Does beating schools with a much smaller enrollment impress you?

 

I am still trying to figure out the argument. We all know Trinity and Highlands are the two best programs regardless of enrollment. Is this an argument about #1 program?

Does beating schools with a much smaller enrollment impress you?

Disregarding your intent....I'll answer the question....beating everyone impresses me.

^ Wins is what I said, not titles.

 

Maybe not in looking at great programs today. But when looking at it historically, getting wins in 1950 is just as good as getting wins in 2010.

1. Trinity

2. St. X

3a. Highlands

3b. Male

 

Please do explain the logic of your ranking.

I am still trying to figure out the argument. We all know Trinity and Highlands are the two best programs regardless of enrollment. Is this an argument about #1 program?

 

No, it is an arguement against the old wins are not impressive. My arguement is that wins are impressive, depending on the level of competition and level playing field. Winning over a longer period of time is more impressive. If a high school starts this year and wins all their games, I wouldnt consider them one of the best programs in the state. Yeah they never lost a game but old wins do matter.

No, it is an arguement against the old wins are not impressive. My arguement is that wins are impressive, depending on the level of competition and level playing field. Winning over a longer period of time is more impressive. If a high school starts this year and wins all their games, I wouldnt consider them one of the best programs in the state. Yeah they never lost a game but old wins do matter.

 

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that. I think people put more stock into the amount of wins you have if you have the titles to go along with it. Bowling Green is amongst the leaders in all time wins but have maybe 1 title to show for it. Does that make them a better program than say....Boyle County who has 7 titles in the last 12 years? I think that should be the debate. I understand Male may have more wins than everyone else except Highlands but I will always regard St. X and Trinity as better programs as they have more titles than Male. Even if Trinity and St. X have a larger enrollment than Male, they would be the better programs in my eyes. Highlands would be better than both because Highlands has the wins and the titles.

Edited June 26, 201115 yr by PurplePride92

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that. I think people put more stock into the amount of wins you have if you have the titles to go along with it. Bowling Green is amongst the leaders in all time wins but have maybe 1 title to show for it. Does that make them a better program than say....Boyle County who has 7 titles in the last 12 years? I think that should be the debate. I understand Male may have more wins than everyone else except Highlands but I will always regard St. X and Trinity as better programs as they have more titles than Male. Even if Trinity and St. X have a larger enrollment than Male, they would be the better programs in my eyes. Highlands would be better than both because Highlands has the wins and the titles.

 

Absolutely:thumb:

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that. I think people put more stock into the amount of wins you have if you have the titles to go along with it. Bowling Green is amongst the leaders in all time wins but have maybe 1 title to show for it. Does that make them a better program than say....Boyle County who has 7 titles in the last 12 years? I think that should be the debate. I understand Male may have more wins than everyone else except Highlands but I will always regard St. X and Trinity as better programs as they have more titles than Male. Even if Trinity and St. X have a larger enrollment than Male, they would be the better programs in my eyes. Highlands would be better than both because Highlands has the wins and the titles.

 

I am on the same page with the same top programs. We should collectively come up with what the criteria is for a top program.

Please do explain the logic of your ranking.

 

Trinity, St.X and Male play in the biggest class in Kentucky. Always have, always will. While Highlands record is quite impressive, if they had been in the same class as the big 3 the last 50 years, I'm sure they would have a few titles to boast about, but T and X would still have many more. That is my opinion and logic.

Trinity, St.X and Male play in the biggest class in Kentucky. Always have, always will. While Highlands record is quite impressive, if they had been in the same class as the big 3 the last 50 years, I'm sure they would have a few titles to boast about, but T and X would still have many more. That is my opinion and logic.

 

If Highlands had the disparity in enrollment against their competition like Trinity and St. X they would have many more titles. Highlands has played up in class and still is tied for the most titles.

There will always be different ways to view and judge football programs. I do think that other factors besides school size need to be considered... Mayfield and Danville have had amazing histories, as well as Ashland.

 

Oh, and going back to the point about whether St. X has accomplished more than Male, it should be noted that Male holds a significant advantage in these two programs' head to head series.

I'll admit that paticipated in this thread like a lot of BGP have. So , Im just as guilty as everyone else. This thread has turned into my program has the best program in the state. Everything from my program was great ,way back then or we play in the biggest class (6 A ) , we have 20 state tiles while play up two classes , we were great earlier but not so good now. We are not getting a fair shake because we are in the small school bracket , wins , losses , head to head matchups , we have seven state titles , enrollment numbers where the historical 3A team can,t or won,t play a 6A team while being a 3A or 4A team per enrollment. There are some teams that were not mentioned that may (or maybe not )be deserving. ) I am sure the word program in the thread title is the key. Sounds like Ky is proud of their football programs , we should be proud of all the football programs that has made it to the "elite status " and also the ones have made great strides and sacrifice to reach that goal . Eventually , even as we speak , coaches and players are sacrificing to reach the "elite " status . Truthfully I'm more proud of the Ky. teams that are not considered " elite " because they may realize before the season starts , they have a feeling that they might not be in the playoffs at the end of the season. To make things worse , there are players on those teams that know that they won't even see the field come game time. Those same players go to the two a day practice in August , and lift weights all year around and train all year long just like some of the better teams do. The coaches , we know what they go through , not only keeping kids safe from the heat , but also trying to make their team better , while trying to keep the fans and parents happy.

 

Sorry for the length of my post . I just would like to say that I am proud of all the football programs every player and coach goes all out to make their team elite . Sometimes it happens , sometimes it doesn't. We are just happy and thank the players and coaches for their effort and the Friday night memories. Best program for bragging rights ? Who really cares ?

Wins

Titles

Mythical titles

wins and titles while playing up in class.

 

I really wonder where Manual fits in. They hold the only 'national championship' by a Kentucky team. What is that worth in considering all time gratness.

Mythical titles

In all honesty, they mean nothing to be because they're exactly that ... mythical.

Wins

Titles

Mythical titles

wins and titles while playing up in class.

 

I really wonder where Manual fits in. They hold the only 'national championship' by a Kentucky team. What is that worth in considering all time gratness.

I believe Ashland won a mythical national title in the 1930s.