I thought this was a "family-friendly" site!

Size of the school matters in the game of Football and Baseball, where there are more players on the field than 5. Basketball is a different story. Easy to find 5-8 good B-ball players compared to 9-11 players for other sports.

Mustang gets it. If you don't understand his post, you probably don't get it. Good job Mustang.

 

What part of my earlier post is invalid? Or does it simply not fit your argument?

What part of my earlier post is invalid? Or does it simply not fit your argument?

Your points are valid. None of the arguments in this thread are true for every school, in every situation. I know that. I'm just speaking in general terms. I don't think Beechwood, Frankfort, Raceland, or Russell are going to beat Trinity. That is not what I am saying. I am saying it takes a good program: good coaches, good off season, good fan support, good school support and a good support staff to sustain a program, no matter what size it is. And if a program has that, they will become a program that can compete with schools that are a lot bigger. I think it is more about the program, then it is about the size. I don't think Trinity is Trinity because of their size, I think they could drop enrollment dramatically and still be a football force in 6A. I would go as far as to say if they were 4A by enrollment, they would still be a perennial power in 6A, just like Highlands is 3A by enrollment and a perennial power in 5A. It's not their school enrollment, it is their program.

If size doesn't matter, why have classes?

 

Just remember,when we talk about the size of the school,we are talking about total enrollment,boys and girls. Now look at all the bigger schools with all boys,it would seem that they would have a HUGE advantage over any other co-ed school,with more BOYS to choose from.

Size does matter, 6A teams SHOULD dominate 1A teams, they have a larger base from which to draw players should be able to platoon and keep players fresh, and have a larger alumni and booster base from which to raise money. However, as with everything in life there are variables the most important being the guy running the ship, if he can get those athletes out for football and knows the game they will beat most smaller schols, if he doesn't have a clue and the staff can't coach they will lose. Football is special in that 11 players working together with great leadership can fell a giant despite their size or enrollment.

 

By the way there is a reason all the 6A teams you have mentioned can't beat smaller schools - the HC, period.

The whole class argument is another topic completely, but I am not for one class, and I am not for six classes either. But, that is another ball of wax.

You would also have to factor in open enrollment for the small schools.. Without it, no way does the smaller schools compete as well.... Not the biggest factor, but it has to be part of the equation.

Size of school does increase the odds that there will be more good athletes to choose from. But if they aren't coached well or the support structure isn't in place, it won't matter a hill of beans.

 

I just don't see it. We are talking about statistics. And statistics are not all inclusive. Like you said, they have to have a good program. I think the quality of the program is more important then the enrollment numbers. And that is what I am getting at.

 

Algebra equation:

Team 1 (big enrollment X poor program) = Team 2 (smaller enrollment X quality program)

 

Which team wins?

 

You should have quoted my entire post to include the qualifier that came after the first sentence -- which you essentially agreed with later on in the thread when Mustang elaborated upon it.

Your points are valid. None of the arguments in this thread are true for every school, in every situation. I know that. I'm just speaking in general terms. I don't think Beechwood, Frankfort, Raceland, or Russell are going to beat Trinity. That is not what I am saying. I am saying it takes a good program: good coaches, good off season, good fan support, good school support and a good support staff to sustain a program, no matter what size it is. And if a program has that, they will become a program that can compete with schools that are a lot bigger. I think it is more about the program, then it is about the size. I don't think Trinity is Trinity because of their size, I think they could drop enrollment dramatically and still be a football force in 6A. I would go as far as to say if they were 4A by enrollment, they would still be a perennial power in 6A, just like Highlands is 3A by enrollment and a perennial power in 5A. It's not their school enrollment, it is their program.

 

Highlands is the exception, not the rule.

 

Can a smaller school play above their size? The answer is yes.

 

Can a large school play below their size? The answer to that is also yes.

 

Will a larger school beat a smaller school more often? Again the answer is yes.

You should have quoted my entire post to include the qualifier that came after the first sentence -- which you essentially agreed with later on in the thread when Mustang elaborated upon it.

Maybe I didn't know I was going to agree with it later.:lol:

Will a larger school beat a smaller school more often? Again the answer is yes.

That is what I don't agree with, just by being larger doesn't dictate who will win. Now if the larger school has a "Quality" program and the small school has a "Poor" program, or both have "Decent" program, possibly. But, a school does not win just by the virtue of having more students. If so, we wouldn't play the games, we would just have the superintendents show up with the enrollment papers and the game would be decided by the enrolment figures.

I agree with you Ram, that size is a bogus argument. If you have a quality program, you're going to get an exponentially larger percentage of the boys wanting to play football. This totally negates the advantage of a larger population school with a lousy program that no one wants to play for. Trinity and Xavier are successful, not because they're large, but because they are able to maintain that high percentage of interest in their football program, and thus, have more players to choose from.

 

Now, for the regional population being a factor, as it relates to NKY. We're divided into so many small communities here that there is a high concentration of schools in a small area. Now throw in all the county schools and the parochial schools, and that metro area is chopped down to very little.

 

If you build it, they will come. Build a good program and the players you need will come to you. :thumb:

 

Here's a novel idea. Why don't we classify teams by the number of players they have come out for football in a given set of years (say, three maybe), instead of the school's enrollment? Seems that would be a much more fair and accurate way of comparing the actual talent pools with which teams have to draw from.

I agree with you Ram, that size is a bogus argument. If you have a quality program, you're going to get an exponentially larger percentage of the boys wanting to play football. This totally negates the advantage of a larger population school with a lousy program that no one wants to play for. Trinity and Xavier are successful, not because they're large, but because they are able to maintain that high percentage of interest in their football program, and thus, have more players to choose from.

 

Now, for the regional population being a factor, as it relates to NKY. We're divided into so many small communities here that there is a high concentration of schools in a small area. Now throw in all the county schools and the parochial schools, and that metro area is chopped down to very little.

 

If you build it, they will come. Build a good program and the players you need will come to you. :thumb:

 

Here's a novel idea. Why don't we classify teams by the number of players they have come out for football in a given set of years (say, three maybe), instead of the school's enrollment? Seems that would be a much more fair and accurate way of comparing the actual talent pools with which teams have to draw from.

 

Then by that reasoning Beechwood should be able to beat any of the top 10 teams in 5A and 6A each season right? After all they are a quality program. Yet somehow I don't think they would fare too well against those opponents. Your argument only holds water when you take a high quality smaller school program and match it up with a very average or poor quality bigger school program. If you compare the small schools with the bigger schools of the same level of quality then the smaller school is almost always at a disadvantage. Especially if they don't have open enrollment to help them.

If size doesn't matter, why have classes?

 

:thumb:

 

My thoughts exactly.