From My eyes

[BDURHAM]

TheEgoHasLanded:

 

Just a minute here young whipper snapper! Hillsboro has a great coach, and it would be interesting to see what would happen if he and Quarrels switched schools for five years.

 

Different coaches thrive in different environments...as do certain athletes. Coach Aydelott has done an excellent job at Hillsboro. He has gotten players to go out for football, and stay on the team. He has also gotten them to buy into his system, etc.

 

Hillsboro was not out-coached. And I would debate you about who has the better athletes. It is much more equal than you may think.

 

East is another story...

 

Posted by TheEgoHasLanded:

Look at Maryville...they have decent athletes...but Hillsboro and East probably have better talent and athletes...they would be favored against both of those teams if they played right now.

[Edited by StanTrott on 9-11-02 9:55P]

 

[itzme]

Just one more example...Brentwood High School before Jack Daniels and after Jack Daniels came there. It's not as if great athletes just started showing up at BHS...he helped make them great, and competitive.

[TheEgoHasLanded]

I think Hillsboro has better athletes...but what about East huh no answer there?

 

What about Melrose huh? Not that great this year.

 

What about Trezevant huh? Nothing this year.

 

What about Whitehaven, Fairley, and many other memphis city schools...all are very good in football, but are not able to play at the state championship level.

[BDURHAM]

Ego:

 

Disagree with you about Hillsboro's athletes vs. Maryville. Did you see Red Bank vs. Riverdale a couple of years ago? A strong line makes a big difference...and Hillsboro doesn't have the type of line Maryville has. Team speed does not equal athletic ability. And no one knows for sure if Hillsboro had more speed than Maryville. Other than speed, what could you possibly be basing your statement on that Hillsboro had better athletes?

 

A quick test of coaching being more important than athletes: Do you think Coach Fulmer is the best active coach in college football? According to his record, he is the best.

 

 

Posted by TheEgoHasLanded:

I think Hillsboro has better athletes...but what about East huh no answer there?

 

What about Melrose huh? Not that great this year.

 

What about Trezevant huh? Nothing this year.

 

What about Whitehaven, Fairley, and many other memphis city schools...all are very good in football, but are not able to play at the state championship level.

[Edited by StanTrott on 9-12-02 7:46A]

 

[VolunteerGeneral]

Stan...hate to have to correct you, but Marshall`s coach has the best active record now.

 

VG

[Edited by VolunteerGeneral on 9-11-02 11:08P]

 

[BDURHAM]

VG:

 

You're right!

 

Bob Pruett Marshall .86250

 

Phillip Fulmer Tennessee .82609

 

A link to the stats:

http://www.ncaa.org/stats/football/coaching/coaching1a.html

 

Posted by VolunteerGeneral:

Stan...hate to have to correct you, but Marshall`s coach has the best active record now.

 

VG

[Edited by VolunteerGeneral on 9-11-02 11:08P]

[TheEgoHasLanded]

Melrose, Trezevant, East, Whitehaven all have better athletes...it comes down to coaching, and instead of people admitting that, they would rather talk about advantages private school kids have.

[BDURHAM]

Ego:

 

You mixed two arguments in your last post without logically debating either.

 

It comes down to coaching, and that is why publics don't want to play the privates?

 

And Maryville - Hillsboro is one of your examples of a the better coach winning?

 

Surely you see that this argument is flawed! The players are multiple variables and the coaches are two variables.

 

Do you think Qaurels could have done a better job coaching Hillsboro's team? I beg to differ. And more importantly, the players do factor into the equation. Coaching doesn't win all the games. Ever hear of a coach who never lost a game?

 

If your argument of "coaching makes all the difference" is true, then why don't some of the privates beat all of the publics who have sorry coaches? Put USJ up against Hillsboro and tell me what you think would happen.

 

Furthermore, to imply that all the best coaches are at private schools is flawed. There are great coaches in public schools.

 

Bear Bryant, Joe Paterno, etc. never won every game. Is there a private school coach who has not lost a game to a public school? I conjecture that many private schools coach's TEAMS have lost to teams (private and public) who were not as well coached.

 

There are other doucumented issues involved in the public-private debate. Public schools don't want to play Ezell because they are afraid of their coach. The players and how the program is developed are at the center of the debate.

 

 

 

Posted by TheEgoHasLanded:

Melrose, Trezevant, East, Whitehaven all have better athletes...it comes down to coaching, and instead of people admitting that, they would rather talk about advantages private school kids have.

[Chakra20]

I dont think anyone is afraid of Ezell's Coach. Nest year they are playing Good PAsture and David Lipscomb If My sources are correst which prolly means they will play a total of 3 public schools all year. So they are almost done playin public schools.

 

The point of my thread was that private schools cycles are faster then public schools. Where a private school may be good every 3 or 4 years publics are good every ten and thats where u see a disparity. All this talk about coaching and so forth, while very true also takes way from the point that they get better athletes on a regular basis. But dont use that as a crutch strive to be better not point fingers at others and say that the reason we cant win.

 

All your doing is teaching bad habitsx and things this country was not founded on.

[TheEgoHasLanded]

Maryville Hillsboro comes down to better coaching...Maryville wins.

 

Melrose, Whitehaven, Trezevant, East are all more athletic then Maryville...yet Maryville wins...comes down to coaching.

 

 

Yes I do think Quarrels would have done a better job if he had coached Hillsboro.

 

I never said all the best coaches were at privates...I might have implied that coaching at private schools is better on the whole, then at public schools...but anything else was just you infering something incorrectly.

 

USJ versus Hillsboro? I don't know where that came from, but a 1A school should never have to go up against a 4A school, and I have no idea where you got that, but for the sake of the argument let us look at that real quickly.

 

Briarcrest versus Kingsbury last year...Briarcrest won, Kingsbury had Division 1 players and some of them now play for UT (Like Laron Harris I think). Harding versus White Station...Harding wins 31-0...White Station had much better athletes...Harding and Briarcrest had superior coaching and destroyed those teams.

CBHS versus Melrose...CBHS wins in front of about 20,000 at liberty bowl stadium.

 

I can keep going...StannTrott out of all the people who add to the debate, you seem to get mixed up more then anyone else, you also have not been on this board (or have been on vacation) and I have only had the liberty of reading your posts for the last 4 weeks or so.

 

I fully admit that I am not near any rural 1a schools, so I can not sympathize or understand them.

 

But I do live near Maryville/ Alcoa and have seen them play now, I also lived in Memphis for 18 years, and understand that athletes will not make you win every game...

 

This debate is only happening because private schools continue to destroy small public schools...most of the public schools (besides Cloudland, Collinwood, Gordonsville etc.) aren't very good in the first place, and instead of taking responsibility, they choose to blame their lack of success on private schools.

 

I didn't go to a 1a private school, instead I went to a d2 school, I don't have a kid or brother at a 1a private school or any friends at them for that matter, I try to look at this logically and I find no evidence that can fully show that privates have distinct advantages that make them better then small 1a rural schools.

 

People keep talking about how easy it is to reload at private schools...CPA is 0-2 and could easily be 0-3 after this week...considering two years ago they were one of the best teams in the state, I just don't understand that argument...going from 15-0 to 0-3 in two years doesn't look like reloading to me.

 

I could go on and on and give facts like no private school has one more then one state championship...or that publics won 7 out of 10 state titles in the 90's...or many other highly developed arguments, but you guys would just over look it, choose not to respond, or attack me again.

 

I never knew about this debate until about 6 months ago, and I was very impartial to say the least...in fact I probably sided with the publics more due to the fact my school lost to USJ and Fayette Academy but after reviewing it and constantly thinking about it, there is no evidence that proves what you guys say is true, therefore I dismiss it, and spend most of my time trying to come up with more arguments that will solidify my stance, but that doesn't seem to work.

[BDURHAM]

Ego:

 

I am debating this issue for several reasons, and what started this debate is the separation of the pubics and privates. In simplistic terms, the large public schools spearheaded the split because they didn't want to keep losing to Brentwood Academy. Many people say it was one coach in particular who didn't want to play BA in championship games that was the major force in the split.

 

If disparity existed between large public schools and privates schools, it is reasonable to assume the disparity exists in the smaller schools as well. Moreover, I would say the disparity is greater in the smaller classificiations.

 

And I would disagree with you regarding your assumption that most small public schools are not very good at football. There are plenty of large public schools that are presently not real good, but it goes up and down.

 

One more comment: you must not have any knowledge of Hillsboro's coach and their program. But I agree to disagree with you, and I have asked a Maryville resident to post some comments. He may agree with you, I don't know. But Hillsboro was not out-coached by Maryville in my opinion. Of all your points, I disagree with this one the most, but I will stop commenting on it.

 

 

 

You wrote:

This debate is only happening because private schools continue to destroy small public schools...most of the public schools (besides Cloudland, Collinwood, Gordonsville etc.) aren't very good in the first place, and instead of taking responsibility, they choose to blame their lack of success on private schools

[TheEgoHasLanded]

Yeah I did write that...if the small rural public schools were beating the privates we would not have this argument at all! I am done with this thread, it has gotten us no where...and I do think Hillsboro was beat on the offensive and defensive line in the fourth quarter and outcoached...

 

If you think that the best coaches are coaching at public schools then thats fine...but look at Ezell...don't they have a solid coach, what about Marley over at USJ, Goodpasture, Lipscomb, CPA, all have great coaches!

 

I am not going to say that Coaching is the only thing...only a fool would say that, talent, experience, luck, and a few other things are needed but COACHING brings them all together.

 

As I stated earlier, I am done with this thread, I take it you have never heard of MUS basketball, because if you have, then you would understand...perhaps you have seen Lipscomb play before? They prove that you don't have to be the biggest or the toughest,but coaching will get you very far...