Dark Horse78

Hahahaha...Male is a public private, they can and do "attract" kids that they choose. It's not a coach better, work harder, lift more issue (reference the public/private debate in other threads for a litany of arguments). If you think that is the REASON for their success then you are dazed and confused. Are those things important ingredients? Yes. But the REALITY is that Jimmy's and Joe's are 90% of the battle...the other things you mentioned are 10%. You can have the privilege of all those nice things and be average without very good players. Likewise, you can have very good players and without SOME of those things you mentioned still not win every game. Best example is Bob Redman at Male vs Bob Redman at Jeffersonville (same program philosophy, different Jimmy's and Joe's). With that said, I don't like this multiply business with kids (agree that it leaves way too many loopholes). I do not know the answer to classification, but I am pretty sure using multipliers is not it.

Neither offense scored on the other...infact, I haven't seen an offense score on another offense ever. Although, that would be fun to watch. I wanna go to the games you are attending!! :banana:

The NIT for high school football...interesting.

Easy assumption but NOT true. Here are the facts: Football has nearly 100,000 less injuries than basketball per year. According to data from the U.S. Consumer Produce Safety Commission on youth injuries treated in emergency rooms (2012). The Top 15: 1.Basketball: Over 520K 2.Bicycling: Over 450K 3.Football: Over 410K 4.Soccer: Over 200K 5.Baseball: Over 150K 6.Skateboards: Over 100K I think this can also be skewed some due to PE classes playing basketball and probably responsible for 10% of those basketball injuries...but none-the-less. I know I won't let my kids have a skateboard!!! LOL

Interesting...

Good points on coaching staff, spot on! Very difficult in rural areas to get a good coach to move there especially since rural schools often don't lose many teachers. Para pros are few and far between that have very good football knowledge unless you inherit them.

Seems to me that either will do a GREAT job!! Hope Lincoln gets who they need for the long haul.

Meade was good before coach Mattingly and they will be fine without him. Coach Mo knows what it takes to win ball games and the Greenwave will be good as usual. I am not sure they can match what they did last year, that was a special group, but no doubt Meade Co. will continue as Meade Co. always does. Good luck!

Winning is the key...but they won't give him "years" to get the wing-t in there. The last time they had a losing season was when they ran the wing-t (Delaware version) and single wing. Don't think that the parents don't remember that and believe me when I say the parents get what they want in that end of town. They scored plenty of points last year and the year before so I hope they don't change the "mentality" too much on offense (mentality has NOTHING to do with what offense you run-watched several teams go ofer last year with a hard-nosed run mentality), but defense has to get better and that is where their PHILOSOPHY has to improve. Looking forward to watching the Bruins improve under Mattingly.

Interesting I imagined Owensboro Catholic and Ft. Campbell would have made the list since Beechwood is on there...but I guess they are more related to tradition in my mind over actual perfromance the past 5 years. Good work...would be entertaining to watch for sure!

Couple of points: 1. Special needs students already count in a different way towards our state testing and accountability...in fact, it hurts a school for a special needs student to be apprenitce (0 point value for the school) vs a regular ed student who scores apprentice (1 point value for the school). Just one example of how it's not as equal as we all want it. 2. Basketball isn't classified for lots of reasons, but with that said it really is easier to find 5-7 kids that can play in a confined space, then it is 22 kids in a wide open space. Basketball does not 'require' strength to be primary component to victory (though it certainly helps), there is no leagal contact in basketball, and in reality if you have a dominant player he only needs 1 guy to inbound the ball and he can take over. Baseball...well, I don't concern myself enough with it either so why even discuss it. 3. Football has CLEAR advantages to numbers. You can sub every play and players can specialize (basketball does not have this) and focus on just offense/defense. The physicality lends itself to numbers as the fresh guy who is even remotely close to being as good as the starter has a clear advantage over the kid who plays both ways the enire game (war of attrition). Because it is a violent game, and the only one like it in boys sports played by nearly all schools (yes I am aware of LaCrosse, but few schools play), it does lend itself to bigger is better and unlike in basketball, the little schools CANNOT knock off the big boys with one dominant player. Yes you can snap it to a freak of nature at QB, but with no OL...it's famon. You can have a super start WR, RB, TE..etc. But without a QB or OL, the aformentioned will occur...a beat down. Football is the amplification of a TEAM sport, so many working parts that specialize that you gotta have the right guys to play it...unlike basketball where 1 guy really can take over and dominate...not that it doesnt help to have others who can contribute, but it is the reality.

Until VERY recently KY didn't observe dyslexia as a SPED disability. Even now it is not vastly identified...but that is changing.

The same could be said about the team right on the fringe...37-38-39....they will play the best because the just weren't bad enough. 1 win too many in 4-5 years. I do like the idea though

The issue, I think, would be that the other 1A school who could compete would be lumped in with some big schools by comparison in the 4 Classes that are left and create some travel issues with the leftovers from 1A and some 2A districts. I think it would be helpful if someone could breakdown a potential classification with that set up?? Would be interesting.

Getting closer...

Play where your numbers indicate you should play and live with it. They opened Pandora's box when they let schools "choose" what they wanted to do.

I believe he did...caught I think is the appropriate word for EKY football

Heard a coach in South Carolina say to a coach I know in KY. "I got a lot of respect for you guys. You all have to prepare like its the super bowl to win a game in that basketball state, not to mention get kids to play...hell, I just stripe a field and have 6 Division 1 kids show up along with 80 others for them to just smack around!!" If you can win at an average program (not talking about the T's-X's-Highlands-Belfry...etc of KY), you are quality in my book!

HAHAHAHA!! If so, I say Highlands and SK would beat them in close games.

If your an admin, how could you approach this? I would say that this will have a pretty significant impact on the the season...regardless of how many wins/loses there are.

No...conditioning and beating the fire out of each other in drills trying to win a district game is not the "fun" stuff I was referring to. LOL

Yes and no...I will play devils advocate here. Point: You said if we hand out opportunities in life they will expect that. Well, that's exactly how life works...everybody gets the opportunity, what they choose to do with that opportunity is eventually what determines their success. Why are the playoffs different?? We give opportunities in nearly EVERY arena in life. Life is often more about who you know, not how hard you work. This is a fantasy that we sell to young people, and there are a few exceptions to this...but the overwhelming rule is that you can work yourself to death...and never get anywhere in life. You get hired in MANY jobs in this country not by your resume, but by your last name, who your friends are, what school you attended...etc. Is the opposite true, sure...but let's be realistic. Last...how many kids stand on the sideline of a team that wins a championship and never contributes (except mom and dad's tuition check for example) to the success of the team. Sure some of them are scout team and actually help prepare the varsity...but I can think of many who are on a freshman team of 100 that don't get any clock in games, they go through drills, but they don't play, nor do they practice against the varsity to actually prepare them for any contest, and don't even dress on Friday night...but they get a ring for just showing up every day and doing a few drills before taking a knee for the rest of practice. In my book I don't call that earning, that is being along for the ride. Now with that said, I don't advocate that EVERY team should make the playoffs...but who and what constitutes "earning" success? What is the criteria? Many states use a point system to make the playoffs, and in those states you could win 7-8 games and not make the playoffs...were they not successful in winning 7-8 games? Im just playing devils advocate here and mean NO disrespect to anybody, but I think we are putting a lot of emphasis on something that has nothing to do with the other (making playoffs vs success in life). Can sports help teach young people...ABSOLUTELY! But at the end of the day it's not the 3rd world war, governing policies are not decided, and life and death is not at stake. It's a game, played by kids...period. Maybe, just maybe, we are exaggerating this a little? Just saying.

From what I have heard he may not be able to coach due to how badly he has progressed. Just didn't know if anyone else had the same info. Coach is a super guy...I pray things aren't as bad as I had heard.

I think the biggest factor is who will lead the Knights. I thought I had heard that coach Robbins had some serious health issues of some kind?

Interesting...I will have to check with my source. She was looking at IC and said he will turn 19 October of his Junior year according to his birth date in the school system.