Basketball advantage??

[Xman85]

On this date Football powers X and T have less than stellar basketball records. X is 2-2 and Trinity is 1-4. All of both schools' losses have come at the hands of public schools. This shouldn't be happening. Afterall, X and T have all those kids to pick from. They should have a much better chance to find talent...and they can also find that talent in Indiana...across county lines ETC.....

 

And please do not try to feed me all the baloney about not needing but one or two players to be effective in basketball. It still doesn't quell the whole ..."you have more boys" ..and ..." you can get talent from anywhere" rants. If this is true then those schools would have way more than 2 or 3 talented players.

[ladiesbballcoach]

Some of the arguments used on here about publics, I guess are relevant to your question. While this would not be my opinion but those arguments thrown at publics would be T and X need to 1)find better coaches; 2)work harder; 3)have better parental and community support; 4)have a better feeder system.

 

At least those are the arguments I hear on here for the reasons publics are failing, so I guess they are the same for T and X in basketball.

[stick1]

Football and basketball are apples to oranges IMO. It's much easier to find five quality players than the 66 you could have in football including special teams.

[All Play No Work]

Some of the arguments used on here about publics, I guess are relevant to your question. While this would not be my opinion but those arguments thrown at publics would be T and X need to 1)find better coaches; 2)work harder; 3)have better parental and community support; 4)have a better feeder system.

 

At least those are the arguments I hear on here for the reasons publics are failing, so I guess they are the same for T and X in basketball.

 

 

I kind of agree with some of the above, or something else is wrong.

 

T and X should be able to roll a ball down the hall of school and have enough talent to win at least 20 games every year. I should be able to coach them and win at least 20 games a year.

Seriously, they should never have a losing season and should at least be a serious contender each year.

[Xman85]

Some of the arguments used on here about publics, I guess are relevant to your question. While this would not be my opinion but those arguments thrown at publics would be T and X need to 1)find better coaches; 2)work harder; 3)have better parental and community support; 4)have a better feeder system.

 

At least those are the arguments I hear on here for the reasons publics are failing, so I guess they are the same for T and X in basketball.

While you were attempting to be funny...I would have to say that you actually hit the nail on the head. At least on the first 3. Trinity did hire a good coach and even had players attending speed schools last year and showed improvement. X did not. They could work harder as the drive is not near as strong as football. As far as parental and community support...go look at the basketball forum and count how many X or T threads you find and then compare that to football forum. One point that you missed was getting players to come out for basketball. While football enjoys great numbers, basketball does not. At X, when I was there, the intramural teams had more talent than the school team.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I kind of agree with some of the above, or something else is wrong.

 

T and X should be able to roll a ball down the hall of school and have enough talent to win at least 20 games every year. I should be able to coach them and win at least 20 games a year.

Seriously, they should never have a losing season and should at least be a serious contender each year.

Let me first say, I have NO KNOWLEDGE WHATSOEVER OF the programs at T or X.

 

But at other schools that have successful programs in whatever sport, I have known the coaches of that sport to, let's say, NOT ENCOURAGE their players to play other sports. They would prefer offseason club/AAU teams, weightlifting, etc.

[ladiesbballcoach]

While you were attempting to be funny...I would have to say that you actually hit the nail on the head. At least on the first 3. Trinity did hire a good coach and even had players attending speed schools last year and showed improvement. X did not. They could work harder as the drive is not near as strong as football. As far as parental and community support...go look at the basketball forum and count how many X or T threads you find and then compare that to football forum. One point that you missed was getting players to come out for basketball. While football enjoys great numbers, basketball does not. At X, when I was there, the intramural teams had more talent than the school team.

Check my post out after yours and before this one for the last part of your post.

 

And my post was not meant to be funny. My sense of humor is more cornball than that.

 

Those are the points that are made for the lack of public success so it is only fair that the same criteria be used on privates in areas they are not successful. I am big on fairness of criteria used. If you don't believe, check out the thread in college sports about UK, Tubby and national championships. :thumb:

[ladiesbballcoach]

One more point....Look at the final 8 football teams. Isn't it fair to say that out of the 8, only 1, Lex Catholic has a realistic shot to compete for the state boys basketball championship this year?

[Xman85]

Let me first say, I have NO KNOWLEDGE WHATSOEVER OF the programs at T or X.

 

But at other schools that have successful programs in whatever sport, I have known the coaches of that sport to, let's say, NOT ENCOURAGE their players to play other sports. They would prefer offseason club/AAU teams, weightlifting, etc.

I can only speak of X here...but the football coaches do encourage players to play other sports. My son was encouraged to run track by his football coach. Other players are encouraged to to join the wrestling team. These are only ones that I know about. True...Track and wrestling will work on skills that can be used on the football field...but so can basketball. The footwork and the old saying "there is no shape like being in basketball shape" are examples.

[Xman85]

Check my post out after yours and before this one for the last part of your post.

 

And my post was not meant to be funny. My sense of humor is more cornball than that.

 

Those are the points that are made for the lack of public success so it is only fair that the same criteria be used on privates in areas they are not successful. I am big on fairness of criteria used. If you don't believe, check out the thread in college sports about UK, Tubby and national championships. :thumb:

:thumb: They are valid points..just the same!

[Xman85]

One more point....Look at the final 8 football teams. Isn't it fair to say that out of the 8, only 1, Lex Catholic has a realistic shot to compete for the state boys basketball championship this year?

Yes

[ladiesbballcoach]

Yes

I believe Trinity was very, very good last year, but did they not also graduate several. I don't recall exactly.

[Xman85]

I believe Trinity was very, very good last year, but did they not also graduate several. I don't recall exactly.

I can't respond with too much accuracy here...but i do believe you are right. We need a Trinity guy to verify..

[leatherneck]

Football and basketball are apples to oranges IMO. It's much easier to find five quality players than the 66 you could have in football including special teams.

 

Stick but the ability to find 5 higher quality players when you are looking at 1300 vs 200 boys simply cannot be debated logically. If you are trying to find the 5 oldest coins you can, logic tells you that if you are looking in a pile of 1300 coins the odds are you'll be able to find 5 coins that are older than if you looked in a pile of 200 coins. You may be able to find 5 old coins in the pile of 200, but odds are if you make the same effort to look, you'll find 5 even older coins in the pile of 1300.

 

The simple reason in my opinion that X and T have not won in basketball they way they've won in football is that they have not been as committment to basketball as they have to football and other schools have been more committed and their kids thus have worked harder in basketball than Xs and Ts kids have (sorry X and T fans but it is a double edged sword). Being successful in football, because you can have many, many more tuition-paying, keeping the doors open, kids on the team, just made more sense from a dollars and cents perspective than being successful in basketball because it is a sport that permitts about what, 45 kids total for the frosh, jv and varsity teams. Heck X and T have that many or more kids on their frosh football teams. Football is, putting it in its simplest form, more conducive to bringing in more kids, generating more revenue for the school and keeping the doors open. And all those alumni who played on successful football teams at X and T over the years, mean more donors to fundraising and endowment drives. If you win a state championship in basketball, you have what about 15 alumni players who are going to look back favorably on the school and be more likely to open the wallet when the school comes calling. Win a state championship in football at X or T, and you have a 100 of those alumni. Multiply that difference by the parents and other relatives supporting the players, and we are talking a lot of people willing to cough up the coinage. Smart old private school administrators figured that one out early. And the public school administrators weren't stupid, its just they weren't concerned about keeping the doors open; farthest thing from their minds, so they simply didn't look at football with the committment and priority that the Xs and Ts did.

 

It is a simple and uncontrovertible fact is that the X's, T'x, Highlands, Mayfields and Beechwoods of the state have placed a much greater emphasis on football for a much longer time than the other schools. Take Scott County. McKee appears to be a decent coach from what I know. But when did Scott County really start getting serious about football? For a long time and at a large majority of schools, basketball is what the schools really cared about and football was simply something done during the fall, if it was done at all. Off season conditioning? Forget about that. Too much work to be done on the farm. For a long time we were an agrarian society and boys were expected to help on the farm during the summer and after school (if they even continued in high school after turning 16). Football was something that was only done after the tobacco was hung in the barn. Because there really wasn't much going on on the farm during the winter, basketball did not have those impediments. It was played during the winter when there were few chores that needed to be done. Heck the moms of the kids wanted them out of the house and burning off exercise. Basketball was a natural for schools to emphasize. And Superintendents and Principals who themselves didn't play football in high school had little interest in supporting football when they took over.

 

Now with football becoming more popular (in large part due to NFL marketing in my mind) and the farm not demanding the labor time it once did, other schools are showing a greater committment to win in football and frankly are disappointed as heck that they cannot beat the aforementioned programs that have been committed to football for a long time. That frustration is what has lead to the current state of disappointing affairs.

 

Just my take on things.

[Hasbeen]

Some of the arguments used on here about publics, I guess are relevant to your question. While this would not be my opinion but those arguments thrown at publics would be T and X need to 1)find better coaches; 2)work harder; 3)have better parental and community support; 4)have a better feeder system.

 

At least those are the arguments I hear on here for the reasons publics are failing, so I guess they are the same for T and X in basketball.

 

:thumb: I've been waiting for the opportunity to point that out and you beat me to it.