|
|
Post by airraider on Jul 1, 2007 11:44:05 GMT -6
after reading about the best college teams vs worst NFL teams, I realized that someone said it was about like a top high school team vs a D3 school.
Well, I happen to believe that teams such as SLC could beat a good many D3 schools.
Most D3 schools down in this area are private schools who have players who could never make it on even the D2 level. Whereas most of these big time high school teams are loaded with D1 prospects.
If South Lake Carroll and East Texas Baptist University were to play.. My money would be on SLC.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachpoe on Jul 1, 2007 12:50:30 GMT -6
this to me is a much more interesting question then worst NFL vs. best college. You are right that the majority of D3 schools are private and many players there couldn't cut it on the D2 level. But there are a lot of players at D3 schools who could have played at a higher level and didn't feel the higher level schools were the right fit. There are also a lot of transfers at schools like Mount Union or Wisc. Whitewater from higher levels. There would obviously be some high school players who are more talented then who they are playing against. But D3 schools have 22 year old men...high schools have 17 or 18 year olds. There is a huge difference. I would take SLC vs. a bad or a young and inexperienced D3 team, but there is no way IMO they could compete with St. John's, Whitewater, Mount Union, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Jul 1, 2007 13:13:47 GMT -6
again ... this is such a silly topic. Do people really think D3 football is that bad? It ain't like they got a bunch of scrubs and 2nd teamers from the high school ranks, ya ' know. some of those guys even play professionally, too ... look at things logically ... take good players from a bunch of high school teams (players that were starters, probably all-district or all-area, etc. in HS, yet not offered a D1/D2 spot) and put them together with older players of same background (upperclassmen). now, practice those players for a year. let their young bodies mature. then, go play a team of 17 year olds where only half (if lucky) will play football at another level beyond high school. come on ...  |
|
|
|
Post by khalfie on Jul 1, 2007 13:17:52 GMT -6
Again...
I'd go with the bad D3...
It would probably be close, but I equate the D3's to state championship teams...
Most state championship teams aren't comprised of D1 studs... maybe 1 or 2, but for the most part, they have gotten the most out of some comitted hard working kids.
Those are the same kids that probably didn't get a look in college, but still have the passion for the game. In addition, they are men now... put on that extra 10 to 20 lbs of muscle. Mentalities and experience have them playing at a different comfort level.
The more I think about it... the maturity levels alone put the D3's in a position to blow out some pretty good State Champions...
|
|
|
|
Post by aleator on Jul 1, 2007 13:35:18 GMT -6
again ... this is such a silly topic. Do people really think D3 football is that bad? It ain't like they got a bunch of scrubs and 2nd teamers from the high school ranks, ya ' know. some of those guys even play professionally, too ... look at things logically ... take good players from a bunch of high school teams (players that were starters, probably all-district or all-area, etc. in HS, yet not offered a D1/D2 spot) and put them together with older players of same background (upperclassmen). now, practice those players for a year. let their young bodies mature. then, go play a team of 17 year olds where only half (if lucky) will play football at another level beyond high school. come on ... I could not agree more with you. |
|
|
|
Post by briangilbert on Jul 1, 2007 13:37:29 GMT -6
I played a year at a D3 school then transfered and walked on to a Mac school made the team and played there... The d3 school I played at was in Ohio and pretty darn good and let me tell you the difference between D1 and D3 obviously is huge.
I also played for a pretty good D1 HS in Ohio, and I think my SR year HS team could have given that D3 school a very good game. I also think that teams like Iggy and St X etc in Ohio could beat Average to Poor D3 teams by a TD or more.
I know we will never know the answer but D3 teams as a whole probably only have 10-15 players and the rest are just EH.
We all know how D3 recruiting goes, Just throw a bunch of names at the wall and see who sticks.
|
|
|
|
Post by briangilbert on Jul 1, 2007 13:39:28 GMT -6
It should be noted though that a lot of D3 players peaked their SR year in HS and never developed. I don't believe this is the case at the upper schools like Mount and Ohio Northern, but at places like Kenyon believe me it's possible for players to have been better at age 17 then age 21! The college life and work ethic sometimes don't go together at certain d3 schools where winning isn't a HUGE deal.
|
|
coachf
Freshmen Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by coachf on Jul 1, 2007 14:19:32 GMT -6
again ... this is such a silly topic. Do people really think D3 football is that bad? It ain't like they got a bunch of scrubs and 2nd teamers from the high school ranks, ya ' know. some of those guys even play professionally, too ... come on ... Not to completely disagree, but I have seen some really bad D3 teams. I know our area has 2 or 3 teams that really stink. These teams don't recruit players, you fill out a form that says you want to play and they sign you up. Plus, our area isn't exactly a hot bed of elite talent and that is where they get most of their players from. Some of the schools up north around Chicago would give these teams a run for their money. Maybe even beat them. I agree that we disregard how much a few years of development can really change an athlete. But, I think we also disregard the fact that football really isn't that big of a deal at some D3 schools. |
|
|
|
Post by coachjaz on Jul 1, 2007 14:43:08 GMT -6
Id take a great high school team. There are high school teams out there with multiple D1 prospects.
The point was made that many high school players even on good teams do not play in college. Keep in mind that some of these good players may be able to play, they just choose not to, where as the kid on the D3 team chose to play.
I know there are many WEAK D3 teams out there. Just take a look. Id take a high school power over a number of D3's
|
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Jul 1, 2007 14:48:54 GMT -6
what are we comparing these "weak" D3 teams to? uh, other D3 teams, right?
what are we comparing these "great" hs teams to? uh, other hs teams, right?
Guys, let's think this out . . .
ah, the heck with it... think what you want, convince each other, i'll shut up and avoid the silliness.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachjaz on Jul 1, 2007 16:09:28 GMT -6
Huey - In Wisconsin and Minnesota there are some very weak D3 programs. The WIAC is good, and St. John's is good in Minnesota. Other than that you have some VERY weak teams. Id take some of the nation's best over some of these teams. Im might not know what I am talking about but there are many very poor D3 teams regardless of who you compare them too.
|
|
|
|
Post by airitout616 on Jul 1, 2007 16:36:17 GMT -6
Have any of you guys heard of Trinity Bible College. There D3 there the smallest college in the country with a football team. They lost games by 100 a few times in the worst D3 league in the country. A lot of there players didnt even play high school ball. There the worst team in all D3 hands down I would bet some of the top high school teams would run that team in the ground.
|
|
|
|
Post by wingtol on Jul 1, 2007 17:03:33 GMT -6
I am sure there is a possiblity of a HS team beating a D-III school. Of course if you take the best of something and put them against the worst of something else anything can happen. I know there are some crappy D-III programs out there that some elite HS programs would have a shot at. But over all I would take a coll. team over a HS school any day. I coached on a national ranked state championship team that sent 8 kids D-1 but remember we also had to find kids to play the other 14 spots on the team. We had kids start on that team that went D-III and were special teams guys at best. I guess i am saying that just because a HS has a few D-1 kids they still have alot of other players on the field who couldn't cut it in D-III.
|
|
|
|
Post by groundchuck on Jul 1, 2007 17:06:01 GMT -6
Again I will go with the D3 team. I played on a middle of the road d3 team many years ago. When I came in as a freshman ( iwas an all-conference all area performer in HS) I was quickly thrown and beat into my place by the men who were above me on the depth chart.
There are some really bad d3 teams, and I am not going to get into how a big school state champ would fare against the worst d3 team in the country.
|
|
|
|
Post by larrymoe on Jul 1, 2007 17:49:54 GMT -6
again ... this is such a silly topic. Do people really think D3 football is that bad? It ain't like they got a bunch of scrubs and 2nd teamers from the high school ranks, ya ' know. some of those guys even play professionally, too ... come on ... Not to completely disagree, but I have seen some really bad D3 teams. I know our area has 2 or 3 teams that really stink. These teams don't recruit players, you fill out a form that says you want to play and they sign you up. Plus, our area isn't exactly a hot bed of elite talent and that is where they get most of their players from. Some of the schools up north around Chicago would give these teams a run for their money. Maybe even beat them. I agree that we disregard how much a few years of development can really change an athlete. But, I think we also disregard the fact that football really isn't that big of a deal at some D3 schools. This from the guy who argued that St. T can't beat MacArthur?  |
|
coachf
Freshmen Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by coachf on Jul 1, 2007 18:22:34 GMT -6
[/quote] This from the guy who argued that St. T can't beat MacArthur? [/quote] I know, I know. I still stand by that one, though.........except, for this year. They would kick their butt this year. BTW, I know Texas is the mecca of all that is football. So apparently their D3 teams are butt-kickers and HS teams would explode just by looking at them  But, seriously I have seen some really bad football at these small D3 schools. Take a HS with an enrollment of 3000, several D-1 and D-2 prospects versus a tiny D3 school that takes its players from a questionnaire, or shows up to your school begging anyone and everyone to play. I saw guys from our school who were terrible go to some of these schools and see legitimate playing time. I, in no way, am saying that D3 schools suck. They are head and shoulders above HS teams. I am just trying to point out there are some really bad D3 teams that most of you don't know about. There are a few that would get beat by HS teams. That was the point I was making. |
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jul 1, 2007 18:48:24 GMT -6
what are we comparing these "weak" D3 teams to? uh, other D3 teams, right? what are we comparing these "great" hs teams to? uh, other hs teams, right? Guys, let's think this out . . . ah, the heck with it... think what you want, convince each other, i'll shut up and avoid the silliness. Huey, arent you a D3 coach now? Maybe thats where the bias comes from? I compared the average weights of Euless Trinity with Hardin-Simmons University. The average weight for Trinity was 206 whereas the average weight for Hardin-Simmons was 201. The biggest players from each school are as follows. Trinity 6'7 328. Hardon-Simmons 6'4 310 I think there are a lot of variables here. Sure, the college kids are older, but the high school kids are bigger. Sure the college kids are more mature, but the high school kids are better talents. Of course these generalizations are skewed either way, but in general there are several kids on that Trinity roster who could and will play major college football and maybe only a couple on the Hardin Simmons roster. And lets not forget to mention speed. Teddy Morgan of Hardin Simmons, who is said to be the fastest on the team, ran a 22.03 in the 200m dash while in high school. While that is a really fast time, Riley Dodge, the QB from SLC ran it in 22.32. |
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jul 1, 2007 18:51:55 GMT -6
And if you would read the original post, I said they could be a good many.. heck that could be 50 out of 200... Sure there are some power house D3 schools that could probably compete with some D2 schools... but there are also some bottom of the barrel schools out there who will take a 5'11 210lb who runs the 40 in 5.3 just because he can foot the bill and has a 3.4 gpa.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jul 1, 2007 19:37:37 GMT -6
Aside from the difference in talent level; look at the age difference.
You've got a squad of 17-18 year olds playing a squad of 21-22 year old guys. 4-5 more years of practice,4- 5 more years in the weight room; the HS team isn't going to stand up to that.
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jul 1, 2007 20:08:59 GMT -6
Aside from the difference in talent level; look at the age difference. You've got a squad of 17-18 year olds playing a squad of 21-22 year old guys. 4-5 more years of practice,4- 5 more years in the weight room; the HS team isn't going to stand up to that. not completely true. Why do you just automatically assume that all the starters on the D3 level are 21+? Do you really think that there are so many quality players at this level that they can afford to sit the 18-20 years olds? This past season we had three 19 year old players. They cannot turn 19 until after sep 1. Some of these smaller D3 schools cannot compare in terms of facilities and weight programs. Just so we are clear here, I am talking about these small private school teams that cost upwards of $10,000 a semester to attend. They are predominantly white and no where near as athletic as some of the top high school teams in the country. Some of you are not allowing yourself to see the forest for the trees. Sure, it only seems right that a group of 18-22 year old guys "should" be able to beat a team of 16-19 year old guys.. but the average age of full maturity is very low these days.. and most men have reached full growth and body maturity at the age of 18. |
|
coachf
Freshmen Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by coachf on Jul 1, 2007 21:40:52 GMT -6
Aside from the difference in talent level; look at the age difference. You've got a squad of 17-18 year olds playing a squad of 21-22 year old guys. 4-5 more years of practice,4- 5 more years in the weight room; the HS team isn't going to stand up to that. I think this is a very valid point. Now I know I have pushed that a few HS teams could beat the worst of the worst D3 teams, but I think this spells out why it seems so impossible. When I started my first teaching job, I was 23 years old- 6 years removed from HS. I was working with one of our linemen. He was 6'1" about 225 and I was 5'11" 180. I threw the kid around all over the place. The kid benched more than I did in HS, all around was stronger, but he had not learned how to really use it yet. I was amazed, but this was the case with the entire team. Now, I did not lift very many weights after HS. And I am not some giant physical specimen, but I think those extra years of development make such a huge difference. Remember a 16-17 year old is referred to as a kid. By your 20's, you are referred to as a man (even though that is questionable with a lot of guys). There is a reason for that. |
|
|
|
Post by tog on Jul 1, 2007 22:14:51 GMT -6
as someone on the first smu team back from the death penalty
i can tell you
there were many 5a teams that year that could have given us a run for our money
|
|
|
|
Post by briangilbert on Jul 2, 2007 5:35:03 GMT -6
D3 school I played at had 12 Freshman starting... And we were considered a decent program (Finished 5-5 in the OAC).
Teams like Hiram would get smoked by any school from the Federal League up here in Ohio.
The weak D3 teams in the country would lose to elite HS teams here in Ohio badly.
But the studs like Mount Union and Ohio Northern would have no problem winning obviously.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachjd on Jul 2, 2007 6:23:17 GMT -6
silly topic, IMO. You are comparing apples to oranges. Could this happen, yes, but what does it matter? I coached at an NAIA school for 4 years, never lost to a div II school in the 4 years, but lost to a div III school. It just doesn't matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jul 2, 2007 6:45:33 GMT -6
silly topic, IMO. You are comparing apples to oranges. Could this happen, yes, but what does it matter? I coached at an NAIA school for 4 years, never lost to a div II school in the 4 years, but lost to a div III school. It just doesn't matter. Silly to you, but not to me. Doesnt matter you, but does to me. Actually you are not comparing apples to oranges. Football is football, and I happen to believe that these elite high school teams are playing at a higher level then some of these small time D3's. Just like you, I am entitled to my opinion. If you will notice, I keep saying that "I" feel this way, not that its silly for you to feel or think opposite. |
|
|
|
Post by coachjd on Jul 2, 2007 6:55:19 GMT -6
can you explain how a NAIA school defeats 6 NCAA Div II schools in 4 years and loses 2 games to NCAA div III school in the same time period.
|
|
But, seriously I have seen some really bad football at these small D3 schools. Take a HS with an enrollment of 3000, several D-1 and D-2 prospects versus a tiny D3 school that takes its players from a questionnaire, or shows up to your school begging anyone and everyone to play. I saw guys from our school who were terrible go to some of these schools and see legitimate playing time. 
