I dont understand how anyone could place St.X in front of Trinity. Its rather ridiculous. There was no doubt left in the championship game. The argument for 2nd is between St.X and Lex Cath, but make no mistakes about it...Trinity is the BEST team in the state this year.

He said he was considering the whole season not just one game. He even gave your rocks the credit they deserve for a wonderful game...settle down.

I dont understand how anyone could place St.X in front of Trinity. Its rather ridiculous. There was no doubt left in the championship game. The argument for 2nd is between St.X and Lex Cath, but make no mistakes about it...Trinity is the BEST team in the state this year.

Don't worry about it. We heard the same thing from them in 94 after the season. They also think that the sun rises because they crow. I think they teach a class in that stuff.

I dont understand how anyone could place St.X in front of Trinity. Its rather ridiculous. There was no doubt left in the championship game. The argument for 2nd is between St.X and Lex Cath, but make no mistakes about it...Trinity is the BEST team in the state this year.

 

 

I thought there was no doubt left about it too in September, but I was wrong.. If T beat X by more then I would probably agree with you, but the fact remains that X could have tied the game with 2 minutes to go. That is hardly a game that was dominated and a game that left no doubt.

 

Again, this is no disrespect to Trinity. They had a great season! If you think about it, both X and T only have one loss in state this year.....to each other! Two great opponents! I just give the edge to X based on the entire season.

I hate the argument that people say that X had a better season as a whole, we won state, they didn't.

 

We ARE #1, they are not.

1 Lexington Cath.

2 Trinity

3 Bowling Green

4 St. Xavier

5 NCC

6 Mayfield

7 Russell

8 Owensboro Cath.

 

Now this IMO, Lexington Cath was to play Trinity or even a rematch with St. X., they would come out on top, and the reason I put BG ahead of St. X. in a rematch BG would win this time. Mayfield would have beaten both Russell and OC. Again this is base only on my opinion.

I hate the argument that people say that X had a better season as a whole, we won state, they didn't.

 

We ARE #1, they are not.

 

Its not an arguement. It is an opinion.

1 Lexington Cath.

2 Trinity

3 Bowling Green

4 St. Xavier

5 NCC

6 Mayfield

7 Russell

8 Owensboro Cath.

 

Now this IMO, Lexington Cath was to play Trinity or even a rematch with St. X., they would come out on top, and the reason I put BG ahead of St. X. in a rematch BG would win this time. Mayfield would have beaten both Russell and OC. Again this is base only on my opinion.

I agree Lex Cath would give T and X a game, but I feel X's ball control and Trinity's potent pass defense would prevail. One thing people did not do this year, was throw the ball against Trinity.

If the criteria is who would win most often if they played as they were heading into the final game...

 

1. St. X

2. Trinity

3. Lex Cath

4. Bowling Green

 

The rest I know nothing about.

I hate the argument that people say that X had a better season as a whole, we won state, they didn't.

 

We ARE #1, they are not.

 

Actually, one could quite easily make an argument that St. X had a better overall season. They lost fewer games, won more, had a harder schedule by far, and blew out the only team that beat them in the most lopsided contest ever in a series that includes games when Trinity was a brand new school and St. X an established power.

 

Congratulations to Trinity on their state title. They played the better game on Friday. But it's not hard to make an objective argument that St. X was the better team this year. They lost one game, to their biggest rival, when their starting QB broke his foot on the game's second play, and they were robbed on a spot that should have given them a first down that would have allowed them to potentially send the game into OT.

 

I think if St. X and Trinity had played 10 times this season, X would have won 7-8 of them.

Actually, one could quite easily make an argument that St. X had a better overall season. They lost fewer games, won more, had a harder schedule by far, and blew out the only team that beat them in the most lopsided contest ever in a series that includes games when Trinity was a brand new school and St. X an established power.

 

Congratulations to Trinity on their state title. They played the better game on Friday. But it's not hard to make an objective argument that St. X was the better team this year. They lost one game, to their biggest rival, when their starting QB broke his foot on the game's second play, and they were robbed on a spot that should have given them a first down that would have allowed them to potentially send the game into OT.

 

I think if St. X and Trinity had played 10 times this season, X would have won 7-8 of them.

The team that has the best overall season, is the team to win the championship...how could there be any reasoning but that. There cant...how can you say your season was better, when you didn't win it all? I dont get it.

Actually, one could quite easily make an argument that St. X had a better overall season. They lost fewer games, won more, had a harder schedule by far, and blew out the only team that beat them in the most lopsided contest ever in a series that includes games when Trinity was a brand new school and St. X an established power.

 

Congratulations to Trinity on their state title. They played the better game on Friday. But it's not hard to make an objective argument that St. X was the better team this year. They lost one game, to their biggest rival, when their starting QB broke his foot on the game's second play, and they were robbed on a spot that should have given them a first down that would have allowed them to potentially send the game into OT.

 

I think if St. X and Trinity had played 10 times this season, X would have won 7-8 of them.

Well there you have it folks. Finally an X man comes out and says what they all feel. "We was robbed". Your namesake took his beating from Rocky like a man, I suggest you take X's defeat by the Rocks like one as well. I'm sure years from now all the seniors on this years team will remember this season fondly and how they were the better team that let one get away to their arch rival...NOT!!! I've got a feeling that this defeat will burn in their guts for many years to come.

Actually, one could quite easily make an argument that St. X had a better overall season. They lost fewer games, won more, had a harder schedule by far, and blew out the only team that beat them in the most lopsided contest ever in a series that includes games when Trinity was a brand new school and St. X an established power.

 

Congratulations to Trinity on their state title. They played the better game on Friday. But it's not hard to make an objective argument that St. X was the better team this year. They lost one game, to their biggest rival, when their starting QB broke his foot on the game's second play, and they were robbed on a spot that should have given them a first down that would have allowed them to potentially send the game into OT.

 

I think if St. X and Trinity had played 10 times this season, X would have won 7-8 of them.

 

Spoken like a true ex-man. Let's hear it for the roosters.

St. X lost the title game. They deserved to lose it. They were outplayed by Trinity. I'm not sure if I could make that any more clear.

 

That doesn't mean that it can't reasonably be argued that St. X was the better team in 2005, especially given the mitigating circumstances in their sole loss.

 

Rockpride said he was sick of the argument that St. X had the better season, and that the argument was absurd. I say that, objectively, one could make the argument that St. X was the better team - i.e. would have won more often than Trinity if they played a series. That's all.

St. X lost the title game. They deserved to lose it. They were outplayed by Trinity. I'm not sure if I could make that any more clear.

 

That doesn't mean that it can't reasonably be argued that St. X was the better team in 2005, especially given the mitigating circumstances in their sole loss.

 

Rockpride said he was sick of the argument that St. X had the better season, and that the argument was absurd. I say that, objectively, one could make the argument that St. X was the better team - i.e. would have won more often than Trinity if they played a series. That's all.

 

 

OTOH, had X's injuries occured at the beginning of the season as Trinity's did, we may be looking at a different W-L record for X. Trinity incurred a huge amount of attrition in the beginning of the season all at one time. Usually a team can expect to lose some key players for a game or two throughout the season, maybe a couple for the entire season. We lost Mike Clark right as the season started, then Graham Switzer, and several others within the first 3 weeks of the season. I think (and anyone can chime in and correct me) we had at least 4 key players out, excluding Mike, at the time of the first X game. Truth be told, if Coach Beatty, staff and the players hadn't gone back to the drawing board, we very well could have had a disasterous season. I guess it all comes down to perspective.

Trinity

St.X

Lex. Catholic

NCC

Russell

O. Catholic

Mayfield