oneijoe

Jeeez, guys... Prestonsburg lost by 1 and 2 points in the 2nd and 3rd games of 4 played AWAY vs. good teams in the span of 1 week. Any team would have problems with a stretch like that. It's only December... :lol:

Agreed... :thumb:

"The raw numbers mean little ... too many variables at play in teams' schedules." "Those intra-class games are not a measure of class strength. If the 10 worse Class A teams played the 10 best AA teams I would expect AA to be 10-0. Likewise, if the 10 best A teams played the 10 worst AA teams I would expect A to be 10-0." ____________________________________________________ I don't accept the info is of "no value". Why should we dismiss the only objective information dealing with this issue .... ?? I invite you both to present your own objective data instead of re-stating popularly held "opinion". Repeating the same thing over and over makes it no more true...

You really think that ?? :sssh: So then, does this also mean the thread entitled, "Could the best team in KY actually be outside of Louisville???" implies Louisville's Big 3 "isn't what it should be" ?!? Now...with that said...in '05, the Massey numbers for the first time in at least 3 yrs show 2A without a winning % advantage in intra-class games: Class...wins...losses...winning% 4A...87...49... 64% 3A...90...104.. 46% 2A...94...100.. 48% 1A...98...100.. 49% :bunny:

LOL... You can agree with westsider if you want, but you've just re-inforced MY take on it. :lol: "...there are good 2A teams that have dropped into 1A and there are good 2A teams that have moved up to 3A. There hasn't been that many drop into or move into 2A recently." This is almost EXACTLY what I was pointing out... :sssh: :thumb:

The only reason we have a "debate every year" is... many of the former 2A strong "traditional" teams are now in 1A. If one compared the Big-10 and Big-12 in college football, one would HAVE to say the Big-10 is stronger. Now, say Ohio State changed conferences to the Big-12. Would that, in and of itself, make the Big-12 stronger ?? (note: we're talking >40 teams in each size classification, ie "conference", in KY football !!) I'd say many would claim it WOULD make the Big-12 the stronger conference, though I'd suggest the truth is otherwise.....(even though yes, losing OSU would make the Big-10 "weaker than it should be"...)

Agreed... it doesn't mean anything.

:thumb: :thumb:

OK then, go on to the next part... If sports DOES motivate the student-athlete to "pass" his schoolwork at (very) minimum levels, why should it not "motivate" him to get a "C" average ?!? (the grade level that could actually be useful to the student)

In the first few replies, I'm sure you see the problem with such an open-ended poll question. If you're wanting to go back 5 yrs. and talk "top 5" vs. "top 5", I can understand the pro-1A opinions. However, if we're talking a longer period of time than that and/or "top 10" (or more), well, there is NO comparison in any year. Obviously (judging by the votes), many of the poll respondents are either young or have short memories... :lol: :lol: Good idea with bringing it up, though...interesting topics start coming in short supply this time of year !! :thumb:

It really is unfortunate. I had thought progress was being made a couple years ago. (Though this comes off partially as a shameless plug) If football was my game and I was in 8th grade, I'd seriously consider going to high school at Prestonsburg, Johnson Central, or Morgan Co.. In other words, it may be time to "abandon ship"...

VERY well said !! :thumb:

The only "winner" in this setup is the school's gate $$$... !! Perhaps I've missed something. What exactly IS this "motivation" for this kid to put effort in his classes ?? If this same "motivation" can push the kid to "pass" 3/4 of his classes, couldn't it also push him to get a college qualifying 2.0 gpa ?? Of course there is one advantage to such a low standard, the student will always have his "glory days" on which to reflect after his "unskilled labor" (read, "low wage job") workday. Don't forget..."core curriculum" classes MUST be passed to graduate. Current KHSAA standards don't make the same distinction for play eligibility. What this means is...it's possible for a student athlete to not qualify to graduate yet never lose eligibility to play. :sssh:

You were talking about 4A vs. 3A vs. 2A vs. 1A, NOT the single top 2A team vs. the single top 1A team. :sssh: LOL... why change the subject ?? It's OK, I'll bite... 2005 - slight edge to NCC 2004 - Belfry 2003 - Danville (but a better game than most think) 2002 - Breathitt 2001 - Bardstown (by a LOT) 2000 - Boyle Co. (by a LOT) and just as much 2A as anyone else that year !! 1999 - Boyle Co. over Beechwood 1998 - Middlesboro over Caldwell Co. That's 5 - 3 in favor of 2A... but like you said, "purely speculative"...

"These students would drop out of school w/out sports..." Am I the only one that sees the problem with this phrase ?!? Sports is not be a tool to keep kids in school. Rather, sports is an allowed extra for earning an average (a "C") grade in class !! :bunny:

Anything objective to support this judgement or is it another "prognostication" ?? :sssh:

Sure, "speculating" that something is true is everyone's right. Heck, "speculating" the moon was made of cheese was rather popular many years ago... :lol: Objectively though, the Win/Loss numbers between the classes have not supported your "consistent" supposition since I've been a member here. This includes the '02, '03, and '04 seasons (I don't know the '05 numbers yet).

I'm Spartacus...

Let's remember, the kids we're talking about are students first and athletes second. If "playing ball" is the only thing a given student will put effort into at school, this student does NOT need to be around his teammates (or other classmates, for that matter). A "C" average requires more effort from some than others, but is impossible only to those that shouldn't be there anyway (learning disabled, mentally handicapped, etc). I'll repeat what I said earlier...the effort required to "get the grade" will serve a student FAR more than team participation. Since so few "move on to the next level", he MUST be prepared for life - NOW !! Education is the main course. Athletics is a dessert. We all know a kid can't have cake until he's eaten dinner.

It's pretty straight-forward - the extras in high school shouldn't come until a reasonable passing standard in schoolwork is met. This has NOTHING to do with being "college bound" !! I REALLY have a problem with your last sentence. You seem to think "real meaning of what it is like to be on a team" is as important as passing classes. The MOST important thing a young person this age needs to learn is personal responsibility. Having to maintain a grade is the first REAL mandatory standard many of these student athletes have been faced with. The effort and discipline required to "make the grade" serves a borderline student far, FAR better than playing on any team ever could. And this is true in ALL ways... :bunny:

IMO, the KHSAA minimum requirement is a JOKE. I'd make it mandatory statewide a 2.0 gpa (a "C") must be maintained AND would add that NO core classes (required to graduate) may be failed. I'd use the same standard and apply it to ALL extra-curriculars (cheerleading, band, etc.). Why should a failing student be allowed to spend time on extras before spending it with his books ??

I'll probably get slammed for saying this, but... I think Kentucky football in all 4 classes is weaker at the top than we saw last year and perhaps more. :sssh:

Is that "weakest" 4A vs. 3A vs. 2A vs. 1A ??? -OR- Is that 2A in 2005 is "weaker" than it has been in recent years ??? I'll agree with one of those suppositions, but the other is just plain wrong (IMHO)....

Should I feel insulted ?!? :sssh: :lol:

"Sparky"...if you ever consider a username change, there's your new handle. :lol: