|
|
Post by julien on Mar 13, 2009 10:09:02 GMT -6
Reading this site for month now, I wonder if there is a real difference of game level between the different states?
An if it's the case how do you explain that?
My question may seems silly to you guys but the more I learn from coachhuey.com the more I have questions for you...
Not to say that I am slow to understand but you know I am French and a lot of the concept described here are new to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Mar 13, 2009 10:12:54 GMT -6
at the very top probably not, other than we play by NCAA rules
once you get to second tier teams from each state, I would think the ones in Texas would be a lot farther along for a variety of reasons
|
|
|
|
Post by jpdaley25 on Mar 13, 2009 10:15:57 GMT -6
If you are from TX, Texas is better. If you are from Ga, Georgia is better. If you are from Fla, Florida is better. If you are from Ala, Alabama is better. If you are from the South, the South is better - etc. etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Mar 13, 2009 10:18:58 GMT -6
at the very top probably not, other than we play by NCAA rules once you get to second tier teams from each state, I would think the ones in Texas would be a lot farther along for a variety of reasons Thats about the best answer you will get. |
|
|
|
Post by coachbleu on Mar 13, 2009 10:28:32 GMT -6
I agree that the top tier schools in most states would be very competitive. However, the emphasis on football in the south and especially in TX probably results in better football. Also, the talent level in the south is better than a lot of places. Look at the amount of "athletes" that come out of LA, MS, AL and FL as compared to other states, then look at their population densities. Nobody lives there! Most states have at least one city with more people than the entire state of MS.
|
|
|
|
Post by fatkicker on Mar 13, 2009 10:35:20 GMT -6
chances are if the mississippi 5A champ and the vermont 5A champ play then there's gonna be a killin'..........
cept maybe in sokker......
|
|
|
|
Post by julien on Mar 13, 2009 10:48:29 GMT -6
once you get to second tier teams from each state, I would think the ones in Texas would be a lot farther along for a variety of reasons What kind of reasons? Population could not explain that, right? |
|
|
|
Post by John Knight on Mar 13, 2009 10:55:18 GMT -6
Ohio is by far the BEST!!!!!!!!
LOL!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by gdoggwr on Mar 13, 2009 10:57:01 GMT -6
Julien,
From one of the states that Tx is better than... the biggest difference is the level of preparation. states such as Texas have year round athletic periods to work on X's and O's, and have the opportunity to put the pads on in the spring for spring football. This makes a huge difference in the players understanding of the game, and their preparedness at the beginning of the season. I would venture a guess that there isn't a huge difference in athletic ability (please, no need to point out all of the exceptions to the last statement guys, I know its a gross oversimplification), but there is a HUGE difference in the ability to prepare for a season between states like Texas and say, Kansas.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Mar 13, 2009 11:06:37 GMT -6
read most all of the issues in the general board dealing with getting kids to offseason to lift and other things of that nature
we don't have that problem
we have other's
but having athletic periods means we get and keep the kids
|
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Mar 13, 2009 11:09:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Mar 13, 2009 11:59:15 GMT -6
There are a lot of factors. How the school district views athletics, how the parents view athletics, how the teachers union views athletics, and even geography. In my state things have always been very bad. The school district views athletics as a waste of money. The parents don’t take much interest so it hard to use the parents to put pressure on the kids. The teachers union views coaching positions as simply an extra source of income rather than a profession and as a result we end up with some bad coaches. And geographically we have extremely long winters that make training difficult. While we do have indoor training facilities that were built in part with tax payer money under the guise of "our young athletes need places to train in the winter" you would have to move heaven and earth to get the school districts to pony up one dime to use the facilities even at an extremely discounted rate.
Now Texas on the other hand oh that is Shangri-La. Coaches are coaches and not history teachers trying to pad their income. The parents live eat breathe and die football (yes I know that can also be a problem), and its warm year round making training a hell of a lot easier.
|
|
|
|
Post by julien on Mar 13, 2009 12:30:30 GMT -6
hey, thanx Brophy!
I believe it help me a lot to understand football & american society.
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Mar 13, 2009 13:29:00 GMT -6
Coaches are coaches and not history teachers trying to pad their income. unless a ad/hc (95%) or very few coordinators all of us teach too |
|
zbessac
Sophomore Member
Posts: 149
|
Post by zbessac on Mar 13, 2009 17:07:59 GMT -6
I think that part of the reason that certain states are better than other states is that the rules are not always the same. In my state we don't have spring football and we are also very limited on the amount of time that we can spend with our players year round. In other states they are allowed ALOT of contact with their players.
|
|
aggie8
Sophomore Member
Posts: 102
|
Post by aggie8 on Mar 13, 2009 17:30:13 GMT -6
Football is so HUGE in Texas. The top teams in the other states are probably comparable but I think the difference is in the smaller schools.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Mar 13, 2009 18:07:49 GMT -6
Coaches are coaches and not history teachers trying to pad their income. unless a ad/hc (95%) or very few coordinators all of us teach too I think what he meant was that in TX, the COACHES are real coaches. They are the guys that have 1,500 posts on this board. They are the guys who realize Football is year round. They realize that come August, the days are very long until November. In other places..sometimes you find coaches doing it for the stipend, or because they are NEEDED, rather than because they want to coach. |
|
|
|
Post by dg1694 on Mar 13, 2009 18:24:05 GMT -6
One thing I do know is that the commitment to football in Texas is huge. Some examples:
- I was able, in the offseason, to spend infinitely more offseason time with kids coaching TX HS football than when I was coaching in college. Also, as a coordinator, I had 1 PE class per day.
- A prominent school district I know of will hire substitutes for ALL coaches on MOndays during the playoffs so that staffs can gameplan.
- Just today, an NFL proday with scouts from more I was at was in jeopardy because of the weather. The solution: a local 3A high school's indoor practice facility
|
|
|
|
Post by tog on Mar 13, 2009 21:23:55 GMT -6
unless a ad/hc (95%) or very few coordinators all of us teach too I think what he meant was that in TX, the COACHES are real coaches. They are the guys that have 1,500 posts on this board. They are the guys who realize Football is year round. They realize that come August, the days are very long until November. In other places..sometimes you find coaches doing it for the stipend, or because they are NEEDED, rather than because they want to coach. yeah 50 we got the kind he was talking about too though guys that have to back up to the pay window to get the paycheck generally it is for their teaching and coaching stipend good news is they don't last in good programs very long if they can ever get to em in the first place |
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on Mar 14, 2009 8:05:38 GMT -6
I coach youth football in Texas. And, sometimes, I get worried about football's future in our state at youth level. The 'Wussification of America' seems to have spread its sickness into our state, also.
I try not to look at the past with rose-colored glasses. The bad attitudes aren't everywhere. Maybe I'm just over-reacting. But, the general attitude of some of the kids and parents that I've seen playing on my teams, other teams and, other leagues is getting to bother me and other youth coaches.
|
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Mar 14, 2009 8:42:59 GMT -6
- Just today, an NFL proday with scouts from more I was at was in jeopardy because of the weather. The solution: a local 3A high school's indoor practice facility That about sums it up. There are a few schools in PA, the biggest mind you, that are starting to get indoor facilities. But is is very very rare here and I think it's still a pretty big football state and is taken seriously here. And I know other schools are getting them in other states but Texas is in another universe, it's almost like a level between HS and College ball. Isn't there a Texas HS stadium website somewhere? I remember seeing something like 15 or 20 HS stadiums that seat over 15,000 people. Unreal. |
|
cmpd
Sophomore Member
Posts: 136
|
Post by cmpd on Mar 14, 2009 8:54:06 GMT -6
I live in Vermont, I can tell you that the top team in this state would get killed by almost any other state. Every year some of the top teams in the sate travel to NH or Mass. to play and they get killed. Also we have a shrine game to fund raise money for the shriners hospital . This game puts the top talent in VT against the top in NH, lets just say we don't fair well. 7 wins in 47 games. Up here hockey and soccer are the top two sports followed by basketball. A lot of school up here don' t have a football team. In the south, and other states for that matter, football is "the sport to play". Another reason I believe some regions are better than other is the population. Again since I now live in VT, there is only 610,000 people in the state there are small cities in this country with more people, we have a smaller talent pool.
I feel confident in saying this because couple of weeks ago I was surprised at the speed that some people were posting for their athletes , on our team our two running backs place 1st and 4th in the 100m and 200m in track the previous season, I could say with confidence that we had the fastest backfield in the state. Both of them run a 4.7 forty. According to the responses I got from some coaches they would not see much action. One coach mentioned that they would be blocking for them.
I coach in a pretty good program and the school does not even put any money into the program other than 2 or 3 coaching positions. We have to fund raise just to have a program. All the other sports get what they need from the school. We have three divisions and 34 teams, a handful of them have had their program for 5 or less years and even more that came on board this decade.
The last reason I can think of is that with this small population you get a lot of three sport athletes, so no focuses on a sport. Truthfully a lot of programs would not have the number to compete if it was not for these kids.
I am sure the story is similar in other states. I just looked at the other boards that Brophy referred to they are very interesting.
Sorry for the long post I guess I had more to say than I thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by pegleg on Mar 14, 2009 9:16:33 GMT -6
Here is how I sum up this thread.
When I read the threads about athletic periods and weekend time and things like that, I dont' get it. I mean I understand that not everyone has what we have in TX, but that is completely foreign to me. I've never been in a school without an athletic period and we work 7 days a week. I can't imagine how to run a football program without those things. That's the biggest difference to me, the commitment of everyone involved.
As for facilities, I've never had an indoor, but they are everywhere. Stadiums, however are all huge. I would guess the number of 15,000+ seat stadiums is closer to 100. I know there are 15 or so within 20 miles of my house. And our home stadium seats 20,000. We played 6-8 games this year in front of 10,000+, home and away.
|
|
mont
Junior Member
Posts: 322
|
Post by mont on Mar 14, 2009 9:34:18 GMT -6
In NY football is not as important as it is down south. I think alot has to do with the school districts committment to the game. I know there are alot of dedicated year round coaches but we don't have the huge stadiums and the indoor field houses like you see down south (although we should as the weather sucks here).
I wish it were as big up here, we seem to play less games each year and basketball seems to start earlier and earlier!!
Oh well.
|
|
|
|
Post by justryn2 on Mar 14, 2009 9:52:44 GMT -6
I played HS football in Texas but now live in Illinois where my son plays for his HS team. A few weeks ago I spoke to a friend of mine, who happens to be on the school board, concerned that my son's team didn't seem to be putting in the time necessary to improve. He told me that he actually hears more parent complaints about the team requiring TOO MUCH TIME from the players.
I'm fairly certain that "average" TX HS football teams would be exceptional in many other states and it's probably because of the commitment of the entire community. If its still like it was a bizzilion years ago when I played, support for, and commitment to the local high school football team comes from the players, their parents, the school's teachers and administrators, and the entire town. Unfortunately, its just not like that everywhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by mahonz on Mar 14, 2009 11:50:13 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by rpetrie on Mar 14, 2009 12:23:59 GMT -6
Here is how I sum up this thread. When I read the threads about athletic periods and weekend time and things like that, I dont' get it. I mean I understand that not everyone has what we have in TX, but that is completely foreign to me. I've never been in a school without an athletic period and we work 7 days a week. I can't imagine how to run a football program without those things. That's the biggest difference to me, the commitment of everyone involved. As for facilities, I've never had an indoor, but they are everywhere. Stadiums, however are all huge. I would guess the number of 15,000+ seat stadiums is closer to 100. I know there are 15 or so within 20 miles of my house. And our home stadium seats 20,000. We played 6-8 games this year in front of 10,000+, home and away. I have NEVER heard of an athletic period where a coach can take his athletes and work with them DURING the school day. Perhaps I am in the dark on that one. Our facilities are mediocre at best, and there is no fieldhouse. For home games we stay in our endzone area...we don't travel back to the locker room. It's simply not condusive to team functions. While I do like grass, many schools are switching to field turf. We don't have lights so all games are on Saturday afternoons @ 1 or 2, with JV games also on Saturdays at 9AM. I'm in NY now, but orgininally from VA, which in my opinion has top rate football...on par with most of the other states mentioned. The biggest difference in my opinion is the committment from the kids. In the south there is less to compete with football in the fall. Up north they play soccer in the fall, and the other sports available are endless... there is lacrosse, hockey, bowling, fencing, badminton, swimming, gymnastics, boy's volleyball, basketball, x-country, track (winter/spring), golf, tennis, baseball & wrestling. I might even be forgetting one or two. It's madness and coaches often battle for kids...it really drains the talent pool, and when a coach pushes specialization within their sport it hurts even more. I liked it more when the options were simply football, basketball, wrestling, baseball, track. Good coaches are good coaches. They put the time in necessary and teach good skills. I would just say that the resources are better in your traditional football states and the EXPECTATION to play football is greater within those states as well, so kids gravitate to the program/sport more naturally. I'd also have to say the presence of "high quality" college programs also influences the High School participation. lots of ramblings....forgive me...my hs is best known for having the Guinness Book WR for longest consecutive scholastic win streak in sports...unfortunately the sport is badminton. ???Tough trying to convert that mentality.  |
|
|
|
Post by defensiveminded on Mar 14, 2009 14:08:05 GMT -6
There are some very good programs in other states. But graded on the whole state Texas far surpasses all the others.
|
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Mar 14, 2009 15:18:52 GMT -6
As for facilities, I've never had an indoor, but they are everywhere. Stadiums, however are all huge. I would guess the number of 15,000+ seat stadiums is closer to 100. I know there are 15 or so within 20 miles of my house. And our home stadium seats 20,000. We played 6-8 games this year in front of 10,000+, home and away. Was just going off the info on this site: www.texasbob.com/football/That alone should tell you something...there is a web site just for the stadiums of high school football in Texas! Also interesting there are about 75 schools listed as having video replay score boards. |
|
mase04
Probationary Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by mase04 on Mar 15, 2009 10:16:21 GMT -6
Recruiting statistics may just tell you where the 'best players' are or the 'best talent' and may not necessarily be a reflection of the 'best football.' How can one determine 'who plays the best football?' Good question - and one with probably a myriad of reponses. Several in this thread have mentioned that perhaps 'depth' is the key. As in, the 2nd and 3rd tier teams from a state may be a better indication of the overall 'quality' of football in the state. I would guess that 2nd tier teams from Texas, Florida, and California are probably significantly better than 2nd and 3rd tier teams from other states. Again, this is just an opinion based on very unscientific research (as in, none) by me.  |
|
