Kirtland vs Versailles

[efarns]

Indian Hill doesn’t have much competition when it comes to income, a category you claimed was critical. Based on that, they shouldn’t be concerned about other schools stealing their talent and coaches.

Ironton wouldn’t have beaten Sycamore a few years ago if income was such a large factor.

So what makes a difference? Talent is important but the answer is COACHING!!!!!!!!

Great example of this is Hilliard Davidson. A D1 program that, under coach Brian White, won two state and five regional titles. Once he retired, the football team went to . No longer a D1 power.

Did Hilliard’s jobs, income, demographics, etc change to cause this? No. Hilliard is still a well off, family oriented area. Has the same demographics, income, etc as before. Only thing that changed was the coach.

Need another example? Take Kirtland. Always has been a family-oriented area with good schools, jobs, income, etc. But pre-Tiger, they had zero playoff wins. Once Tiger took over as coach, they became a state power.

Still need another example? This time, I’ll use Marion Local. Again, a strong middle class area with good paying blue collar jobs and strong family values. Has been that way for a long time. But before their current coach took over the program, ML had ZERO state titles. ZERO!! All of their titles and success have come under ONE coach!!!

Finally, take Wheelersburg football. In 1971, Burg lost 5 games that season. Ed Miller took over starting the 1972 season. From 1972-1979, Wheelersburg lost a total of 5 games with zero losses in five of those seasons! Did Burg’s income level dramatically change in one year? Did Burg’s demographics dramatically change? No. Only thing that changed was the coach.

You are citing coaches who coached in desirable areas who had success. Obviously, coaching is a key element. But show me a school with a state title dynasty in an economically depressed county. I'll wait.

You clearly believe economics trumps coaching. Most of your posts on this thread have been around trying to prove this, unfortunately real-life does not agree with you. Coaching is not just a key element, it is the most important element.

Nope. I don't.

[RBH23]

You are citing coaches who coached in desirable areas who had success. Obviously, coaching is a key element. But show me a school with a state title dynasty in an economically depressed county. I'll wait.

You clearly believe economics trumps coaching. Most of your posts on this thread have been around trying to prove this, unfortunately real-life does not agree with you. Coaching is not just a key element, it is the most important element.

Nope. I don't.

Then why have you spent this entire thread trying to prove that economics is more important than coaching?