Official 2022 college football thread: its conference realignment season. (4 Viewers)

[Capella]

Dumbo just absolutely stealing money

 

[Beef Ravioli Part 2]

Not sure which commercial is more annoying, Lily/LeBron or the you just finished a run and I have a Mick Lite for you.

LBJ hands down. He’s What make it annoying!

 

[gump]

Dumbo just absolutely stealing money

Keeping an eye on the recruiting class…currently #18 a year after the best class in history.

 

[Capella]

Dumbo just absolutely stealing money

Keeping an eye on the recruiting class…currently #18 a year after the best class in history.

A lot of those kids from this best class ever are gonna transfer out. Those wideouts didn’t sign up to catch 2 passes for 19 yards.

 

[gump]

Dumbo just absolutely stealing money

Keeping an eye on the recruiting class…currently #18 a year after the best class in history.

A lot of those kids from this best class ever are gonna transfer out. Those wideouts didn’t sign up to catch 2 passes for 19 yards.

Yep…you won’t sustain success no matter how fat your recruiting wallet is if you don’t develop.

 

[culdeus]

Dumbo just absolutely stealing money

Keeping an eye on the recruiting class…currently #18 a year after the best class in history.

A lot of those kids from this best class ever are gonna transfer out. Those wideouts didn’t sign up to catch 2 passes for 19 yards.

QB play and recruiting into that position (And OL) have been atrocious.

Guy is getting 750k a game to coach. Not sure how that changes with no bowl game math wise.

 

[Tom Servo]

Weber State lost to Montana State 43-38. The difference was Weber State airmailed four snaps into the endzone for 4 safeties - breaking the FCS record for safeties.

 

[culdeus]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

 

[gump]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

Didn’t realize that...does it impact the top half though? Or just depth and they aren’t used to having to get it elsewhere. They are also keeping fewer big recruits in state…CA especially.

 

[culdeus]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

Didn’t realize that...does it impact the top half though? Or just depth and they aren’t used to having to get it elsewhere. They are also keeping fewer big recruits in state…CA especially.

Texas and TAMU both tend to offer 2/3 in state. This has been fluctuating a lot lately as simply the quality of the best of the best is in decline. When you look at per capita blue chip rates, the core SEC states just dominate this. Layer on top here that the recruit grading services have a heavy Texas bias, you get a 10-10 Sarkasian and a similar Jimbo with OU in a sudden free-fall.

The landscape has changed. The red states are just late to this, for now the changing tolerance for the injuries and head injuries has waned recently at least in the media, but not in the schools. Kids are playing more basketball, soccer and even baseball instead. This is now accelerating with for the first time in recorded history fewer than 1MM kids playing football this year at the high school level.

You see these just epic recruiting classes with a billion blue chips, then you say "oh so and so couldn't develop them". No, those kids weren't that great to begin with and they were graded to perfection because the good athletes are playing other stuff.

 

[Tom Servo]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

Didn’t realize that...does it impact the top half though? Or just depth and they aren’t used to having to get it elsewhere. They are also keeping fewer big recruits in state…CA especially.

Texas and TAMU both tend to offer 2/3 in state. This has been fluctuating a lot lately as simply the quality of the best of the best is in decline. When you look at per capita blue chip rates, the core SEC states just dominate this. Layer on top here that the recruit grading services have a heavy Texas bias, you get a 10-10 Sarkasian and a similar Jimbo with OU in a sudden free-fall.

The landscape has changed. The red states are just late to this, for now the changing tolerance for the injuries and head injuries has waned recently at least in the media, but not in the schools. Kids are playing more basketball, soccer and even baseball instead. This is now accelerating with for the first time in recorded history fewer than 1MM kids playing football this year at the high school level.

You see these just epic recruiting classes with a billion blue chips, then you say "oh so and so couldn't develop them". No, those kids weren't that great to begin with and they were graded to perfection because the good athletes are playing other stuff.

I was wondering when the affect of tolerance for head injuries was going to start showing itself. I do think the sport will suffer long term until/unless something is done to lessen the risk. There's no magic pill for this.

 

[culdeus]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

Didn’t realize that...does it impact the top half though? Or just depth and they aren’t used to having to get it elsewhere. They are also keeping fewer big recruits in state…CA especially.

Texas and TAMU both tend to offer 2/3 in state. This has been fluctuating a lot lately as simply the quality of the best of the best is in decline. When you look at per capita blue chip rates, the core SEC states just dominate this. Layer on top here that the recruit grading services have a heavy Texas bias, you get a 10-10 Sarkasian and a similar Jimbo with OU in a sudden free-fall.

The landscape has changed. The red states are just late to this, for now the changing tolerance for the injuries and head injuries has waned recently at least in the media, but not in the schools. Kids are playing more basketball, soccer and even baseball instead. This is now accelerating with for the first time in recorded history fewer than 1MM kids playing football this year at the high school level.

You see these just epic recruiting classes with a billion blue chips, then you say "oh so and so couldn't develop them". No, those kids weren't that great to begin with and they were graded to perfection because the good athletes are playing other stuff.

I was wondering when the affect of tolerance for head injuries was going to start showing itself. I do think the sport will suffer long term until/unless something is done to lessen the risk. There's no magic pill for this.

I mean even with the advances in prevention football still has something like 4x the concussion protocols of all other hs sports together and something like 10x the fractures. You know what's the next worst sport. Cheerleading.

 

[gump]

You see these just epic recruiting classes with a billion blue chips, then you say "oh so and so couldn't develop them". No, those kids weren't that great to begin with and they were graded to perfection because the good athletes are playing other stuff.

But even if talent is down across the board, the best coaches are still developing and the NFL is still drafting.

 

[culdeus]

You see these just epic recruiting classes with a billion blue chips, then you say "oh so and so couldn't develop them". No, those kids weren't that great to begin with and they were graded to perfection because the good athletes are playing other stuff.

But even if talent is down across the board, the best coaches are still developing and the NFL is still drafting.

Are they? The distribution of programs getting 1st and 2-4th is spreading out more than in history. Is that coaching or just regression to the mean? I would argue TCU being in the top 10 and Kansas getting a cup of coffee in the top whatever is more variance than coaching. The draft is self fulfilling, nobody passes on their picks the fact that they hold the draft doesn't mean NCAA coaching is doing a good job.

 

[gump]

You see these just epic recruiting classes with a billion blue chips, then you say "oh so and so couldn't develop them". No, those kids weren't that great to begin with and they were graded to perfection because the good athletes are playing other stuff.

But even if talent is down across the board, the best coaches are still developing and the NFL is still drafting.

Are they? The distribution of programs getting 1st and 2-4th is spreading out more than in history. Is that coaching or just regression to the mean? I would argue TCU being in the top 10 and Kansas getting a cup of coffee in the top whatever is more variance than coaching. The draft is self fulfilling, nobody passes on their picks the fact that they hold the draft doesn't mean NCAA coaching is doing a good job.

No argument overall…but there are definitely coaching recruiting and developing…A&M isn’t one of them. Also sounds like some players were smoking in the locker room and will be suspended…it’s unraveling.

 

[culdeus]

You see these just epic recruiting classes with a billion blue chips, then you say "oh so and so couldn't develop them". No, those kids weren't that great to begin with and they were graded to perfection because the good athletes are playing other stuff.

But even if talent is down across the board, the best coaches are still developing and the NFL is still drafting.

Are they? The distribution of programs getting 1st and 2-4th is spreading out more than in history. Is that coaching or just regression to the mean? I would argue TCU being in the top 10 and Kansas getting a cup of coffee in the top whatever is more variance than coaching. The draft is self fulfilling, nobody passes on their picks the fact that they hold the draft doesn't mean NCAA coaching is doing a good job.

No argument overall…but there are definitely coaching recruiting and developing…A&M isn’t one of them. Also sounds like some players were smoking in the locker room and will be suspended…it’s unraveling.

Florida, Florida St., and Miami all have had substantial amounts of players drafted in recent drafts and have had nearly no impact on college football in ages. Is conversion to NFL drafting coaching, development, or inertia. I'd argue it's simply inertia. Note that last draft saw a total of 0 Texas players drafted.

It's a core belief of mine that the myth that players "develop" is a myth. Kids either have the genetics and the talent, or they don't. Some can't get out of their own way for trouble, but those are more rare than the media would make you think. Teams that succeed either are in a target rich environment (Deep SE USA, or Upper Midwest) and spot the talent early enough and put them where they can succeed. Those that succeed on the edges (The TCU types) find players that can fit into specific roles in a system, or target JUCO/Portals. Only a tiny tiny portion of what makes a team successful is development of players.

 

[gump]

It's a core belief of mine that the myth that players "develop" is a myth. Kids either have the genetics and the talent, or they don't. Some can't get out of their own way for trouble, but those are more rare than the media would make you think. Teams that succeed either are in a target rich environment (Deep SE USA, or Upper Midwest) and spot the talent early enough and put them where they can succeed. Those that succeed on the edges (The TCU types) find players that can fit into specific roles in a system, or target JUCO/Portals. Only a tiny tiny portion of what makes a team successful is development of players.

Agree to disagree...at least with separation between P5. UGA v Texas A&M....Bama v LSU thru the 2010's....

 

[culdeus]

It's a core belief of mine that the myth that players "develop" is a myth. Kids either have the genetics and the talent, or they don't. Some can't get out of their own way for trouble, but those are more rare than the media would make you think. Teams that succeed either are in a target rich environment (Deep SE USA, or Upper Midwest) and spot the talent early enough and put them where they can succeed. Those that succeed on the edges (The TCU types) find players that can fit into specific roles in a system, or target JUCO/Portals. Only a tiny tiny portion of what makes a team successful is development of players.

Agree to disagree...at least with separation between P5. UGA v Texas A&M....Bama v LSU thru the 2010's....

How so. If the core tenet here is that the talent is consolidating to the South and East + Rust Belt, if you look at the 2010s you had Texas and OU still competing for national titles. You can argue whether OU has been relevant for the last decade in a variety of ways, but they haven't been true national contenders in awhile. Texas and OU are moving to the SEC much like TAMU did to try and get some recruiting inroads (and $$$) in the SE. Texas' hiring of Charlie Strong was a starter kit to that overall strategy.

 

[General Malaise]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

If these talented kids are opting for other sports, where are they? Can you point out the scholarship sports that are seeing an influx of talent at the college level? Is NCAA Baseball now robust with kids that would have been taking scholarships for football in the past? NCAA basketball is just a one-year audition for the best of the best, but those kids tend to be, you know, tall. Are they swimming?

So show me where these talented kids are showcasing their talents if not on the grid iron. Your theory needs a little evidence to support itself, IMO.

Tangentially related: First World Series since 1950 to not have an African American player.

 

[General Malaise]

We certainly aren't paying college coaches as if there is a dearth of talented kids and the NFL isn't salivating over the draft because college players aren't being developed. You're telling me Sauce Gardner wasn't ready for the NFL? He's the best cornerback in football right now.

 

[General Malaise]

As for needing to be in a talent rich environment to succeed, I'd point out that Oregon has been successful for 20 years without being in a talent rich environment. And yes, I'll suggest that losing two national championship games in 15 years counts as success. A&M has never seen a title game, playoffs or a meaningful bowl (that I can remember). I guess they beat Alabama once.

 

[Moe.]

As for needing to be in a talent rich environment to succeed, I'd point out that Oregon has been successful for 20 years without being in a talent rich environment. And yes, I'll suggest that losing two national championship games in 15 years counts as success. A&M has never seen a title game, playoffs or a meaningful bowl (that I can remember). I guess they beat Alabama once.

It’s an insane take even for him.

 

[culdeus]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

If these talented kids are opting for other sports, where are they? Can you point out the scholarship sports that are seeing an influx of talent at the college level? Is NCAA Baseball now robust with kids that would have been taking scholarships for football in the past? NCAA basketball is just a one-year audition for the best of the best, but those kids tend to be, you know, tall. Are they swimming?

So show me where these talented kids are showcasing their talents if not on the grid iron. Your theory needs a little evidence to support itself, IMO.

Tangentially related: First World Series since 1950 to not have an African American player.

Basketball is more deep now, kids are pushing that sport to wherever it can take them. Soccer is on the upswing as well. Then on the flipside kids are fat, lazy, and unathletic so the overall numbers are down. Basketball is the only pro sport with YoY increases in youth participation and the only growth sector in select sports, but mainly it's not talented kids went elsewhere they just vanished.

 

[General Malaise]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

If these talented kids are opting for other sports, where are they? Can you point out the scholarship sports that are seeing an influx of talent at the college level? Is NCAA Baseball now robust with kids that would have been taking scholarships for football in the past? NCAA basketball is just a one-year audition for the best of the best, but those kids tend to be, you know, tall. Are they swimming?

So show me where these talented kids are showcasing their talents if not on the grid iron. Your theory needs a little evidence to support itself, IMO.

Tangentially related: First World Series since 1950 to not have an African American player.

Basketball is more deep now, kids are pushing that sport to wherever it can take them. Soccer is on the upswing as well. Then on the flipside kids are fat, lazy, and unathletic so the overall numbers are down. Basketball is the only pro sport with YoY increases in youth participation and the only growth sector in select sports, but mainly it's not talented kids went elsewhere they just vanished.

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

Also not sure I buy that basketball is 'more deep now' (sic). Deeper than when? The most coveted player in the upcoming draft ain't a 'merican, bruh. And NCAA basketball games are tough to watch with sloppy play, poor shooting and no cohesiveness because the best of the best are gone after one year. With only 12 roster spots on an NBA team, the path to glory is greatly reduced, especially for a talented player who isn't 6'4" or taller.

I think the comment that kids are fat, lazy and unathletic is a desperate dig to try and make your point. I have five kids, how many do you have? Not one of them is fat, lazy or unathletic. Neither are their friends. I coached dozens and dozens of kids (boys and girls) for 13 years in youth sports and I can't recall more than one or two who were overweight and even those kids gave it their all (I had one heavier set kid who just tattooed the soccer ball and was far more athletic than some of the skinnier kids).

Maybe this is all just one big fishing effort, if so, congrats. Otherwise, I find your theory pretty full of holes.

 

[psychobillies]

As for needing to be in a talent rich environment to succeed, I'd point out that Oregon has been successful for 20 years without being in a talent rich environment. And yes, I'll suggest that losing two national championship games in 15 years counts as success. A&M has never seen a title game, playoffs or a meaningful bowl (that I can remember). I guess they beat Alabama once.

Good god man, Oregon deserves a better comparison than a&m. Aggie hasn't been relevant since the great depression.

 

[General Malaise]

As for needing to be in a talent rich environment to succeed, I'd point out that Oregon has been successful for 20 years without being in a talent rich environment. And yes, I'll suggest that losing two national championship games in 15 years counts as success. A&M has never seen a title game, playoffs or a meaningful bowl (that I can remember). I guess they beat Alabama once.

Good god man, Oregon deserves a better comparison than a&m. Aggie hasn't been relevant since the great depression.

Right? AND - get this - THEY ARE IN A FERTILE, TALENT RICH ENVIRONMENT. I think Texas had like six 5-star kids and forty-five 4-stars. Oregon had like three 4-star kids this last year and has only had three 5-stars in state history. Probably because we're all fat, lazy and unathletic.

 

[psychobillies]

As for needing to be in a talent rich environment to succeed, I'd point out that Oregon has been successful for 20 years without being in a talent rich environment. And yes, I'll suggest that losing two national championship games in 15 years counts as success. A&M has never seen a title game, playoffs or a meaningful bowl (that I can remember). I guess they beat Alabama once.

Good god man, Oregon deserves a better comparison than a&m. Aggie hasn't been relevant since the great depression.

Right? AND - get this - THEY ARE IN A FERTILE, TALENT RICH ENVIRONMENT. I think Texas had like six 5-star kids and forty-five 4-stars. Oregon had like three 4-star kids this last year and has only had three 5-stars in state history. Probably because we're all fat, lazy and unathletic.

They were able to buy a pretty good group of talent last year, they just managed to screw it up. From the number one class of all time, at least half will be gone next year. The whole smoking grass in the locker room just screams IDGAF, and I don't think there are enough male cheerleaders on campus to convince them to stay. Total dumpster fire that should make Auburn fans feel good about their program.

 

[Moe.]

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

They are coming.

Soccer does it right, there is zero reason for high-level athletics to be associated with institutions of higher learning. It’s really an asinine way to do it. NCAA soccer is an afterthought and it wouldn’t surprise me if it produces next to zero professional players in the near future. The academy approach is the best way to produce future professional athletes, no question.

The only reason we haven’t come up with a more efficient system for producing football players is because there is no competition. If we got our asses handed to us by Japan at the Gridiron World Cup you can bet we’d reevaluate the entire thing, but why would anybody care right now? If Culdeus is right and the overall talent level is slipping - how would we even notice since performance is all relative?

 

[Moe.]

I also agree that basketball is way deeper now and the move away from the NCAA is because the rest of the world is catching up.

 

[mr. furley]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

If these talented kids are opting for other sports, where are they? Can you point out the scholarship sports that are seeing an influx of talent at the college level? Is NCAA Baseball now robust with kids that would have been taking scholarships for football in the past? NCAA basketball is just a one-year audition for the best of the best, but those kids tend to be, you know, tall. Are they swimming?

So show me where these talented kids are showcasing their talents if not on the grid iron. Your theory needs a little evidence to support itself, IMO.

Tangentially related: First World Series since 1950 to not have an African American player.

Basketball is more deep now, kids are pushing that sport to wherever it can take them. Soccer is on the upswing as well. Then on the flipside kids are fat, lazy, and unathletic so the overall numbers are down. Basketball is the only pro sport with YoY increases in youth participation and the only growth sector in select sports, but mainly it's not talented kids went elsewhere they just vanished.

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

Also not sure I buy that basketball is 'more deep now' (sic). Deeper than when? The most coveted player in the upcoming draft ain't a 'merican, bruh. And NCAA basketball games are tough to watch with sloppy play, poor shooting and no cohesiveness because the best of the best are gone after one year. With only 12 roster spots on an NBA team, the path to glory is greatly reduced, especially for a talented player who isn't 6'4" or taller.

I think the comment that kids are fat, lazy and unathletic is a desperate dig to try and make your point. I have five kids, how many do you have? Not one of them is fat, lazy or unathletic. Neither are their friends. I coached dozens and dozens of kids (boys and girls) for 13 years in youth sports and I can't recall more than one or two who were overweight and even those kids gave it their all (I had one heavier set kid who just tattooed the soccer ball and was far more athletic than some of the skinnier kids).

Maybe this is all just one big fishing effort, if so, congrats. Otherwise, I find your theory pretty full of holes.

i live very near a college. the men's soccer games attract, like, singles of people.

8, 9 sometimes more.

 

[gump]

It's a core belief of mine that the myth that players "develop" is a myth. Kids either have the genetics and the talent, or they don't. Some can't get out of their own way for trouble, but those are more rare than the media would make you think. Teams that succeed either are in a target rich environment (Deep SE USA, or Upper Midwest) and spot the talent early enough and put them where they can succeed. Those that succeed on the edges (The TCU types) find players that can fit into specific roles in a system, or target JUCO/Portals. Only a tiny tiny portion of what makes a team successful is development of players.

Agree to disagree...at least with separation between P5. UGA v Texas A&M....Bama v LSU thru the 2010's....

How so. If the core tenet here is that the talent is consolidating to the South and East + Rust Belt, if you look at the 2010s you had Texas and OU still competing for national titles. You can argue whether OU has been relevant for the last decade in a variety of ways, but they haven't been true national contenders in awhile. Texas and OU are moving to the SEC much like TAMU did to try and get some recruiting inroads (and $$$) in the SE. Texas' hiring of Charlie Strong was a starter kit to that overall strategy.

Recruiting rankings to on-field college success to NFL draft success. There's no chance kids aren't developed with how much $ and planning goes in to them from the time they step on campus til they leave...from diet, academic curriculum, personal finance to schemes, position technique to speed, strength. And some programs do it much better than others.

This is all leading to us believing TAMU has a talent disadvantage? I'm kinda lost in this debate.

 

[General Malaise]

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

They are coming.

Soccer does it right, there is zero reason for high-level athletics to be associated with institutions of higher learning. It’s really an asinine way to do it. NCAA soccer is an afterthought and it wouldn’t surprise me if it produces next to zero professional players in the near future. The academy approach is the best way to produce future professional athletes, no question.

The only reason we haven’t come up with a more efficient system for producing football players is because there is no competition. If we got our asses handed to us by Japan at the Gridiron World Cup you can bet we’d reevaluate the entire thing, but why would anybody care right now? If Culdeus is right and the overall talent level is slipping - how would we even notice since performance is all relative?

So the working theory in here is that talent is fleeing football and landing in soccer? But not NCAA soccer, just academy soccer? How soon before we see this translate to success in US Soccer vs other countries? I don't follow enough to know how improved the USMNT is, but it can't be any worse than not qualifying for the WC, right?

I'm also not clear on why soccer players are still short relative to athletes in football. If the talent is fleeing football, where are the 6'3" soccer players? Still developing? Where are the bigger guys going, the guys that play OL/DL? What sport are they playing? It ain't soccer.

So much questions.

 

[gump]

Hugh Freeze gets a raise to $5M/year

 

[Long Ball Larry]

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

They are coming.

Soccer does it right, there is zero reason for high-level athletics to be associated with institutions of higher learning. It’s really an asinine way to do it. NCAA soccer is an afterthought and it wouldn’t surprise me if it produces next to zero professional players in the near future. The academy approach is the best way to produce future professional athletes, no question.

The only reason we haven’t come up with a more efficient system for producing football players is because there is no competition. If we got our asses handed to us by Japan at the Gridiron World Cup you can bet we’d reevaluate the entire thing, but why would anybody care right now? If Culdeus is right and the overall talent level is slipping - how would we even notice since performance is all relative?

So the working theory in here is that talent is fleeing football and landing in soccer? But not NCAA soccer, just academy soccer? How soon before we see this translate to success in US Soccer vs other countries? I don't follow enough to know how improved the USMNT is, but it can't be any worse than not qualifying for the WC, right?

I'm also not clear on why soccer players are still short relative to athletes in football. If the talent is fleeing football, where are the 6'3" soccer players? Still developing? Where are the bigger guys going, the guys that play OL/DL? What sport are they playing? It ain't soccer.

So much questions.

I have no idea about football players leaving for soccer, but USMNT is greatly improved right now as opposed to the last WC qualifiers.

 

[culdeus]

It's a core belief of mine that the myth that players "develop" is a myth. Kids either have the genetics and the talent, or they don't. Some can't get out of their own way for trouble, but those are more rare than the media would make you think. Teams that succeed either are in a target rich environment (Deep SE USA, or Upper Midwest) and spot the talent early enough and put them where they can succeed. Those that succeed on the edges (The TCU types) find players that can fit into specific roles in a system, or target JUCO/Portals. Only a tiny tiny portion of what makes a team successful is development of players.

Agree to disagree...at least with separation between P5. UGA v Texas A&M....Bama v LSU thru the 2010's....

How so. If the core tenet here is that the talent is consolidating to the South and East + Rust Belt, if you look at the 2010s you had Texas and OU still competing for national titles. You can argue whether OU has been relevant for the last decade in a variety of ways, but they haven't been true national contenders in awhile. Texas and OU are moving to the SEC much like TAMU did to try and get some recruiting inroads (and $$$) in the SE. Texas' hiring of Charlie Strong was a starter kit to that overall strategy.

Recruiting rankings to on-field college success to NFL draft success. There's no chance kids aren't developed with how much $ and planning goes in to them from the time they step on campus til they leave...from diet, academic curriculum, personal finance to schemes, position technique to speed, strength. And some programs do it much better than others.

This is all leading to us believing TAMU has a talent disadvantage? I'm kinda lost in this debate.

That's not really where this is at. My general feelings on this in a nutshell are:

1) Fewer kids are playing tackle football, this is accelerating across the nation but is less pronounced in the core SEC regions. (It will eventually get there too)
2) The evaluation of high school kids is harder now. The talent dipping across all schools makes an average kid look better in contrast because overall the competition is weaker.
3) 1 and 2 together makes this problem in Texas, where a lot of the media recruiting rankers are, reside.

This gives rise to specifically the issues facing Texas and Texas A&M yet the focus here seems to be on Texas A&M. Both these schools are having to struggle to see a .500 conference season in the last decade, or need generational players to see even slight success.

Yet continually, the recruiting rankings are high for both and both underperform year after year and pay ridiculous sums of money to coaches.

The alternative hypothesis is maybe just maybe the kids were graded poorly, peaked early, and had no development left and the programs due to geography are just destined to struggle the next few decades no matter what.

 

[General Malaise]

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

They are coming.

Soccer does it right, there is zero reason for high-level athletics to be associated with institutions of higher learning. It’s really an asinine way to do it. NCAA soccer is an afterthought and it wouldn’t surprise me if it produces next to zero professional players in the near future. The academy approach is the best way to produce future professional athletes, no question.

The only reason we haven’t come up with a more efficient system for producing football players is because there is no competition. If we got our asses handed to us by Japan at the Gridiron World Cup you can bet we’d reevaluate the entire thing, but why would anybody care right now? If Culdeus is right and the overall talent level is slipping - how would we even notice since performance is all relative?

So the working theory in here is that talent is fleeing football and landing in soccer? But not NCAA soccer, just academy soccer? How soon before we see this translate to success in US Soccer vs other countries? I don't follow enough to know how improved the USMNT is, but it can't be any worse than not qualifying for the WC, right?

I'm also not clear on why soccer players are still short relative to athletes in football. If the talent is fleeing football, where are the 6'3" soccer players? Still developing? Where are the bigger guys going, the guys that play OL/DL? What sport are they playing? It ain't soccer.

So much questions.

I have no idea about football players leaving for soccer, but USMNT is greatly improved right now as opposed to the last WC qualifiers.

Well, I would certainly hope so....

 

[General Malaise]

Unless our USMNT averages 6' 5" athletic freaks like Randy Moss playing stryker, I'm call horse schneers on this.

 

[gump]

That's not really where this is at. My general feelings on this in a nutshell are:

1) Fewer kids are playing tackle football, this is accelerating across the nation but is less pronounced in the core SEC regions. (It will eventually get there too)
2) The evaluation of high school kids is harder now. The talent dipping across all schools makes an average kid look better in contrast because overall the competition is weaker.
3) 1 and 2 together makes this problem in Texas, where a lot of the media recruiting rankers are, reside.

This gives rise to specifically the issues facing Texas and Texas A&M yet the focus here seems to be on Texas A&M. Both these schools are having to struggle to see a .500 conference season in the last decade, or need generational players to see even slight success.

Yet continually, the recruiting rankings are high for both and both underperform year after year and pay ridiculous sums of money to coaches.

The alternative hypothesis is maybe just maybe the kids were graded poorly, peaked early, and had no development left and the programs due to geography are just destined to struggle the next few decades no matter what.

So for example the state of Alabama has 7 of the top 35 recruits in this '23 cycle...Texas had 7 of the top 30 in the last '22 cycle (TAMU signed 4). You think the Bama class is more accurately graded and will be better?

 

[Tom Servo]

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

They are coming.

Soccer does it right, there is zero reason for high-level athletics to be associated with institutions of higher learning. It’s really an asinine way to do it. NCAA soccer is an afterthought and it wouldn’t surprise me if it produces next to zero professional players in the near future. The academy approach is the best way to produce future professional athletes, no question.

The only reason we haven’t come up with a more efficient system for producing football players is because there is no competition. If we got our asses handed to us by Japan at the Gridiron World Cup you can bet we’d reevaluate the entire thing, but why would anybody care right now? If Culdeus is right and the overall talent level is slipping - how would we even notice since performance is all relative?

The US men’s team just screams success.

 

[Tom Servo]

Also, this seems like

 

[In The Zone]

Sadly, the Legend Vince Dooley passes away at the age of 90.

RIP Coach

 

[Moe.]

Unless our USMNT averages 6' 5" athletic freaks like Randy Moss playing stryker, I'm call horse schneers on this.

You start to lose a lot of utility north of 6ft2 in soccer. I don’t think you’ll ever see a bunch of 6ft7 guys roaming around in midfield.

There are plenty of tall athletes in Brazil - they mostly play volleyball. I don’t think those two sports will cannibalize one another. Soccer is more likely to pull athletes from football than bball.

I don’t mean to turn this into the USMNT thread but we are absolutely loaded with young talent. They’re all over the place in Europe, and the academy approach within MLS is starting to bear serious fruit.

 

[culdeus]

That's not really where this is at. My general feelings on this in a nutshell are:

1) Fewer kids are playing tackle football, this is accelerating across the nation but is less pronounced in the core SEC regions. (It will eventually get there too)
2) The evaluation of high school kids is harder now. The talent dipping across all schools makes an average kid look better in contrast because overall the competition is weaker.
3) 1 and 2 together makes this problem in Texas, where a lot of the media recruiting rankers are, reside.

This gives rise to specifically the issues facing Texas and Texas A&M yet the focus here seems to be on Texas A&M. Both these schools are having to struggle to see a .500 conference season in the last decade, or need generational players to see even slight success.

Yet continually, the recruiting rankings are high for both and both underperform year after year and pay ridiculous sums of money to coaches.

The alternative hypothesis is maybe just maybe the kids were graded poorly, peaked early, and had no development left and the programs due to geography are just destined to struggle the next few decades no matter what.

So for example the state of Alabama has 7 of the top 35 recruits in this '23 cycle...Texas had 7 of the top 30 in the last '22 cycle (TAMU signed 4). You think the Bama class is more accurately graded and will be better?

If the last 2 decades are any guide, yes.

 

[Moe.]

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

They are coming.

Soccer does it right, there is zero reason for high-level athletics to be associated with institutions of higher learning. It’s really an asinine way to do it. NCAA soccer is an afterthought and it wouldn’t surprise me if it produces next to zero professional players in the near future. The academy approach is the best way to produce future professional athletes, no question.

The only reason we haven’t come up with a more efficient system for producing football players is because there is no competition. If we got our asses handed to us by Japan at the Gridiron World Cup you can bet we’d reevaluate the entire thing, but why would anybody care right now? If Culdeus is right and the overall talent level is slipping - how would we even notice since performance is all relative?

The US men’s team just screams success.

When I say soccer I don’t mean us soccer exclusively.

If you think playing for your high school until you are 18, then going to college and juggling sports and pretend school for a few more years is going to produce superior players compared to a system where they essentially become full-time pros in their mid teens I’m not sure what to tell you.

We’re hosting it so that’s a factor but the US will be in the top 10 in terms of odds to win the WC in 2026. I’m not fishing I promise. Probably not articulating my point as well as I could. The academies within the US are producing tons of world class talent right now, the big European clubs are gobbling it up.

 

[Moe.]

I am about to throw up the bat signal for @NewlyRetired

 

[ChiefD]

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

They are coming.

Soccer does it right, there is zero reason for high-level athletics to be associated with institutions of higher learning. It’s really an asinine way to do it. NCAA soccer is an afterthought and it wouldn’t surprise me if it produces next to zero professional players in the near future. The academy approach is the best way to produce future professional athletes, no question.

The only reason we haven’t come up with a more efficient system for producing football players is because there is no competition. If we got our asses handed to us by Japan at the Gridiron World Cup you can bet we’d reevaluate the entire thing, but why would anybody care right now? If Culdeus is right and the overall talent level is slipping - how would we even notice since performance is all relative?

So the working theory in here is that talent is fleeing football and landing in soccer? But not NCAA soccer, just academy soccer? How soon before we see this translate to success in US Soccer vs other countries? I don't follow enough to know how improved the USMNT is, but it can't be any worse than not qualifying for the WC, right?

I'm also not clear on why soccer players are still short relative to athletes in football. If the talent is fleeing football, where are the 6'3" soccer players? Still developing? Where are the bigger guys going, the guys that play OL/DL? What sport are they playing? It ain't soccer.

So much questions.

Small sample size but I can tell you from watching my kids high school soccer teams the kids are getting bigger compared to when I played soccer 35 years ago in high school.

Their teams have several guys 6’2” and taller. My son is 6’1” and there are several boys on his team and other teams way taller than him.

 

[FairWarning]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

If these talented kids are opting for other sports, where are they? Can you point out the scholarship sports that are seeing an influx of talent at the college level? Is NCAA Baseball now robust with kids that would have been taking scholarships for football in the past? NCAA basketball is just a one-year audition for the best of the best, but those kids tend to be, you know, tall. Are they swimming?

So show me where these talented kids are showcasing their talents if not on the grid iron. Your theory needs a little evidence to support itself, IMO.

Tangentially related: First World Series since 1950 to not have an African American player.

Basketball is more deep now, kids are pushing that sport to wherever it can take them. Soccer is on the upswing as well. Then on the flipside kids are fat, lazy, and unathletic so the overall numbers are down. Basketball is the only pro sport with YoY increases in youth participation and the only growth sector in select sports, but mainly it's not talented kids went elsewhere they just vanished.

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

Also not sure I buy that basketball is 'more deep now' (sic). Deeper than when? The most coveted player in the upcoming draft ain't a 'merican, bruh. And NCAA basketball games are tough to watch with sloppy play, poor shooting and no cohesiveness because the best of the best are gone after one year. With only 12 roster spots on an NBA team, the path to glory is greatly reduced, especially for a talented player who isn't 6'4" or taller.

I think the comment that kids are fat, lazy and unathletic is a desperate dig to try and make your point. I have five kids, how many do you have? Not one of them is fat, lazy or unathletic. Neither are their friends. I coached dozens and dozens of kids (boys and girls) for 13 years in youth sports and I can't recall more than one or two who were overweight and even those kids gave it their all (I had one heavier set kid who just tattooed the soccer ball and was far more athletic than some of the skinnier kids).

Maybe this is all just one big fishing effort, if so, congrats. Otherwise, I find your theory pretty full of holes.

i live very near a college. the men's soccer games attract, like, singles of people.

8, 9 sometimes more.

I see some of the games when flipping thru the sports channels, literally no one outside of friends and family.

 

[FairWarning]

As for needing to be in a talent rich environment to succeed, I'd point out that Oregon has been successful for 20 years without being in a talent rich environment. And yes, I'll suggest that losing two national championship games in 15 years counts as success. A&M has never seen a title game, playoffs or a meaningful bowl (that I can remember). I guess they beat Alabama once.

I think this will change thanks to the transfer rules. 4-star recruits will not backup for 2-3 years at Bama anymore, too much money on the table for them. They can transfer and play right away. Look at basketball, a lot of smaller schools are succeeding in the big dance now.

As important as recruiting is, the transfer period is just as important now.

 

[mr. furley]

It has to be said that the Texas recruiting pipeline is suffering the same issues that the west coast pipeline did. Fewer and fewer talented kids are opting for football, and looking at other scholarship sports. OU, Texas, and TAMU are all falling victim to this. Honestly don't blame the kids.

If these talented kids are opting for other sports, where are they? Can you point out the scholarship sports that are seeing an influx of talent at the college level? Is NCAA Baseball now robust with kids that would have been taking scholarships for football in the past? NCAA basketball is just a one-year audition for the best of the best, but those kids tend to be, you know, tall. Are they swimming?

So show me where these talented kids are showcasing their talents if not on the grid iron. Your theory needs a little evidence to support itself, IMO.

Tangentially related: First World Series since 1950 to not have an African American player.

Basketball is more deep now, kids are pushing that sport to wherever it can take them. Soccer is on the upswing as well. Then on the flipside kids are fat, lazy, and unathletic so the overall numbers are down. Basketball is the only pro sport with YoY increases in youth participation and the only growth sector in select sports, but mainly it's not talented kids went elsewhere they just vanished.

If soccer is on the upswing, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the players would be taller? The average soccer player is like 5'9". So if all these talented kids no longer playing football are moving on to the pitch for soccer, where's the 6'3" stud that would have been a WR at Auburn?

Plus, nobody is attending NCAA male soccer games. What's the average attendance, 89? Parents, girlfriends and???? Kids want to be lionized and cheered for; they want to score chicks. Football players will forever be kings on campus.

Also not sure I buy that basketball is 'more deep now' (sic). Deeper than when? The most coveted player in the upcoming draft ain't a 'merican, bruh. And NCAA basketball games are tough to watch with sloppy play, poor shooting and no cohesiveness because the best of the best are gone after one year. With only 12 roster spots on an NBA team, the path to glory is greatly reduced, especially for a talented player who isn't 6'4" or taller.

I think the comment that kids are fat, lazy and unathletic is a desperate dig to try and make your point. I have five kids, how many do you have? Not one of them is fat, lazy or unathletic. Neither are their friends. I coached dozens and dozens of kids (boys and girls) for 13 years in youth sports and I can't recall more than one or two who were overweight and even those kids gave it their all (I had one heavier set kid who just tattooed the soccer ball and was far more athletic than some of the skinnier kids).

Maybe this is all just one big fishing effort, if so, congrats. Otherwise, I find your theory pretty full of holes.

i live very near a college. the men's soccer games attract, like, singles of people.

8, 9 sometimes more.

I see some of the games when flipping thru the sports channels, literally no one outside of friends and family.

yeah. i feel bad for the kids. it's so quiet in the stadium they play at that i can hear individuals communicating positioning, arguing, etc. when walking by.

 

[Jayded]

Absolutely brutal one-sided refereeing in ND/Syracuse game. Over the season average for yards in Q1, but missing obvious calls again Cuse (0 penalties thus far).