|
Post by kurtbryan on Jan 9, 2008 13:45:33 GMT -6
Coaches:
World Class speed defined as 4.4 seconds (or less) in the 40-yard dash.
Other than NCAA Place Kickers & Punters, when will the first-ever World Class Female Athlete put on the Pads in the NCAA at the 1-AA or 1-A Level at Wide Receiver?
With more than 1,500 women playing tackle football at the high school level in 2007, and the growth of Women's Pro Football leagues, what NCAA Collegiate team is going to "Roll the Dice" and Scholarship a Speed-Burning Female Star that can catch a Hitch, Slant or Fade?
It's interesting to think about...somebody in the NCAA will do it...I predict a Division II or 1-AA will take a chance on a World Class Speed Burner Female Athlete that can Catch the football within 5 -7 years.
Thoughts?
KB
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Jan 9, 2008 13:58:23 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 9, 2008 14:25:21 GMT -6
I'm all for it. but the amount of resources you spend trying to develop the one that would be worth anything would far out-weigh their contribution. Physical attributes aside (that, in and of itself, is about 1% of the female athlete population), you'd be dealing with a PSYCHOLOGICAL and SOCIOLOGICAL nightmare from HER (not even concerned about what everyone else would 'say')....girls are RAISED differently than boys and what they turn into as young-adults / adults mentally is completely different than what a football is (mentally). in summation, how many young girls (let alone grown women) can get beyond their own personal "drama" and focus on the best interests of the team in the midst of physical abuse? Drama in the locker room, drama in the classroom, ............oy vey. Like I said, I am 110% behind women that want to compete in the football arena....and look forward to any takers, just not holding my breath for the exceptions. the absolute BEST women's football teams (you be the judge of what 'could' happen) DCatlantaoklahomamediocre 1A HS football is what it amounts to at best.......standard is JV Jr High. this turned into a good story didn't it? You would need an 'untouchable' DI coach to pull this off without a scandal.
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Jan 9, 2008 14:41:43 GMT -6
Already had a girl football player at our school - became an All County kicker, good distance and great placement - even made a few tackles in games. She was an outstanding soccer athlete and we were (still are) a small school. She could compete and excel at our level.
Having said that, how many of us have had a great track kid with speed to burn but also had hands of stone? Or a kid with all the quickness in the world but would not hit/tackle? The statement Built like Tarzan - Plays like Jane is probably applicable here. A female can have all the tools to run 4.4 in the 40 and still NOT be a football player, especially at the college level! I'll take 4.4 or 4.5 any day of the week where I'm at now, but even at the D-II level a kid that is a "football player" and who runs a 4.6 is going to destroy a faster track kid (male or female) who can't hit.
Nothing against the ladies, but its a little bit more than speed out there.
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Jan 9, 2008 15:03:48 GMT -6
Not to sound sexist because I would put a world class female player on my team anyday but sorry it just ain't happening EVER. Unless she is on steroids or HGH.
|
|
|
Post by wingt74 on Jan 9, 2008 15:10:45 GMT -6
not going to happen.
Easiest way, Has there ever been a female playing football at the highschool level that even made all-conference at a non-kicker position?
Sure you get a girl here and there playing youth football...maybe even getting some PT, but thats it.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 9, 2008 15:24:49 GMT -6
obstacles; (outside of the cheapest of them all ~ social pressure) 1) in order to prove your worth, you have to play the sport. There are 350 females participating in football in America this year......out of millions of young men. That is a small percentage. How many actually start? 2) for a scholarship opportunity with a major college program, you need to be the best of the best. If you are the best of the best, you will receive recognition in your conference, region, and state (be an impact player) 3) If you plan on walking-on to a major program, you follow the same criteria of #1 (don't kid yourself) 4) Major college football programs feature genetic works of art - there are no shrimps in these programs. The testosterone that creates these biological mosters is staggering. Competing with ripped 220lb 6'4"+ explosive athletes is something the female "Forrest Gump" is waaay too much to overcome. How likely, given these odds, do you think it will happen? My belief is that you have to look at the odds. Not to discourage the outside-the-box thought process, but REALITY shows that only 5.8% of High School football players go on to earn a college scholarship for the sport. Those numbers are very, very slim. You're suggesting that out of the 1.5M HS football players a DI coach would pick 1 of the 350 female HS football players (2% of all athletes playing) in 2007? addtl reading
|
|
|
Post by k on Jan 9, 2008 15:55:44 GMT -6
The fastest kid in our school right now is a girl. She is a three sport all state athlete and I have no idea what her 40 time is but our fastest kid was (only) a 4.7 and she beat him on the track with blocks, on the track without blocks, and on the grass in cleats and not by a little...
She isn't a big girl or nothing so football wouldn't be her sport but as a sophomore I'd have let her play in our freshmore games and return kicks at the very least.
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Jan 9, 2008 17:50:01 GMT -6
This is an excellent forum topic.
* Per the NFHS just over 1,500 girls played high school tackle football in 2007.
1. Coach Huey's Data Link was fantastic and very thought provoking - seems to point in the direction that the Best Female Sprinters are closing the Gap on the Men, etc.
2. Div. 1-AA Coaches I have talked with WOULD take a chance on a Female Superstar if she was a Burner and Could Catch reasonably well.
3. Actual 40- yard dash times at the Div. 1-AA level for men? Probably two or three guys per team that actually run 4.4 or less when Honestly timed.
4. So, if you get a Female with Legit 4.4 or less speed and some skills, well...one never knows.
KB
|
|
|
Post by airman on Jan 9, 2008 18:34:30 GMT -6
i doubt it will happen for the following reason. the Q angle of womans hips lends them to have a high rate of acl injuries. more woman have acl tears then mean do.
marion jones who annually was the fastest woman in the 100 meters runs like a 10.75 100 meters. high school boys can run that fast.
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Jan 9, 2008 20:40:10 GMT -6
Remember those scenes in the movie The Waterboy, where the other colleges tried to put their waterboys in the game? That's exactly what would happen to the female "burner" going up against college players. OUCH!
|
|
|
Post by bulldogoption on Jan 9, 2008 20:51:14 GMT -6
Who is the best female athlete in the world right now?
What position could she play besides kicker?
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jan 9, 2008 21:36:21 GMT -6
Physical attributes aside (that, in and of itself, is about 1% of the female athlete population), you'd be dealing with a PSYCHOLOGICAL and SOCIOLOGICAL nightmare from HER (not even concerned about what everyone else would 'say')....girls are RAISED differently than boys and what they turn into as young-adults / adults mentally is completely different than what a football is (mentally). A lot of evidence in recent child rearing trends would suggest you're way off about this assumption. Many studies on child rearing and early education have suggested that females are being raised early on to be the dominant sex and are much more encouraged to be physical and mean. Boys aren't allowed "to be boys" as much anymore with rough housing and physical play. This is leading to their becoming more passive and tradional girl like in their behaviors. With the feminist movement where it is today, girls are taught to be strong mentally and physically and they can be every bit as tough and mean as boys. I've taught many girls that are just flat out tougher than even some of the best athletes I've ever coached. And I've coached a few D1 kids.
|
|
billyn
Sophomore Member
Posts: 231
|
Post by billyn on Jan 9, 2008 21:37:24 GMT -6
We have a girl shotputter right now that is close to 6' tall weighs right about 200, benches 195 and squat over 300 pounds. I don't have any doubt that she could compete on our football team (Class 2A). That said I don't see women being able to compete at the D1 level, any woman. How many NCAA women's basketball teams that use men pulled from the general population to practice tells you something about the difference between elite male and female athletes.
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 9, 2008 22:02:59 GMT -6
My question is, why would a girl with world class talents want to play football when she can dominate womens sports and make a career doing so? Also looking at the bodies of already world class athletes, do you think they could hold up to a Division 1 football hit? Look at Marion Jones (just forget the steroid stuff for now and use her as an example) She weighs probably no more than 140lbs (thats probably way over, but shes pretty solid muscle) Do you think that her body could withstand the beating of division one football??? I see this as a very very slim possibility of ever happening.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 10, 2008 7:45:50 GMT -6
Physical attributes aside (that, in and of itself, is about 1% of the female athlete population), you'd be dealing with a PSYCHOLOGICAL and SOCIOLOGICAL nightmare from HER (not even concerned about what everyone else would 'say')....girls are RAISED differently than boys and what they turn into as young-adults / adults mentally is completely different than what a football is (mentally). A lot of evidence in recent child rearing trends would suggest you're way off about this assumption. while I DO respect your thoughts on this, I really feel we have to put our framing into perspective. But I feel the 'studies' are just that. There are inferring that because X=X and Y=Y, then X+Y=Z. That isn't always so. That is very similiar to assuming any kid that can run fast, should be a good football player. Serena Williams, 5'10" 180lbsI coached an adult women's football team for a season, so that is probably where my reference is skewed. Football is football, teaching schemes and techniques is actually easier with women. We had more than a few 6'+, 180lb+ athletes, some DI track runners,softballers, and soccer players. Like I said, scheme and technique-wise, they had it, but from a mental / emotional standpoint, they were on the level of a 9 year old team (nothing against these fine women, the milieu of the FIELD is not something normal). Not only that, but the SPEED of the game between athletic women is completely different than men. Our fastest of fastest runner was 4.9 (yes, we actually timed them). Now, I realize the hypothesis for this discussion is a 4.4 runner (has any woman ever come close?) -- FloJo ran the very best time ever in the 100 at 10.49 (FloJo was amazing), and even that can be bested by High School males. Unfortunately, the dualistic dynamic girls/women have to juggle being a 'football player' is insane. Football is violence. How many women in society do we CELEBRATE for violence? It goes completely against what we accept as a society (in ANY culture). Women appear to be tougher than boys when they are viewed through the context of what a "girl" is. A dominant alpha girl amongst girls is one thing, but put her in a PHYSICAL environment with 11 other alpha MALES and her impact will be significantly diminished. At small schools, many girls that play football are starters (have seen one small school MLB that was probably the best one on her team). I think there are TWO parts to this discussion (need to recognize this). 1) WOULD YOU TAKE A CHANCE ON A DI WOMAN ATHLETE? Unequivocally, YES....why not? 2) WOULD A WOMAN BE ABLE TO PHYSICALLY BE ON PAR WITH DI FOOTBALL TALENT? I highly doubt it. 4.4 speed is supremely gifted and being successful as a college football player takes more than just "running" and "catching". I highly doubt the VERY BEST woman athlete could compete in football at the DIII level, let alone DI
|
|
|
Post by olinecoach61 on Jan 10, 2008 8:49:05 GMT -6
I don't think I'll live to see a 1A team burn a scholarship on a female non kicker. Maybe someone will have success as a walk on. If I were a D1 coach why take a chance and use a scholarship on an unproven female when there are 100's of good males available. Risk vs. Reward.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 10, 2008 9:35:31 GMT -6
and Brophy...the girl in the Colorado jersey...that ain't right. hilarious and I'm still laughing but still that ain't right. I wonder if Barnett recruited her and if she got the same kind of party all the other recruits got. the same girl transferred. I'd be all about recruiting girls to play in HS. I just wouldn't waste a scholarship on an unproven commodity (and I doubt an HC or recruiter would, either). Guys play football because its "fun" ("Fun"= social prestige and girls). A girl WANTS to date a dominate male athlete, and nothing typifies male physical dominance like football. How many guys would be lauding over dating a girl football player? Social mores would hinder most women from taking on a true masculine role
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jan 10, 2008 9:46:00 GMT -6
If she was a good enough I would give her chance. Will one ever be good enough for D-1A? I seriously doubt it.
I have seen a 5 win & 10 loss middle school boys basketball team destroy a 31-2 high school girls team. The middle school boys always win by twenty or more against the girls, and they aren't really even playing that hard.
I was an assistant coach at a 3A school that was 3-8 one year in football. We had a girl in school that got a full scholarship to North Carolina for soccer. At the time UNC had won like 5 straight chamionships. She went on to play pro soccer even after 4 knee surgeries. In other words, she was an exceptional girl athlete. I timed her at a 4.9, she was athletic, she was tough. The year before we didn't have girls soccer, so she played on the boys team. We were awful at soccer. She was about the 11th best player on the team. Oh yeah, we only had about 15 7-12 graders on the team. There is no way she could have helped the JV football football team.
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Jan 10, 2008 11:03:45 GMT -6
Good feedback and Brophy's post with the incredible Ms. Williams photo was very telling as well, and she is a great athlete on all accounts.
In terms of a football coach & program taking a chance on a female superstar - like I mentioned earlier - it would make sense at the Div. 1-AA level, where there is less World Class talent as opposed to the 1A level.
In other words, respectfully, the lower the level of collegaite football - is directly relative to the greater the odds that a Female Superstar can successfully participate with them.
However, we are talking about the VERY best female athlete of the bunch to try and succeed at that level.
a. In terms of a woman being unable to handle the physical pounding at the 1-AA level - well, most Male WR's do not get involved in the fray that often per say (shadowing the DB's, stalk blocking and run offs) and Cut blocking has done wonders for smaller WR's right now.
b. Role Playing that Female superstar WR, 25 - 30 plays per game would not only spare her the grind of an every down physical toll, but would also keep her fresh, she would be used as a decoy on some downs, catch a few passes and maybe a fade or reverse. And another offshoot of course would be generating HUGE amounts of money and PR for that program.
c. To forecast and correctly gauge the exponential growth rate of women playing football at the H.S. level over the next 5 years, and then to project the Very Best female athlete to ascend to the collegiate level in some form is not an impossible reach.
d. The best Male & Female athletes are extremely competitive and want to beat everybody in virtually any form of competition. When the opportunity arises for a World Class Female to take a chance on the football field at the 1-AA level, not only will she take it, but the potential upside (historic & financial) for her will be mind blowing of course
e. Evolution cannot be stopped...but a Revolution can.
Will we ever see a Female football Revolution?
No...
But, are the Male & Female superstar athletes pushing the envelope of human accomplishments at a rapid rate?
Yes.
KB
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 10, 2008 12:21:54 GMT -6
well, if the whole thrust of coaching is to exploit players for $, then you make a great point, Kurt. Preaching to the choir. We had a female kicker where I use to coach. I never had a problem with her playing. thread is about NON-KICKERS> GIRLS IN FOOTBALL THREADWOMAN FOOTBALL COACH THREAD
|
|
|
Post by bmarsh07 on Jan 10, 2008 13:46:07 GMT -6
the absolute BEST women's football teams (you be the judge of what 'could' happen) DCatlantaoklahomaAs a side story, Zeric Foster, the assistant head coach of the Xplosion, plays in my flag league (actually offered me a chance to coach with them, but I didn't feel I had the experience to do it.). Instead, he brought the team out to our playoffs several seasons ago. I can't tell you how awkward the guys were when the females players started talking trash from the sidelines- going so far as to imply certain jailhouse rape scenes. Some of our guys didn't know how to react to them. So mentally, I would definitely say that SOME women are ready. Phusically it might still be a different story
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Jan 10, 2008 17:41:29 GMT -6
kurt ...
how would signing a female generate "HUGE amounts of money and PR for that program". Money generated? from ... ?? will women all of a sudden start buying tickets? those games are non-televised so how will that affect tv ratings and the sponsorship money? in general, women's sports generate significantly smaller crowds and coverage, thus, less overall money. will more men be interested and thus buy tickets to watch this female on a consistent basis?
PR -- well, maybe .. at least in the short-term i could see it. but, long term, it is still about wins/losses. so, the fact that a team has a women would eventually be overshadowed by whether or not they won ... i.e. the PR they get long term is related more to their success rather than the makeup of their team.
|
|
|
Post by kurtbryan on Jan 10, 2008 18:08:10 GMT -6
For generating PR for a program when a superstar female athlete joins and actually Plays for a 1-AA team, sure, that will certainly create tons of buzz and coverage.
Yes, the games would be on TV or Internet for that reason, and yes Winning helps everything.
I know I would watch to see what happens. And, the more success she had, then the more people would watch. And of course, it would definitely Ramp Up Female TV & Internet viewership by a large margin, thereby increasing ratings.
In terms of generating money that seems obvious:
Ad revenue, ticket sales, t-shirts, tv-shows, hats, jerseys, and on and on, and on. There are many possibilities for income generation.
Hope that helps.
KB
|
|
|
Post by fbdoc on Jan 10, 2008 20:16:32 GMT -6
Once again, she would get drilled! Venus might be 180 lbs but she can't run 4.4 (who can?). Marion Jones might run 4.4 but she weighs 140 including breast and thigh fat. The corner who is going to HIT her weighs 180+ lbs, and for you non-physics guys, that formula means "Marion" gets blown up! From a physical/skill standpoint - its not going to happen. Is it possible? Anything is "possible". Is it likely? Are we really having this conversation?
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 10, 2008 20:42:27 GMT -6
WOW! I would love to see a women participate in an outside drill at USC. I will bet she wont make it out of the first round without being carried off on a stretcher. And I would pay to watch it. You'd pay to see it? Thats kind of harsh.
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 10, 2008 22:54:04 GMT -6
Yes I also find this argument quite illogical and very unlikely. I'd stamp it with, not in my lifetime label.
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jan 10, 2008 23:22:04 GMT -6
I won't argue that women physically couldn't play at that high of a level. I was just arguing that the mental aspect of it may not be unreachable for girls in the next 10 or so years.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 10, 2008 23:50:18 GMT -6
For generating PR for a program when a superstar female athlete joins and actually Plays for a 1-AA team, sure, that will certainly create tons of buzz and coverage. Yes, the games would be on TV or Internet for that reason, and yes Winning helps everything. I know I would watch to see what happens. And, the more success she had, then the more people would watch. And of course, it would definitely Ramp Up Female TV & Internet viewership by a large margin, thereby increasing ratings. In terms of generating money that seems obvious: Ad revenue, ticket sales, t-shirts, tv-shows, hats, jerseys, and on and on, and on. There are many possibilities for income generation. Hope that helps. KB No it wouldn't. As evidenced by ratings of the various sports, viewers want EXECUTION, not spectacle. Content, not hype. XFL, New Coke, Catwoman , All opened with a "bang" and fizzled VERY VERY shortly because they had HYPE not content. Regardless of how silly this notion is (taking a chance on a female position player just to be "different" or innovative...to get publicity for being innovative..) i believe this would never happen because of the mentality of the MALES involved. Just like the females in combat...I don't think you will see this "innovation" because males can't deal with the results when they go bad (girl gets trucked/injured in a violent collosion)
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Jan 11, 2008 8:27:36 GMT -6
so we would have to assume that a "WORLD-CLASS" woman athlete - would have minimal body fat
- be amazingly fast
- height & weight are not factored into the discussion
we could assume that she likely couldn't compete on the offensive line or interior defense. Free safety could be a possibility Weak DE could be a possibility if she is super quick -- Valdosta State DE,Travis Harrison (47) was 1st team All-GSC in 2006. Harrison is like 5'6", 185lbs Z receiver might be the option KurtBryann is looking for at 'spot-duty' (likely running fades/bench, bubbles, speed sweeps)...eliminating hitches, shallow crosses, dig, whips, flag, slants, posts. ST returner would be out of the question (?) because the severity of the collisions.
|
|