Diogenes

Whew!!! That would be a rugged schedule regardless of the size of the student body. Your point is well taken; the lower the enrollment of the school, the more difficult it is to compete. I wasn't aware that anyone in the state played a schedule more difficult than that of St. X. It appears that both Covington Catholic and St. X. duck no opponent and if possible go out of their way to build a rugged schedule. It is my belief that St. X. plays in the most difficult district in Kentucky high school football. In addition to St. X., the district features Male, Manual, PRP, Butler, and an improving Iroquois. Out of district,the Tigers meet archrival Trinity, rugged Fern Creek,and 3A powers Highlands, Lexington Catholic and Bowling Green. However,they do not meet the Ohio powers that Covington Catholic has on its schedule. By the way, I would argue that Butler, Manual, and Iroquois have a rougher road than PRP, Male or St. X. in the district because they have to play this year's "Big Three" and PRP, Male or St. X. has only the play two of the "Big Three". Excluding themselves, St. X. plays the top three teams in 4A and either the top two or three teams in 3A. I believe everyone can agree that this is an extremely impressive schedule.

Is the game on radio in Bowling Green? If so, what station?

There is one factor that I neglected to mention in this discussion of the 1990 Trinity team- they were led by coach Lampley. This is an important factor for two reasons. First, it could be argued that he was the best coach ever in Kentucky high school football. Therefore, even aside from talented players or team chemistry, it is safe to say thatTrinity should have never been outcoached that season. This would be a positive in the discussion as to whether that team was the best team to ever play Kentucky high school football. Second, in analyzing the scores I should have mentioned that although they won seven of their 14 games by two touchdowns or less, coach Lampley did not run scores up. Sometimes teams are touted as the "best ever" in part on the strength of running scores up, particularly against inferior opponents. We see that today with Coach Redmon and Coach Beatty. Lampley coached teams were uniformly well prepared, well coached, and represented their school in a classy manner.

Seven of the fourteen teams "the team considered by many to be the best in Kentucky history" played that year came within two touchdowns of "the greatest". One of those teams was 5-5, the other 5-4 (and one forfeit win).`This is a reatively lackluster record to be acclaimed the greatest. Sometimes our heart and our feelings get in the way of reality and statistics. :lol: As to the non sequitor ""something the best team from last year..."comment, relax. Not every observation about a team not being the greatest ever is an attack on the school. Remember my Copernicus rule: the universe doesn't revolve around your favorite school.

Indeed, that was a Bobby Redmon coached team. And, you are correct that Waggener was a different breed of Cat in those days. However, Doss, whom Trinity defeated 20-12 in 1990, was still a 5-5 team. All I was pointing out is that the team that RunFirst posited as considered by many the best team ever in Kentucky won four games by eight points or less, including Waggener twice. That may make Waggener the second-best team in Kentucky history, and few would argue that assertion.

Interesting post. I intend to research this issue someday when I have time.:lol: That team was an undefeated state 4A champion. However, they won four games by 8 points or less, including Waggener (twice) and Doss. The Doss team was 5-5 and lost one game 34-7.

Would you amplify?

Is it on the web, and if so do you have a link?

I have not heard anything yet about Trinity's first opponent, Montgomery Bell. Any insight on their talent this year? Who is the favorite, and, is there a potential upset?

If memory serves me correctly, and if this is the same youngster, an identical thing happened with him earlier in his career. Prior to his freshman season, in August, he was at St. X, playing linebacker. The coaches wished to move him to another position and he chose to leave the team and St. X and attend Trinity. If so, it is apparent that he really wants to play linebacker and it is a deal breaker if he is not at that position.

You may be correct about the number of returning starters. Either way, it may be a difference without a distinction. Having said all of this, and with tongue firmly in cheek, I venture to state that St. X will head down to Bowling Green, show up for the game, and tried to stumble through it in a manner that hopefully avoids abject humiliation. If X can hold the margin of defeat to within thirty-five points, would you consider the game a successful venture? By the way, this is not a sandbag free zone.

Keep an eye on the upcoming St. X versus Bowling Green opener. This game features a top ranked 3A opponent playing a top ranked 4A opponent. Generally, a 4A team would be favored over a 3A squad, if for nothing else because of the disparity in the numberof male students at the 4A school. However, this game features several interesting exceptions to the rule. 1. St. X traditionally starts the season slowly. 2. The game will be played in Bowling Green (Western Kentucky University). 3. One recent article selected the top twenty-five football players in the state this year. Of those twenty-five, three or four played for Bowling Green and one for St. X. 4. This game is a rematch of last year’s opener and Bowling Green gave St. X all they could handle before falling just short. Bowling Green returns a number of starters; St. X. returns three starters.

I would be surprised if Victor ends up at UL based on his previous analysis of the teams recruiting him, but it may be a good fit. Because of his extraordinary athleticism, I believe he could play at RB in any conference, as well as WR or DB.

Thomam, I also like your out of the box thinking. There are some kinks in this concept, though. One that immediately comes to mind is strength of schedule. All winning percentages are not equal, and some schools would undoubtedly jimmy the system to their advantage. Look at last year's Manual or St. X schedule, then look at other team's schedules from last year. Under your proposal, should Manual or St. X in the future duck the tough discretionary games they now seek out? For example, would it be to Manual's advantage to drop Trinity? Should X drop Highlands, Bowling Green, Trinity and Lex Catholic? These are all discretionary games. Year in and year out this strategy would boost Manual or St. X's winning percentage.

Vaught wrote: No touching Trinity, St. Xavier And just in case you were wondering, by some stroke of luck Trinity and St. Xavier are not in the same Class 6A district. Maybe it's fine to put programs such as Boyle and Lexington Catholic together or place Danville and Bardstown in the same district, but the KHSAA won't touch the sacred cows - Trinity and St. Xavier. If you think it is just a coincidence that these teams were placed in different districts to keep alive a chance of a Trinity-St. Xavier title game, then I want to sell you a sauna to use in this hot weather because you have to be more gullible than anyone I know. Where is Mr. Vaught coming from? If he means that the KHSAA intentionally put St. Xavier and Trinity in different districts in order to preserve a later round matchup or even a state championship game, well....yes. These two rivals in a state championship game bring in more money to the KHSAA coffers. Nothing surprising about that. On the other hand, if he is implying that either of these teams had some sort of influence in "fixing" the districts so they each would have an easier ride until the finals he couldn't be much further off. After all, if X could "fix" the district does he really think X would "fix it" by putting Male and PRP in the district with X?

Maybe somebody can explain to me what this new 6A configuration will solve. As I understand it, the problem was that Trinity and St. X were dominating in football. At the 6A level,Trinity and St. X will still dominate football. What has changed? Would we be going to 6A if there was no Trinity or St. X (or a functional equivalent)? Of course not. Well, even with 6A there is still a Trinity and still a St. X. I am open-minded about this, but I do not see that it solved the ultimate problem.

This is a point I particulerly agree on. No one owes anybody anything. Trinity played their best last year- as they should- and they won. Who would want a title if your opponent dogged it? This is a new year and a new, young team.

ttt

Any word yet?

St. X first. My sons attended there/played there and I graduated from a Xaverian Brother school. At the risk of sounding too provincial, Catholic schools in the Jefferson County area second, and also Butler high school. (My wife attended Butler and their fans and teams show a lot of class, IMO.) Third, out in the state Catholic schools because I know the sacrifices parents go through to have their child attend a Catholic school. Fourth, the Bowling Green Purples. My son informed me that when St. X played them, they were a classy team. I felt that their fans were classy in the stands. Ditto for John Hardin. I do not root against anyone, but I was sorely disappointed with the votes of the Jefferson County public schools, particularly Manual, in the recent public/private vote. I had really believed that St. X and Manual had a "special" relationship, particularly since St. X had been a good tenant for Manual over all these years. This has diminished my ability to cheer for those schools. (I am not trying to revive the public/private arguments here, just following the thread as to the schools I root for. Also, I probably need to get over my disappointment in those votes.)

Congratulations T. Interesting observation regarding facilities. It underscores a sentiment of many posters regarding the importance (or lack thereof) of facilities. The top two finishers in 3A track this year did not have a track. One 4A football team has won numerous state titles and since 1959 has a winning record against all active Jefferson County high schools and does not have a stadium. Facilities can be overrated relative to the success of a team.

CentreRocks, LSURock: Let us suppose, for argument sake, that the drawing was rigged? How does this hurt X? In all likelihood X will have to play PRP and Male to advance to a game with T (if T also gets that far). If X wins game 3, the rest should be downhill to the state title. Under the old system the road to state title would also have led through those 3 opponents. So it appears that the overall path to state should be about the same, just in a different order. With the new system X has a shot at splitting a huge pot with T for game 3. That money for X vs. T in the finals all went to the KHSAA under the old system. I am not condoning the fact that the drawing was shrouded in secrecy or even perhaps rigged. I am saying that for X and T the goal is championship, so runner-up, 3rd, 5th or whatever is not that critical. But another huge X/T playoff pot will immensely help both schools. Contrary to many posters on BGP not affiliated with private schools, money does not grow on trees and this extra money will help extend already scarce resources for each institution.

Well…permit me to play the role of the contrarian. I believe that the rule Connecticut implemented is to keep coaches who will act like jerks from running up the score. Permit me to give examples of what I believe Connecticut is attempting to avert. 1. Team A is leading team B 34-14 with five minutes to go in the fourth quarter of the state championship game. The coach of Team A keeps his first stringers in the game in an attempt to score again. What on earth is the purpose of this? Who on earth does it benefit? The second stringers on Team A, who practiced in the blazing sun during August and shivered in the cold of November do not even get in the state championship game. The team that is being blown out is further humiliated. 2. Team A is leading team B 60-0 in a playoff game. It is early in the fourth quarter and Team A keeps its starters in. Does the coach put in bench players? Does he run the ball? Does he punt on third down? Does he have his team take a knee? Of course not, he is too busy sending in deep passing plays. I have attended both games listed above and watched with disgust the late stages of the game. I am as red-blooded as the next guy, and I understand that football is a tough, brutal game. But really, this classless, boorish behavior is a stain on a great game. I really don’t know how to implement a rule penalizing teams that run up scores. Of course I agree with the sentiments expressed above when a team puts in bench players. It is improper to instruct a youngster not to perform at his highest possible level. But what I object to, and what I believe the Connecticut rule was meant to avoid is keeping 1st stringers in and mercilessly drubbing a hapless opponent. For the last three years I have watched one of the big 4A schools in Jefferson County play a hapless opponent. In each time, that school opens the game with its first string and the first stringers play their best. Once the score indicates that the game is out of reach (say 35-0 in the second quarter) then the second string comes in for this team and later the third string. Even though it is regrettable that one team is so vastly superior to the other team, these teams have to play because of district pairings. However, the dominant team wins in as classy a manner as possible. And, occasionally the score has exceeded the 50 point victory margin. I assume that no one would wish the winning team to be penalized in this type of game. However, if a penalty could be fashioned to punish coaches for keeping in first stringers and running up the score, I would not oppose it.

Hey, not bad. X fans may suggest just one tweek: swap X with Southern. Southern is geographically west of X, and it would balance the districts more evenly, putting X and T in one district and Manual, Male and PRP in another. Better yet, it would put X in the east, and further balance the state, with Manual, Male, Warren Central, Henderson, John Hardin, North Hardin, Meade, Christian, Marshall and PRP in the west and X and T in the east.

Back to the topic: Why don't you hear X and T cmplaining about the blind draw and what does that mean? People tend to analyze situations from their unique perspective. Put another way, environment matters. Many Manual fans, for example, feel that the new sitution hurts their school: Manual, while playing good football, has little chance to win a state championship in football. Manual last won a state championship in 1966. Manual now has less chance of advancing deep into the playoffs, hurting postseason monetary possibilities as well as quashing excitement at the school on the occasional year that it may have gone deep into the playoffs. St. X is helped by the new system. Most years X had to play Male, Manual or PRP in their district. This will not change. Round three this year may pit them against Trinity. Unlike the state championship game, in which all proceeds go to the KHSAA, the proceeds go to the participants here. The money is important to X because they receive no funds from the state. Also, the lack of travel in the first two rounds helps X for monetary reasons as well as the fact that even when they are playing an "away" game in Jefferson County they will generally have the larger crowd unless they're playing against Trinity in which case the crowd should match up evenly. Round three in future years gives them an opportunity to play in the Eastern region, which, recently, absent Trinity, has been the weaker region. Thus, for X, more money this year and in the future a potentially easier road to state.