Saturday, February 23, 2008

A couple of articles

This article in the Tribune-Star is kinda interesting. It goes along with my contention that the difference between I-A and I-AA has closed recently (for the FCS playoff teams anyway). In I-A, the BCS and the non-BCS teams seem to be separating somewhat.

Key Quote:"Well, I-AA [FCS teams] is a little bit different. The difference between I-AA and I-A, or whatever they call it these days, is not as great as the jump from [Divisions] II or III, for example, to the NFL. It’s just not. And you see more I-AA guys come in and play relatively soon,” he said."

In Matty Vautour's Hampshire Gazette Blog, he mentions this site, which is a rating site similar to Keeper's. It has some errors on the I-AA level.


Anonymous said...

Aside from the raw speed of the skill positions (which I believe to be a misnomer), athletes in the FCS have a definite learning curve, and those who may not have been as productive or precocious in high school, often become outstanding in college. Sometimes this is due to poor coaching or a lack of opportunity, or to injury, or playing on a poor team, but as with anything in life, humans progress at different rates and learn differently and have opportunities presented to them at the most inopportune times. A child at seventeen is not the same person at twenty. For an athlete, the physical and emotional maturity is part of the equation, just as playing for a top prep team or having the opportunity to rush for 1,500 yards or throw for twenty touchdowns represents. What I love about the FCS is the fact that many of these players were overlooked by larger programs, and these students understand what opportunity really is. It's a great lesson for life, and I think the writer of the article accurately conveys the truth about the inexact science of rating prep players and the perverse ends to which recruiting coordinators will go to secure a perceived talent.

Anonymous said...

I couldn't agree with a post more than that above. Much of what was posted applies to other sports as well. Often, way too often, I see athletes with talent in sports such as track or wrestling wind up with the Assistant Football coach who never wrestled or was ever on a track team. He was either assigned the position or is just picking up some spare change.

It's the same in football when the player get a poor coach or lingers on a losing record team year in and year out. The talent may be there but it is untapped and this is where FCS programs find these "diamonds in the rough" so to speak.

Anonymous said...

Tom Brady's ascension to greatness supports the previous writer's observation. His team in high school was poor, and this [the manner by which coaches/recruiters/draft experts perceived him] affected him on every level straight through to the NFL draft. Many others too numerous to mention.

Anonymous said...

The guy's or gal's right about coach's ability in developing talent and player getting the opportunity to develop. That is why playing time is so important. The same is true at the college level. If you get a bad or inexperienced position coach you really lower you chances of making it to the NFL.