All State Teams Announced

[Voice of Reason]

The proof is in the pudding regarding talent. Trinity and St X have dominated Kentucky Football since 1962. Check out the state championships won by these two schools during that time frame. Simply put they are the best two teams in this state by a HUGE margin. No one is even close. If thats the case then they have the best players as well. Typically the State Champion has several players on the team and this year Trinity only had one player.

 

Opinions dont count however championships do. Outstanding players making great plays in clutch situations lead to championships. To me that defines an all state player. The best game in the state every year is the Trinity St X game and they play twice.

 

Hard work, dedication and teamwork build character. I think Kentucky should be proud to have these two schools and these young men representing the commonwealth. My hat is off to both schools. Now lets give them some individual honors as well. However the state championship ring is enough of a prize for anyone

 

This post is a bunch of bull and the absolute height of arrogance and ignorance. No one will deny how good Trinity and St. X are but that doesn't mean all their players are the best at their positions. There are many players throughout the state this year and in years past that were great players, played D1 football and even in the pros that did not go to T or X. Let's not get carried away with the T/X hype.

[cooperstown]

The proof is in the pudding regarding talent. Trinity and St X have dominated Kentucky Football since 1962. Check out the state championships won by these two schools during that time frame. Simply put they are the best two teams in this state by a HUGE margin. No one is even close. If thats the case then they have the best players as well. Typically the State Champion has several players on the team and this year Trinity only had one player.

 

Opinions dont count however championships do. Outstanding players making great plays in clutch situations lead to championships. To me that defines an all state player. The best game in the state every year is the Trinity St X game and they play twice.

 

Hard work, dedication and teamwork build character. I think Kentucky should be proud to have these two schools and these young men representing the commonwealth. My hat is off to both schools. Now lets give them some individual honors as well. However the state championship ring is enough of a prize for anyone

 

So it couldn't be that perhaps they go deeper in their rosters with very talented players, as opposed to simply having all the "best players" at the top of their rosters? Couldn't have anything to do with the level of coaching at these schools? Or the fact that they are both simply great, well-run, established programs/systems? They no doubt have some very, very good players, but to claim they should have a dozen spots on the all-state team is ludicrious.

[northfootball]

This post is a bunch of bull and the absolute height of arrogance and ignorance. No one will deny how good Trinity and St. X are but that doesn't mean all their players are the best at their positions. There are many players throughout the state this year and in years past that were great players, played D1 football and even in the pros that did not go to T or X. Let's not get carried away with the T/X hype.

 

The all state team represents the best players at their position. Its not a recruiting list for potential D1 talent. There is a difference between potential and demonstrated ability. Many D1 recruits never see an all state team

[IM4THEHOUNDS]

The all state team represents the best players at their position. Its not a recruiting list for potential D1 talent. There is a difference between potential and demonstrated ability. Many D1 recruits never see an all state team

 

Exactly. Being selected to the all state team is an honor and all players are to be congratulated. However, it is not necessarily indicative of who will or will not play D1 ball. Some who never receive this recognition at any level (1st team, 2nd team, honorable mention) go on to play at the D1 level and do so quite well. Everything must be kept in prospective.:thumb:

[IM4THEHOUNDS]

This post is a bunch of bull and the absolute height of arrogance and ignorance. No one will deny how good Trinity and St. X are but that doesn't mean all their players are the best at their positions. There are many players throughout the state this year and in years past that were great players, played D1 football and even in the pros that did not go to T or X. Let's not get carried away with the T/X hype.

 

I wholeheartedly agree, while Trinity and X have great teams and individual players so do other teams around the state . . . these teams (T and X) get more media attention and therefore their players and team are more "well known" but there are equally good (some perhaps better) players around the great commonwealth of Kentucky and I am just as proud of these unsung players who also represent our state well. :thumb:

[Rocks8010]

This post is a bunch of bull and the absolute height of arrogance and ignorance. No one will deny how good Trinity and St. X are but that doesn't mean all their players are the best at their positions. There are many players throughout the state this year and in years past that were great players, played D1 football and even in the pros that did not go to T or X. Let's not get carried away with the T/X hype.

I agree. T & X do not have the best players, they have the best system. Period!

[tcjkbt]

I agree. T & X do not have the best players, they have the best system. Period!

 

On occasion they do have some fair to middlin' players. But their success is based on selfless, grunt-type players who just like to play and be part of a team.

[leatherneck]

I think that if I am a journalist and I see his name on the list and I see he is a wide receiver, just like his father, and that he plays for Highlands, that I am going to vote for him because he is obviously a great talent(it's in his genes) and he plays for one of the greatest football traditional schools in the state. I wouldn't need to see his stats. I already know how good he is because of his last name and AND his high school. If he played for a school in the rural area of the state he wouldn't even be associated with his dad because we all know Chris Collinsworth wouldn't live in a rural Kentucky area, he would live in a suburb of Cincinnati. I think the name recognition goes with his last name and the school.

 

And no, I am not trying to take anything away from AC, he is obviously a great player, but a little logic and common sense will let you know that it wasn't the stats that got him onto the 1st team.

 

Oh you are probably right. But my problem with all All State teams is that they rely so heavily on stats (although I understand why they have to. No voter, be it sportswriters or coaches has the ability to see all the players in the state so they almost have to default to stats). But the problem with stats as Boom pointed out is that they often are very misleading.

 

Take Collinsworth for example. Yes his stats weren't has good as some other receivers. But that doesn't take into effect that Highlands was not a pass crazy team like some of the other teams whose players had better stats. They were more balanced this year than last year and threw the ball more, but there were several other talented receivers on the team that decreased Collinsworth stats, such as Roller, Hogue and Buten. As a result, lesser stats does not necessarily mean a lesser quality receiver. Stats also do not take into account the quality of competition played, which also makes them very misleading, which Boom also mentioned.

 

To be fair, I didn't see every receiver in the state so I cannot state that Collinsworth is the best or even one of the top 3 receivers in the state. But what I do know is that against the playoff teams that Highlands faced this year, Collinsworth made huge catch after huge catch. Some were when he created great separation with his speed and route running techniques; some were when he made spectacular catches when covered closely.

 

Offensive linemen selection are another great irritation for me. They are almost always made based on physical size. I watched 3 of the 5 interior linemen made on one all state team. Two of them had no business being on there. They were big, but had no mobility or footspeed. One of them made zero attempt to even attempt to get down field to block when the play went to the other side. Further more when the play was ran right over them they didn't totally dominate their defensive assignment. I realize that a 6'5" 300 pounder isn't going to be as quick of an O lineman as a 6'0' 210 lineman, but I expect someone worthy of being picked to be All State to at least have some quickness, to show effort and to totally dominate his assignment when the play went over him. Sadly that was lacking in a couple of the selections I watched. But coaches and sports writers wrongly assume that if an O lineman is big and is attracting some college attention (which is more about potential than anything) , they must be a great high school lineman. If they actually watched the kids playing (live or on tape) they'd realize the fallacy of that assumption. Very, very few sportswriters take the time to watch the lineplay or for that matter because few played the game even understand the complexities of lineplay.

[cooperstown]

Oh you are probably right. But my problem with all All State teams is that they rely so heavily on stats (although I understand why they have to. No voter, be it sportswriters or coaches has the ability to see all the players in the state so they almost have to default to stats). But the problem with stats as Boom pointed out is that they often are very misleading.

 

Take Collinsworth for example. Yes his stats weren't has good as some other receivers. But that doesn't take into effect that Highlands was not a pass crazy team like some of the other teams whose players had better stats. They were more balanced this year than last year and threw the ball more, but there were several other talented receivers on the team that decreased Collinsworth stats, such as Roller, Hogue and Buten. As a result, lesser stats does not necessarily mean a lesser quality receiver. Stats also do not take into account the quality of competition played, which also makes them very misleading, which Boom also mentioned.

 

To be fair, I didn't see every receiver in the state so I cannot state that Collinsworth is the best or even one of the top 3 receivers in the state. But what I do know is that against the playoff teams that Highlands faced this year, Collinsworth made huge catch after huge catch. Some were when he created great separation with his speed and route running techniques; some were when he made spectacular catches when covered closely.

 

Offensive linemen selection are another great irritation for me. They are almost always made based on physical size. I watched 3 of the 5 interior linemen made on one all state team. Two of them had no business being on there. They were big, but had no mobility or footspeed. One of them made zero attempt to even attempt to get down field to block when the play went to the other side. Further more when the play was ran right over them they didn't totally dominate their defensive assignment. I realize that a 6'5" 300 pounder isn't going to be as quick of an O lineman as a 6'0' 210 lineman, but I expect someone worthy of being picked to be All State to at least have some quickness, to show effort and to totally dominate his assignment when the play went over him. Sadly that was lacking in a couple of the selections I watched. But coaches and sports writers wrongly assume that if an O lineman is big and is attracting some college attention (which is more about potential than anything) , they must be a great high school lineman. If they actually watched the kids playing (live or on tape) they'd realize the fallacy of that assumption. Very, very few sportswriters take the time to watch the lineplay or for that matter because few played the game even understand the complexities of lineplay.

 

 

I disagree with this. So in essense what you are also saying is that other WR's who might be playing in a "pass-crazy" offense should be penalized because their stats are somehow over-inflated or misleading? Or a WR on another team that didn't have other solid passing options again somehow unfairly benefitted? I would submit that in the latter situation it would make it even tougher on those kids because they would routinely draw extra coverage. And how in the world are all these sportswriters and voters supposed to know which team is "passy-crazy", which WR benefits from playing with an outstanding QB (such as Collinsworth) and who doesn't, which team benefits from playing with great offensive lines (such as Highlands), which teams plays better competition, who built up their stats against the weaker teams, and on and on and on. Sorry, but by and large, it should and needs to be a stat-based award. Maybe not entirely, but predominaantly so. I am in no way, shape, or form claiming that Collinsworth is not a quality WR. He is very good and I myself have stated so on various BGP threads in the past, so please don't claim I'm either anti-Highlands or anti-Collinsworth because I'm not. But IMO he simply wasn't one of the top WR's in the state and he clearly benefits from having the last name of a well-known former NFL player when awards like this are dispensed.

[Guest Birdflu]

I disagree with this. So in essense what you are also saying is that other WR's who might be playing in a "pass-crazy" offense should be penalized because their stats are somehow over-inflated or misleading? Or a WR on another team that didn't have other solid passing options again somehow unfairly benefitted? I would submit that in the latter situation it would make it even tougher on those kids because they would routinely draw extra coverage. And how in the world are all these sportswriters and voters supposed to know which team is "passy-crazy", which WR benefits from playing with an outstanding QB (such as Collinsworth) and who doesn't, which team benefits from playing with great offensive lines (such as Highlands), which teams plays better competition, who built up their stats against the weaker teams, and on and on and on. Sorry, but by and large, it should and needs to be a stat-based award. Maybe not entirely, but predominaantly so. I am in no way, shape, or form claiming that Collinsworth is not a quality WR. He is very good and I myself have stated so on various BGP threads in the past, so please don't claim I'm either anti-Highlands or anti-Collinsworth because I'm not. But IMO he simply wasn't one of the top WR's in the state and he clearly benefits from having the last name of a well-known former NFL player when awards like this are dispensed.

 

I agree. Without benefit of seeing all of the players play, you can only go with statistics to determine all-star and all-state teams. Variables are impossible to take into account and given their proper weight. The only problem I have is when someone makes one of these teams due to their physical size.

[leatherneck]

I disagree with this. So in essense what you are also saying is that other WR's who might be playing in a "pass-crazy" offense should be penalized because their stats are somehow over-inflated or misleading? Or a WR on another team that didn't have other solid passing options again somehow unfairly benefitted? I would submit that in the latter situation it would make it even tougher on those kids because they would routinely draw extra coverage. And how in the world are all these sportswriters and voters supposed to know which team is "passy-crazy", which WR benefits from playing with an outstanding QB (such as Collinsworth) and who doesn't, which team benefits from playing with great offensive lines (such as Highlands), which teams plays better competition, who built up their stats against the weaker teams, and on and on and on. Sorry, but by and large, it should and needs to be a stat-based award. Maybe not entirely, but predominaantly so. I am in no way, shape, or form claiming that Collinsworth is not a quality WR. He is very good and I myself have stated so on various BGP threads in the past, so please don't claim I'm either anti-Highlands or anti-Collinsworth because I'm not. But IMO he simply wasn't one of the top WR's in the state and he clearly benefits from having the last name of a well-known former NFL player when awards like this are dispensed.

 

Have you ever, ever known me to make baseless allegations?

 

I expect people voting on all state selections to take the time to look into the quality of competition played; I expect them to look into the type of offense ran; I expect them to look into the quality of qb throwing the ball to the receiver and then factor those issues into the stats. If a person isn't willing to take the amount of time to determine whom really deserves the award, then they shouldn't be voting. Do I expect every sportswriter and every to do a thorough analysis on every player in the state? Nope. But I do expect them to do a better job with the players in their own backyard than just relying on stats and taking the easy way out.

 

If that analysis "penalizes", as you call it, a WR on a pass crazy team churning out great stats playing against weak competition, then so be it. I wouldn't call it penalizing, rather I'd say it simply provides a better analysis of the quality of player involved.

 

I can't say Austin is the best WR in the state. I can say that in my opinion he was the best receiver of all the receivers that I watched this year even if his stats don't compare with some of the others.

[cooperstown]

Have you ever, ever known me to make baseless allegations?

 

I expect people voting on all state selections to take the time to look into the quality of competition played; I expect them to look into the type of offense ran; I expect them to look into the quality of qb throwing the ball to the receiver and then factor those issues into the stats. If a person isn't willing to take the amount of time to determine whom really deserves the award, then they shouldn't be voting. Do I expect every sportswriter and every to do a thorough analysis on every player in the state? Nope. But I do expect them to do a better job with the players in their own backyard than just relying on stats and taking the easy way out.

 

If that analysis "penalizes", as you call it, a WR on a pass crazy team churning out great stats playing against weak competition, then so be it. I wouldn't call it penalizing, rather I'd say it simply provides a better analysis of the quality of player involved.

 

I can't say Austin is the best WR in the state. I can say that in my opinion he was the best receiver of all the receivers that I watched this year even if his stats don't compare with some of the others.

 

Not saying you'd claim I was anti-Highlands/Collinsworth, but I assure you some other Bluebird faithful might. Right, Radierbird?

 

I think you're kidding yourself if you think the sportswriters/voters do this type of detailed analysis. I'm not even sure how anyone could legitimately do it, especially in light of the fact that you'd have to do it for the hundreds of athletes that would be necessary to consider to make the analysis fair.

Edited January 6, 2009 by cooperstown

[leatherneck]

Not saying you'd claim I was anti-Highlands/Collinsworth, but I assure you some other Bluebird faithful might. Right, Radierbird?

 

I think you're kidding yourself if you think the sportswriters/voters do this type of detailed analysis. I'm not even sure how anyone could legitimately do it, especially in light of the fact that you'd have to do it hundreds of athletes that would be necessary to consider to make the analysis fair.

 

 

I'm not kidding myself in thinking that because I don't think they do that type of detailed analysis. That's my problem with the people making the selections. They don't do much real analysis. Rather they go with factors like stats and size that often can be misleading. I remember my Grandpa telling me: if you aren't going to do something well, don't do it at all.

[RoadRunner]

You can argue forever about whether Austin was the best WR and never get anywhere. That isn't the right question. He was easily one of the best players in the state the past two years. This year he excelled at offense, defense & special teams. On special teams he was as valuable on coverage as he was returning the ball where he also dominated. For those I have spoken with that saw a lot of teams play this year and saw Austin play most agree he was a slam dunk to be all state and it had nothing to do with his name.

 

The question is did they chose the right spot on the all-state ballot.

[Jim Schue]

I'm not kidding myself in thinking that because I don't think they do that type of detailed analysis. That's my problem with the people making the selections. They don't do much real analysis. Rather they go with factors like stats and size that often can be misleading. I remember my Grandpa telling me: if you aren't going to do something well, don't do it at all.

 

I think most reporters/newspapers would be happy to not bother with all the year-end voting.