|
Post by davecisar on Feb 7, 2010 12:30:40 GMT -6
Here is a nice article from the Tulsa World on where DI football players come from: www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=96&articleid=20100129_222_0_WhenOk719881It also rates states per capita in DI players Dallas Ft Worth- 629 kids in DI one of every 20 kids playing DI in the US is from DFW- UNREAL Top states per Capita: Hawaii, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Florida, Mississippi, Ohio, Nebraska At the bottom- Main, Vermont, Rhode Island, South Dakota My state- Nebraska #9 Per Capita Omaha #28 as a City
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Feb 7, 2010 17:08:19 GMT -6
Here is a nice article from the Tulsa World on where DI football players come from: www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=96&articleid=20100129_222_0_WhenOk719881It also rates states per capita in DI players Dallas Ft Worth- 629 kids in DI one of every 20 kids playing DI in the US is from DFW- UNREAL Top states per Capita: Hawaii, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Florida, Mississippi, Ohio, Nebraska At the bottom- Main, Vermont, Rhode Island, South Dakota My state- Nebraska #9 Per Capita Omaha #28 as a City Would be interesting to see that info over time. I wonder if LA will be dropping as they have just cut 5 days of spring football as well as spring games against other opponents.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 7, 2010 17:19:38 GMT -6
You think it is the 5 days that creates the DI athletes?
LA / TX /gulf south is over flowing with athletic (genetic) talent....which is what DI talent actually is
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Feb 8, 2010 4:00:27 GMT -6
Some of this has to be cultural, work ethic, expectations, desire, understanding sacrifice and what it takes to get it done.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Feb 8, 2010 7:47:37 GMT -6
What I find very interesting is how it is so very rare for teams from any of the top -6-7 states with the exception of California and Florida - youth teams winning National Titles. There are lots of AYF, Pop Warner and even unlimited National Championships like NYFC- you just dont see teams from there winning titles or doing real well at all.
Lots of teams from maryland, virginia, Illinois, and elsewhere winning those big tournaments. You just dont see any of the texas, louisiana, georgia, alabama etc doing very well.
The difference may have something to do with the quality of coaching and time investment Up north we dont have athletic periods or spring football and most football coaches dont have all the planning periods and big $$ like they have in Texas and other southern states. May be a contributing factor, because early on in youth football, there really is not a huge difference, where you think genetics would be a HUGE factor. Ive brought teams to Florida, and played teams from Georgia, Florida etc, not a big deal early on. But at the HS level- definitely a difference.
|
|
|
Post by mariner42 on Feb 8, 2010 10:27:54 GMT -6
I'll second TDM. Football culture down south is a completely different animal than most places around the country. That's how so many of their guys end up at DI places, I dunno that I necessarily buy Brophy's genetics argument.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 10:36:52 GMT -6
yes, culture plays a BIG part of it (and may beget another question ...."what degree should be the standard?"......i.e. if the South sets the standard, then why do Northern schools lack the commitment to it / if the North sets the standard, why does the South go so overboard?" Being a 6'3 - 6", 215 - 280 lbs player that is explosive, THAT is genetics. That is something no coaching or prodding will 'develop'. I think the 'genetics' argument is somewhat lazy, always deflating, but it is what it is - and genetic freaks are what (90%) DI athletes ARE. As ridiculous as the Lane Kiffin 9th grader situation is, the majority of DI prospects ARE DI caliber in those years (many will wash out, but there aren't many DI prospects that wake up when they are 17 and all of a sudden have lifted their way to being a 300lbs power cleaning behemoth). I've coached DI kids.........and I can unequivocally attest that there is NOTHING we did, as coaches, to 'make' any of them DI talents. This is an interesting article presented and continues a quandry we've had many times on this site over the past 5 years (US football cultures/athletes) former discussion on this here
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Feb 8, 2010 11:30:27 GMT -6
I'll second TDM. Football culture down south is a completely different animal than most places around the country. That's how so many of their guys end up at DI places, I dunno that I necessarily buy Brophy's genetics argument. I think there are a lot more factors than just the community/culture involved in this. If you look at the top 10 states for D-1 talent I think 8 or 9 of them are top 10 in population as well. It's kind of a numbers thing really the more people you have the more chances of having good athletes. I don't think you can pin it down to just the south, look at Ohio, PA, and IL they seem to keep producing D-1 talent in the north. If you don't buy the genetics argument then I guess you have never watched a D-1 school up close. These guys are freaks. They sure didn't get that way from having a nice facility or spring ball, they were born that way. You can open a whole can of worms with this argument but Chris Rock breaks it down pretty good in one of his stand up routines. I am sure you can find it online somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by davecisar on Feb 8, 2010 11:45:58 GMT -6
I'll second TDM. Football culture down south is a completely different animal than most places around the country. That's how so many of their guys end up at DI places, I dunno that I necessarily buy Brophy's genetics argument. I think there are a lot more factors than just the community/culture involved in this. If you look at the top 10 states for D-1 talent I think 8 or 9 of them are top 10 in population as well. It's kind of a numbers thing really the more people you have the more chances of having good athletes. I don't think you can pin it down to just the south, look at Ohio, PA, and IL they seem to keep producing D-1 talent in the north. If you don't buy the genetics argument then I guess you have never watched a D-1 school up close. These guys are freaks. They sure didn't get that way from having a nice facility or spring ball, they were born that way. You can open a whole can of worms with this argument but Chris Rock breaks it down pretty good in one of his stand up routines. I am sure you can find it online somewhere. Of course high population areas produce more DI kids, that is why the study I cited was broken down PER CAPITA.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 8, 2010 12:17:53 GMT -6
Good information; I always assumed they came from test tubes.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Feb 8, 2010 12:28:06 GMT -6
Being a 6'3 - 6", 215 - 280 lbs player that is explosive, THAT is genetics. That is something no coaching or prodding will 'develop'. I think the 'genetics' argument is somewhat lazy, always deflating, but it is what it is - and genetic freaks are what (90%) DI athletes ARE. I really disagree with that having to do with state levels. I think that dollars to donuts its simply recruiting budgets. I coach in Alaska. We have had some truly great players who never once got recruited. I look at the pop Warner scores from just a few years ago. Our 13-14 yearl odl Pop Warner team crushed the Naperville IL, team 32-0. Now I lived in Naperville I know {censored} well the powerhouses those 2 High schools are. I also trained with a few of their best players as my training partner did strength work with their players and he would invite his elite players into our little circle of powerlifters and bodybuilders to train with the big boys. So I know full well just how talented they are. Now all of this kids I trained with had D1 offers. Now what happened to the kids that beat Naperville 32-0 three years later when they graduated from High School. Not a one of them got a serious look and I can tell you from experience that they were just as talented as the kids I trained with in Naperville. In the end I think it comes down to recruiting budget. The elite schools have the pick of the litter locally so they don’t look far outside of their area except for the 5 star elite recruits and the Midmajors have limited recruiting budgets so they don’t have the money to look far outside of their area. The lest player we had get a D1 offer got it because his parrents could afford to send him to an Oregon St. camp and Oregon St. saw him and offered. We had at least 4 other guys in that senior class who were just as tallented. But we come from a mostly poor area and most of our players cant afford to go to outside camps to get noticed. I'll tell you its down right frustrating. You know that you have talent and that your kids should be going some place but getting schools to give them a look since you are so far outside of their region is like beating your head against a wall. As a general rule an Alaskan player will go to a school if he goes to a school that is at least 1 level below his tallent level. This Kid doesn't have a sinlge offer ATM I saw that football island thing and it was a total joke. If BYU Hawaii or a few of the Pac 10 teams that look that far doesn’t pick those kids up they don’t really get a look in American Samoa. Its the Samoans that are from LA that make up the NFL roster mostly I played flag football with this 19 year old kid from American Samoa who was an absolute freek just as good of a pass rusher as some of the guys I've blocked who got a shot at the pros actually better in some cases and 4 years younger. He should have gone D1 easy but he never got recruited. Troy or any other midmajor really could have used him.
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Feb 8, 2010 16:33:53 GMT -6
WE HAd 7 KIDS LIFT TODAY....culture has everything to do with it.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 17:50:22 GMT -6
Kids lifting isn't what makes a DI caliber athlete, though.
Look at DI rosters, visit their practices. Those athletes aren't 'normal' teenagers (and may help to take your HS kids to see them up-close to give them a dose of reality). DI athletes have the bodies of most grown men (there is no question if a kid is a college football player or not).
I understand there are kids who you would go to war with and are the epitome of a HS football player. That isn't the (necessarily) definition of a DI scholarship athlete.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Feb 8, 2010 18:09:12 GMT -6
Kids lifting isn't what makes a DI caliber athlete, though. Look at DI rosters, visit their practices. Those athletes aren't 'normal' teenagers (and may help to take your HS kids to see them up-close to give them a dose of reality). DI athletes have the bodies of most grown men (there is no question if a kid is a college football player or not). I understand there are kids who you would go to war with and are the epitome of a HS football player. That isn't the (necessarily) definition of a DI scholarship athlete. But what does that have to do with what state they come from? There are more manchilds nationally than there are D1 players. I've got a 6'3" manchild Samoan MLB who is built like the Rock that isn't being recruited because he is from Alaska.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Feb 8, 2010 18:12:44 GMT -6
Kids lifting isn't what makes a DI caliber athlete, though. Look at DI rosters, visit their practices. Those athletes aren't 'normal' teenagers (and may help to take your HS kids to see them up-close to give them a dose of reality). DI athletes have the bodies of most grown men (there is no question if a kid is a college football player or not). I understand there are kids who you would go to war with and are the epitome of a HS football player. That isn't the (necessarily) definition of a DI scholarship athlete. But what does that have to do with what state they come from? There are more manchilds nationally than there are D1 players. I've got a 6'3" manchild Samoan MLB who is built like the Rock that isn't being recruited because he is from Alaska. He's not being recruited because he's from Alaska? College coaches have seen him on film and they've told you this?
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Feb 8, 2010 18:17:13 GMT -6
He's not being recruited because he's from Alaska? College coaches have seen him on film and they've told you this? We do everything we can but the fact of the matter is no scout is going to come up here and if they cant see him in person they aren't gonig to make an offer. You cant drive to Alaska. Well you can but it takes a week and a half. And south west dont fly up here.
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Feb 8, 2010 18:26:38 GMT -6
He's not being recruited because he's from Alaska? College coaches have seen him on film and they've told you this? We do everything we can but the fact of the matter is no scout is going to come up here and if they cant see him in person they aren't gonig to make an offer. You cant drive to Alaska. Well you can but it takes a week and a half. And south west dont fly up here. So what schools have seen film of this kid?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 18:28:30 GMT -6
Could be, you may be right (I'm not here to disqualify your belief).
Are you suggesting that there is an equal number of bonafide DI kids across the Nation, but the regional, per capita dominance as the article articulates, is based on staffs not willing to travel?
To temper this discussion, I'd offer this as a general rule, the metric always seems to come down to; 1 ACT scores (GPA is all relative - can this kid hack college academics?)
2 Ht/Wt measurables (is this kid a dominant physical specimen?)
3 Explosiveness / speed (is he over and above the top flight athleticism in the country?)
4 Athletic ceiling (has this kid already peaked? Will he grow more?)
5 Can I trust this kid? (Or will he spoil the opportunity by being a knuckle head?)
I've seen lots of players who probably could compete at DI level but fail any one of those metrics (pretty much disqualifying him from scholarship consideration)_
|
|
|
Post by fballcoachg on Feb 8, 2010 19:12:06 GMT -6
Not discrediting your opinion on the player from Alaska but Bowling Green went up there for Cole Magner who wound up being a pretty good ball player. I would assume several mid majors would consider the risk for a hidden gem.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Feb 8, 2010 19:52:51 GMT -6
Are you suggesting that there is an equal number of bonafide DI kids across the Nation, but the regional, per capita dominance as the article articulates, is based on staffs not willing to travel? I would say that you see staffs relying more on independent ranking systems and agencies these days and not relying as much on their own leg work as they use to. But all and all I think it is the economics that makes it largely regional. Teams stick for the most part to their region. The elite teams have the pick of the litter in their region and no need to travel all over the country looking for gems and the middling teams don't have the recruiting budgets to travel much outside of their region. So if you are from outside of anyones region and don't have the money to go to camps and increase your visibility you are screwed.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Feb 8, 2010 19:56:59 GMT -6
Not discrediting your opinion on the player from Alaska but Bowling Green went up there for Cole Magner who wound up being a pretty good ball player. I would assume several mid majors would consider the risk for a hidden gem. If memory serves me right Cole got noticed because he could afford to go to camps in the lower 48. Much like our last D1 player from our school. But a plane ticket from Alaska aint cheep and many of our players cant afford it. Cole was a QB and Justin who's youtube is above had a similar season to Coles but cant afford to go to camps.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 20:13:57 GMT -6
Teams stick for the most part to their region. So if you are from outside of anyones region and don't have the money to go to camps and increase your visibility you are screwed. hey, I appreciate your contributions. I'm certainly not breaking balls here or even challenging you here - but here is a question... How does that relate to the regional "per capita" dominance argument that the article is suggesting? Does LA / TX just have a greater DI saturation (more DI schools in a region = more DI athletes regionally)? Or, if your assertion is correct, how else are you accounting for the regional numbers (why some areas have more than others)?
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 20:15:12 GMT -6
Dp
|
|
|
Post by headtrip on Feb 8, 2010 20:47:41 GMT -6
What I find very interesting is how it is so very rare for teams from any of the top -6-7 states with the exception of California and Florida - youth teams winning National Titles. There are lots of AYF, Pop Warner and even unlimited National Championships like NYFC- you just dont see teams from there winning titles or doing real well at all. Lots of teams from maryland, virginia, Illinois, and elsewhere winning those big tournaments. You just dont see any of the texas, louisiana, georgia, alabama etc doing very well. The difference may have something to do with the quality of coaching and time investment Up north we dont have athletic periods or spring football and most football coaches dont have all the planning periods and big $$ like they have in Texas and other southern states. May be a contributing factor, because early on in youth football, there really is not a huge difference, where you think genetics would be a HUGE factor. Ive brought teams to Florida, and played teams from Georgia, Florida etc, not a big deal early on. But at the HS level- definitely a difference. coach dave you also have to consider how the youth leagues are set up and how they view post season play. i coach in mobile al, which is part of the supposed i-10 corridor hotspot for talent. we are ayf , i think, but we basically play our season through our championship game and then may play in some tournament like the 2009 snapper bowl i posted about on dumcoach's site. the scores: Municipal 10 year olds, Municipal 19 Columbus, Ga 0 Municipal 25 Springfield, Fl 0 Municipal 7 UNA, Nashville TN 6 Municipal 25 UNA, Nashville TN 0 Maitre 12 year old team Maitre 28 UNA, Nashville TN 0 Maitre 47 Phoenix City, AL 0 Maitre 14 Dayton, OH 6 Maitre 32 Dayton, OH 0 we have weight limits for the team as a whole, some of the teams we play in these tournaments have none for the offensive or defensive linemen. in every tournament i know about, recently, the results have been similar. would our teams win a national championship if we played for one? i don't really know, but simply because we aren't there doesn't mean the teams/talent aren't being developed.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Feb 8, 2010 20:58:18 GMT -6
Teams stick for the most part to their region. So if you are from outside of anyones region and don't have the money to go to camps and increase your visibility you are screwed. hey, I appreciate your contributions. I'm certainly not breaking balls here or even challenging you here - but here is a question... How does that relate to the regional "per capita" dominance argument that the article is suggesting? Does LA / TX just have a greater DI saturation (more DI schools in a region = more DI athletes regionally)? Or, if your assertion is correct, how else are you accounting for the regional numbers (why some areas have more than others)? Absolutely there is a higher saturation in those states. Ohio has 7 (8?) FBS schools and a few more FCS schools. Michigan has 5 FBS and 0 FCS. IE, Ohio has nearly double. Based on population, Ohio only has a couple of million more people than Michigan. Ohio also produces a lot more D1 players than Michigan. Then you have Illinois, slightly higher population than Ohio. Illinois only has 3 FBS teams. Louisiana, with about half the population of Michigan has 5 FBS teams (not sure how many FCS). Kentucky is nearly the same size as Louisiana, only 3 FBS teams. Then you can compare Texas and New York. Texas is a little highe population wise than New York. New York has 2 FBS teams (including Army). Texas has 9. Florida (a tick smaller than NY) has 6.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 21:04:56 GMT -6
Great post, coachks......
Does(n't) this lead to a skewed statistical reference, then?
Then the next question would be how this translates to pro (NFL) talent (per capita)....which will read remarkably similiar as to the one the OP presented. Why?
* it REALLY should be noted, however, that Texas is its own nation, and including it with the rest of the 49 states will significantly skew the data
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 8, 2010 21:18:22 GMT -6
Kids lifting isn't what makes a DI caliber athlete, though. Look at DI rosters, visit their practices. Those athletes aren't 'normal' teenagers (and may help to take your HS kids to see them up-close to give them a dose of reality). DI athletes have the bodies of most grown men (there is no question if a kid is a college football player or not). I understand there are kids who you would go to war with and are the epitome of a HS football player. That isn't the (necessarily) definition of a DI scholarship athlete. I think this is a very important distinction. D-I athletes are generally born, not made. Even the "Rudy"-type kids who make for an occasional feel-good story...those kids are STILL freaks. One of the best examples of that is Sean Considine who played for the Eagles for a few years even though he was a walk-on player at Iowa. I remember everyone making a big deal about his work ethic getting him into the NFL... Well...I saw Sean Considine play ball in high school and, let me tell you...he was moving at a complete different speed compared to everyone else. I would go as far to say that it was almost unfair.
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Feb 8, 2010 21:54:03 GMT -6
Getting back on American Samoa and football island. We have a huge Samoan population here and I've meet some freaks of nature that never got recruited despite living on football island and being fantastic football players. The truth of the matter is that there are only a few teams that actively recruit the island namely Hawaii for obvious reasons and BYU because of the deep roots the Mormon Church has on the island. As with all teams these schools have limited scholarships and team needs. You can be a great player and totally fall through the cracks if they dont need your position that year.
I've also met a lot of Samoans who kind of got screwed as they were offed walkons that they couldn't afford despite being deserving of a scholarship because those schools know they have a monopoly and those kids don't have offers elsewhere.
|
|
lgoody
Freshmen Member
Posts: 84
|
Post by lgoody on Feb 8, 2010 22:11:22 GMT -6
One thing thats interesting to note.
In terms of demographics, I think we have to assume that "genetics" are at least a considerable part of the puzzle. Something else thats important to note...
Take a look at those states. Minus Hawaii, I think you'll see a correlation there. What are the odds that the coaches in those states...namely Texas, Florida, Ohio, Alabama, Georgia, Nebraska...get more money than anywhere else?
Think of the huge budgets of teams in Texas. Think of some of the Elite Florida and Ohio teams, and just fathom how much money is spent there. That money, influences the culture. If you have a state of the art facility, manned by coaches who are talented, battle tested, and highly competitive, you are going to have better results with your athletes.
Let's take kid x--kid x has insane physical ability...but he's a sophomore in high school, and the varsity coach at West By-God-middle of nowhere, Tennessee is trying his hardest to get that kid in the weightroom, which has four benches, a curl bar, and a squat rack. If you are in Texas and this situation occurs, what are the odds this scenario ever takes place?
So you have these ultra competitive "big" high schools...and they play against other ultra-competitive "big" high schools. What happens?
You breed the best and the brightest, and then throw them in the fire and put them at the limits of their ability. High levels of competition + Big Money + Higher Exposure+ a "culture" of football that takes over a whole town...
...and you get highly dedicated kids who are talented, and will bust their *** in the weightroom. To me, that explains the greater number of recruited kids from certain southern states better than anything.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Feb 8, 2010 22:37:03 GMT -6
I've meet some freaks of nature that never got recruited despite living on football island and being fantastic football players. I get what you're saying, but colleges aren't looking for the best player - they are looking for the best 4 year investment. Again, refer to that 5-point litmus. I've had guys who were the BEST athletes I've ever seen fail on 3 of those and not get a whiff of even DII consideration This isn't 'American Idol'. No one 'deserves' a scholly.
|
|