Not to mention both probably have more assitant coaches on their staff then most public schools. This makes a huge difference as well.

 

What was there coaching records prior to being at X or T?

[All Tell]

The transportation example is a little bit more extreme. The two students mentioned (The Franfort player's father is a coach correct? I think I saw them last year at a MS game) both have to have transportation just to get to school. A QB a year a head of me in school transfered to T after his freshman year (from Shelby Co.). How he got to school I have no clue nor does it matter.

He no longer coaches at Trinity. Hi son drive to school every day.

 

Does T have an open lunch (can leave campus)? If so I am surprised players can not go and eat lunch while they watch film. It is a common practice at schools outside KY that have very good programs.

No they don't.

 

Now all public schools are going to have issues getting even close to what T and X have available. They just can not do it due to funding, structure, and laws to name a few. I do not agree with the X Warren Co. about rural schools not being able to compete. They use to be able to do so but over the last 10-15 years T and X have pushed forward into raising their programs in all ways to the level of great programs around the nation not just KY. It is a much harder for the public schools to follow.

This is not true at all. Go to Male and look at the facilities that they have, or Ballard, or PRP. Compare those to the Iroquois' and Shawnee's of the state. Public schools can have great facilities. Remember Trinity's stadium is only 4 years old, the one prior to that would have had to been upgraded to get to average. They have no on-campus track or baseball field. And this is just the second year that X has had their own football stadium. Prior to they they rented Manual's. The whole facility argument is ludicrous IMVHO because there is so much disparity between facilities in the public schools.

[thsrocks]

Barrel:"If you have 100 freshman but only 200 in the total program then you are only retaining about 1/4-1/3 of your freshman class."

 

We'll have 50 or so come out as sophomores. Many see the handwriting on the wall regarding playing time and do not want to commit to the year round program for the chance to play in a game. I made this mistake and did not come back after my freshmen season. I matured by the time I was a senior, but it was too late.. Then 40 will come out as juniors and 30-35 will complete their four years.

 

Currently, varsity roster contains 109 (So, Jr, Sr) names. This past season's freshmen team ended with about 100, 20 more than usual.

 

The Frankfort player's father took a job in Lexington and now the young man drives himself to school. He is an extreme case. Many folks drive into Louisville to work and it is not a hardship for them to drop their sons off at T or X. It's easy for Oldham County kids because you can catch a TARC bus.

 

I assume public high schools can us ethe same methods as NCAA schools towork around the title IX fiasco. That's another rant entirely .

 

Still, the booster organizations at the successful non-private programs help immensely. The successful non-private boosters for other sports and the funds they raise are directly related to the success of those programs. PRP baseball, Ballard basketball, Male football....kids will attend where they and their parents perceive the greatest affordable advantage lies. The academic standards differ from school to school as well. This plays a role as well.

[barrel]

All Tell: I did not say anything about facilities. I said what they have available to them. Facilities (if that is what I had brought up) is just one thing of many. Henry Co, Belfry and a number of other schools have veyr nice facilities but that is not what I was refering too. Look at the list of questions that thsrock was kind enough to answer for me. Maybe I am reading to far into it but I do not understand the defensive tone.

 

Ulness Male has updated their weightroom and such a great deal over the last few years it was not much. We visited their coaching staff 3 years ago and was surprised because it seemed much lower than what we expected as far as facilities. I am well aware X did not have a field and I had the pleasure of playing both X and T durin gmy freshman year. In fact we use to play both teams twice a year as freshman.

 

As far as numbers dropping from freshman year on that is what I expected.

 

I do not think any of my posts have come across as "bashing" T or X. I think there is an upside to being a private school (just there are downsides) and I think public schools have certain restricitions that are extremely hard to get around. Those restrictions are are factors in why T and X are so far ahead.

[81rock]

It's been a long time since I've posted anything, but I thought I might add a few thoughts on this topic.

 

In my view, the public/private issues that simmer every time this topic comes up are not trivial, but the differences in public and private schools obviously do not hold all the answers. If they did, other privates would be more dominant than they are. Publics would not beat privates as much as they do. I think -- and I know others will disagree -- there is probably something to be learned from T and X specifically, rather than just looking at them as all-male private schools that are successful largely (if not only) based on those two attributes.

 

I am long removed from my playing days at Trinity nearly 30 years ago. But, although things may have changed somewhat, I am pretty confident that the core things that contributed to success in the 70s and 80s continue to foment success today.

 

And before I mention a few "difference makers," let me say that I do not intend to suggest that the following are absent from other programs and schools. It's just that football is a game of inches, split-seconds and near misses. Small distinctions and tiny margins can accumulate over the course of time to create positive results. So, these are not things missing at other schools, but instead are things (I think) Trinity and ( I will grudgingly admit -- especially grudgingly this week) St. X do a little better than most of their competition.

 

1. Commitment. This is a pretty broad statement, I know. But I think the two schools and their respective communities are committed to being successful in football (not to the exclusion of other things). Both institutions have decided that, though it is just a game, winning at football is --and is going to be -- important. This commitment manifests itself in many ways. Nearly 40,000 people go to a particular high school ball game every year. People like me return to Louisville from far away just to renew ties and re-connect. Why? Because we think the game is, in some sense, important. You could pick anything, but these schools have decided that, among other things, they are going to make the achievement of excellence in football an important goal. The non-playing students and alumni care -- a lot. They turn out for the games. They are dedicated to being trainers, equipment managers, videographers and film editors -- anything they can do. Same goes for the parents, alumni, faculty, friends, etc. Thanksgiving morning? No problem -- everyone will be there. And the result of this level of commitment is that each player finds perhaps just a little bit more motivation to do what it takes to give his team the best chance to win. Our slogan was (and I know it's not original): "Everyone has the 'will to win.' Champions have the will to prepare to win."

 

Team Above All. This goes without saying. But, in my experience, it was critical. No stars. No special treatment for anyone. If a player's contribution was to be an All-American, fine. If his contribution was to be on the scout team and get pounded day after day by the first team, also fine. I knew guys who knocked themselves out every day in practice -- as seniors -- on the scout team. Why? Because success is shared by all. It's easy to say; harder to live by. But, in my view, Trinity's football culture took team-driven motivation to a level I have not encountered since. The evidence suggests St. X does the same. And I think the benefits to be gained from this type of approach are perhaps most readily available in football. Because of the intricacy of the interaction among all 11 players on the field, teamwork carries a higher reward on the gridiron than in most (all?) other sports. A phenomenal player can make a huge difference in football. But he can't win it alone. In soccer, hoop or lacrosse, individuals can take over a game more than they can in football. In my view, football teams gain an edge if they can operate within a culture that fosters the sublimation of individual aspirations to the goals of the team. These two schools share this culture. (Others do too, but perhaps not as much or not in conjunction with other factors.)

 

Attention to Detail You might also call this discipline. How many times do we read in these boards how neither Trinity nor St. X makes many huge mistakes? They don't beat themselves. That doesn't happen by accident. It grows out of a culture that includes an obsessive attention to the details. Most of the time, the details don't matter. But sometimes they do. Where does the off hand go when in a three-point stance? What words are shouted EVERY TIME the ball is in the air or on the ground? No detail is too small to ignore. Everything happens the same way every time in practice -- or the practice will continue until it does. I think we used to practice defending against 7 or 8 different types of fake PAT. No matter that we never saw even one of them; we were ready to react automatically and precisely if we did. Again, I don't mean to suggest that others are slack in their attention to detail, but I do think Trinity and St. X put perhaps a higher premium on it than others do. And what it does for you is confer an advantage that can go a long way toward making up for any deficit in athletic talent. If you are attentive enough to detail, you can make the right read a split-second sooner and fill the gap a step earlier. In other words, detail and discipline make good (but typically not great) athletes into great high school football players.

 

Tradition Tradition does matter. There are a number of ways. But in my view, tradition perpetuates winning because it instills a sense of accountability in the players. When you have a tradition of winning, you don't want to face the alumni (least of all, the recent alumni) after having lost a game. You feel accountable to those who came before you, as well as those who will follow. That sense of accountability to the tradition feeds into and is reinforced by the institutional commitment each school has made to being truly excellent at at least this one thing.

 

 

This list is obviously impressionistic and certainly not exhaustive. But I do find the question interesting. What makes teams dominant in football? I don't know the answer, but the things I mention above seemed to make a difference.

[Bluegrasscard]

I have lived in seven different southern states in the USA and have never yet seen such a dominance in a sport as is found here in the Commonwealth of Kentucky regarding St. Xaiver and Trinity High Schools in football.

 

...

 

What is the secret? Someone should write a book on these two. These two giants are way beyond any other team in this state.

 

 

 

Going back to the original question...

 

1. Be a football focused organization in a 'basketball' state. Football has always been a focus of these schools or their predicessor (Flaget) back to the 1950s. Paul Hornung, Howard Schnellenburger and others came out of Flaget in 50s, establising icons and tradition. Football has been king at these schools for over 50 years.

 

2. Have a great youth system. CSAA has always been strong in Louisville. Youths are in pads and learning fundementals in very early stages. The Toy Bowl tradition demonstrates the focus and talent developed through the CSAA programs.

 

3. Team numbers that allow having senior dominated teams each year. Not only are starters experienced but if they go through as a unit from freshman to senior they know each other and, probably as important, they have trust and they have confidence in each other. These teams come onto the field confident, not because they are cocky or even overly rich in talent. It just that they have executed as a unit for 4 years and they know the 9 times out of 10 they will execute better than the opposition that is made up seniors, juniors and often sophamores.

 

4. Be in the largest metro area in the state. Even when X/T/F were not winning the State championship (32 out of 48 years) other Jefferson county based schools have picked up the slack. 42 out of 48 years the champion of the top class (3A (1959-1974), 4A (1975-2006), 6A (2007 - ) comes from Jefferson county. Only 6 non-Jefferson County teams have won the top class title since 1959. Those came in a spurt from 1981 (Henry Clay) to 1996 (Nelson County). Being in the major metro (with a very high Catholic per capita ratio) helps.

 

5. Keep your good coaches. Glaser has been a houshold name in Louisville since the 1980s. Trinity has had more turnover over time at the head coach position but the consistency and quality are always ready it seems.

 

Data on football champions since 1959:

 

http://www.khsaa.org/records/football/pastwinners.pdf

[Tigercat]

Surprised I was asked these two questions?

 

The person asking was a female whose husband coached at a school who has lost to the Rocks by a total score of 100 something to 15 for two games.

 

Some people hurt when they lose like that.

 

Our conversation wasn't mean spirited, just honest and true.

 

When you are on the losing side year after year you start to wonder if there isn't a better and fair way for everyone.

 

I understand the frustration. I wonder though what the scores were in basketball for the same schools, or any of the public schools and Xand T. Nobody ever seems concerned when X and T are getting their brains beat out in basketball and sporting losing or .500 records.

[Noble]

Good feeder programs, a much larger selection of players to choose from, dedication to the program and MONEY.

[Alabama Larry]

Tiger, I believe both schools have a pretty decent teams in basketball/baseball/swimming/, but the thread is football.

 

Check out the score for the games played by X verses Manual, the 2nd best public school.

 

Then check out the score of the Rocks against Eastern for two games. The best public.

 

Total... 200-15. I'm not sure exactly but I'm in the neighborhood.

 

Like I said earlier the Numbers don't lie.

[JIM SEYMOUR # 85]

It's been a long time since I've posted anything, but I thought I might add a few thoughts on this topic.

 

In my view, the public/private issues that simmer every time this topic comes up are not trivial, but the differences in public and private schools obviously do not hold all the answers. If they did, other privates would be more dominant than they are. Publics would not beat privates as much as they do. I think -- and I know others will disagree -- there is probably something to be learned from T and X specifically, rather than just looking at them as all-male private schools that are successful largely (if not only) based on those two attributes.

 

I am long removed from my playing days at Trinity nearly 30 years ago. But, although things may have changed somewhat, I am pretty confident that the core things that contributed to success in the 70s and 80s continue to foment success today.

 

And before I mention a few "difference makers," let me say that I do not intend to suggest that the following are absent from other programs and schools. It's just that football is a game of inches, split-seconds and near misses. Small distinctions and tiny margins can accumulate over the course of time to create positive results. So, these are not things missing at other schools, but instead are things (I think) Trinity and ( I will grudgingly admit -- especially grudgingly this week) St. X do a little better than most of their competition.

 

1. Commitment. This is a pretty broad statement, I know. But I think the two schools and their respective communities are committed to being successful in football (not to the exclusion of other things). Both institutions have decided that, though it is just a game, winning at football is --and is going to be -- important. This commitment manifests itself in many ways. Nearly 40,000 people go to a particular high school ball game every year. People like me return to Louisville from far away just to renew ties and re-connect. Why? Because we think the game is, in some sense, important. You could pick anything, but these schools have decided that, among other things, they are going to make the achievement of excellence in football an important goal. The non-playing students and alumni care -- a lot. They turn out for the games. They are dedicated to being trainers, equipment managers, videographers and film editors -- anything they can do. Same goes for the parents, alumni, faculty, friends, etc. Thanksgiving morning? No problem -- everyone will be there. And the result of this level of commitment is that each player finds perhaps just a little bit more motivation to do what it takes to give his team the best chance to win. Our slogan was (and I know it's not original): "Everyone has the 'will to win.' Champions have the will to prepare to win."

 

Team Above All. This goes without saying. But, in my experience, it was critical. No stars. No special treatment for anyone. If a player's contribution was to be an All-American, fine. If his contribution was to be on the scout team and get pounded day after day by the first team, also fine. I knew guys who knocked themselves out every day in practice -- as seniors -- on the scout team. Why? Because success is shared by all. It's easy to say; harder to live by. But, in my view, Trinity's football culture took team-driven motivation to a level I have not encountered since. The evidence suggests St. X does the same. And I think the benefits to be gained from this type of approach are perhaps most readily available in football. Because of the intricacy of the interaction among all 11 players on the field, teamwork carries a higher reward on the gridiron than in most (all?) other sports. A phenomenal player can make a huge difference in football. But he can't win it alone. In soccer, hoop or lacrosse, individuals can take over a game more than they can in football. In my view, football teams gain an edge if they can operate within a culture that fosters the sublimation of individual aspirations to the goals of the team. These two schools share this culture. (Others do too, but perhaps not as much or not in conjunction with other factors.)

 

Attention to Detail You might also call this discipline. How many times do we read in these boards how neither Trinity nor St. X makes many huge mistakes? They don't beat themselves. That doesn't happen by accident. It grows out of a culture that includes an obsessive attention to the details. Most of the time, the details don't matter. But sometimes they do. Where does the off hand go when in a three-point stance? What words are shouted EVERY TIME the ball is in the air or on the ground? No detail is too small to ignore. Everything happens the same way every time in practice -- or the practice will continue until it does. I think we used to practice defending against 7 or 8 different types of fake PAT. No matter that we never saw even one of them; we were ready to react automatically and precisely if we did. Again, I don't mean to suggest that others are slack in their attention to detail, but I do think Trinity and St. X put perhaps a higher premium on it than others do. And what it does for you is confer an advantage that can go a long way toward making up for any deficit in athletic talent. If you are attentive enough to detail, you can make the right read a split-second sooner and fill the gap a step earlier. In other words, detail and discipline make good (but typically not great) athletes into great high school football players.

 

Tradition Tradition does matter. There are a number of ways. But in my view, tradition perpetuates winning because it instills a sense of accountability in the players. When you have a tradition of winning, you don't want to face the alumni (least of all, the recent alumni) after having lost a game. You feel accountable to those who came before you, as well as those who will follow. That sense of accountability to the tradition feeds into and is reinforced by the institutional commitment each school has made to being truly excellent at at least this one thing.

 

 

This list is obviously impressionistic and certainly not exhaustive. But I do find the question interesting. What makes teams dominant in football? I don't know the answer, but the things I mention above seemed to make a difference.

 

81

 

Thanks for chiming in. Welcome. I find your post to be one of the most insightful and well written ever offered on this topic. Well done. You said it all - and most eloquently. Thank you.:thumb:

[81rock]

Thanks for the kind words, Jim.

 

Off topic, but I thought the guy on the (Internet) radio broadcast last night nearly blew out a vocal cord on TP's long TD to end the half.

 

On re-reviewing my earlier comments (excerpted in your post), it dawned on me -- and I swear I did not do this intentionally -- that the four concepts align with some that may be familiar to the THS crowd: Pride - Commitment, Loyalty - Team, Discipline - Detail, Achievement - Tradition.

[Skunk]

Good feeder programs, a much larger selection of players to choose from, dedication to the program and MONEY.

 

All points that schools in the rest of the state are not privelaged with with the exception of Lexington. That's why is make it such a surprise when we have so many schools not from these two areas in the state finals.