Now that Christmas is over....

[whaler11]

We're not talking about the same thing.

There are players that are further in their development to the NFL in high school than others. Then, there are also players who are behind in their development but have the talent to be developed. Then, there are players that are behind in development and do not have the talent to be developed. Let's call that last group "RKGs".

I'm not talking about the RKGs. I'm talking about the players that have the talent but will be a multi-year development. Those players will thrive on teams that get them more burn. I'm completely confident of that. UConn's entire NFL history is made up from that group, as we've only had a couple of 4 star players (Difton, Miller) and neither went anywhere.

Nobody should be talking about the RKGs being anything more than what they are...

And almost none of UConn’s players you are talking about picked UConn over a P5. Those players are already in the G5/FCS bucket.

 

[Hornet22]

We're not talking about the same thing.

There are players that are further in their development to the NFL in high school than others. Then, there are also players who are behind in their development but have the talent to be developed. Then, there are players that are behind in development and do not have the talent to be developed. Let's call that last group "RKGs".

I'm not talking about the RKGs. I'm talking about the players that have the talent but will be a multi-year development. Those players will thrive on teams that get them more burn. I'm completely confident of that. UConn's entire NFL history is made up from that group, as we've only had a couple of 4 star players (Difton, Miller) and neither went anywhere.

Nobody should be talking about the RKGs being anything more than what they are...

Agreed.
He clearly isn’t getting the point.
It’s about the playing time thats essential.

 

[whaler11]

It’s not about truth or lies. My point is it’s way easier for a four year starter at a UConn that puts up good numbers to get noticed and courted by an NFL scout than someone who never sees the field at Alabama. And if you think otherwise than we’ll just have to agree to disagree. Sure I know most kids who get recruited by an Alabama will choose them over UConn because they will always believe in their ability to see the field. And God bless them for that. But that choice, if it lands you on the bench, was a bad one.
It’s extremely difficult to get to the NFL from the bench. Not impossible but very difficult.

If you went to Alabama for 4 years and didn’t get on the field you aren’t an NFL player anyway.

You have created a class of players that doesn’t exist. If this player had picked UConn he wouldn’t make the NFL either because if he was good enough to play in the NFL he wouldn’t be on Alabama’s bench.

 

[whaler11]

Agreed.
He clearly isn’t getting the point.
It’s about the playing time thats essential.

Yes I apologize for not recognizing the imaginary group of players you have invented.

Sure these mythical players should choose the G5 over the P5.

 

[UConnDan97]

And almost none of UConn’s players you are talking about picked UConn over a P5. Those players are already in the G5/FCS bucket.

That's not true at all. The P5 schools they were offered by were more along the lines of BC, Cuse, Rutgers, Wake Forest, etc. But most had at least one offer if not multiple from P5 schools.

That's what made Diaco's recruiting so glaringly obviously bad. Many of those folks didn't even have 1, and we all noticed...

 

[huskymedic]

Perhaps not. But I'm definitely thinking like a UConn recruiter.

I'm a little too lazy to do the analysis, but I'd love to see percentages of 3 star athletes who make the NFL via the P5 and 3 star athletes who make it outside of the P5. Anecdotally, I think the latter must be larger but having the numbers would be nice. If true, that's something I would have in my back pocket on recruiting trips for the Huskies... #REStorred

This is a start...

Do recruiting rankings matter? The 2017 NFL Draft says yes

>>Of the 90 three-star draftees, 72 of them played for Power Five programs.<<

 

[Hornet22]

And almost none of UConn’s players you are talking about picked UConn over a P5. Those players are already in the G5/FCS bucket.

Good God
Whaler, do you realize that all we’re trying to highlight is that playing time is way better than pine time?
We already know that most kids will choose a P5 over a G5 and have already done so when faced with the choice. Again, all went saying (for the sake of Monday Morning Qb’ing) is that if you chose the P5 and you haven’t seen the field you were better off choosing the G5 and starting.
That’s all.

 

[UConnDan97]

Do recruiting rankings matter? The 2017 NFL Draft says yes

>>Of the 90 three-star draftees, 72 of them played for Power Five programs.<<

Alright.

There it is in black and white then. It must also mean that the majority of players drafted from the G5 / FCS aren't even 3 stars. The bulk of those folks must be 2 stars or less. And that group I would think almost certainly would be G5 dominant by definition, since many in the P5 don't recruit the bulk of those kids...

 

[whaler11]

That's not true at all. The P5 schools they were offered by were more along the lines of BC, Cuse, Rutgers, Wake Forest, etc. But most had at least one offer if not multiple from P5 schools.

That's what made Diaco's recruiting so glaringly obviously bad. Many of those folks didn't even have 1, and we all noticed...

So now your point is some kids should pick UConn over Wake and the reason for this is some have?

Are you guys arguing that there are potential NFL players on Syracuse’s bench and they would have had a better NFL route if they went to UConn?

You think more kids should pick G5 schools over P5 schools even though some do? Somehow this is the better road to the NFL even though Huskymedic’s data just proved that laughably wrong?

 

[whaler11]

Good God
Whaler, do you realize that all we’re trying to highlight is that playing time is way better than pine time?
We already know that most kids will choose a P5 over a G5 and have already done so when faced with the choice. Again, all went saying (for the sake of Monday Morning Qb’ing) is that if you chose the P5 and you haven’t seen the field you were better off choosing the G5 and starting.
That’s all.

Oh so you just want to decide where people should have gone to school after their careers are over. Sure you’ll do a better job of distributing talent in that case.

 

[whaler11]

This is a start...

Do recruiting rankings matter? The 2017 NFL Draft says yes

>>Of the 90 three-star draftees, 72 of them played for Power Five programs.<<

Wait reality isn’t just what I want to be true?

 

[UConnDan97]

So now your point is some kids should pick UConn over Wake and the reason for this is some have?

Are you guys arguing that there are potential NFL players on Syracuse’s bench and they would have had a better NFL route if they went to UConn?

You think more kids should pick G5 schools over P5 schools even though some do? Somehow this is the better road to the NFL even though Huskymedic’s data just proved that laughably wrong?

No. My point was that there are more kids on the MSU bench that could equally get a contract if they got more exposure vs another player there on the 2-deep. That's all I've been saying. Literally nothing more than that...

 

[UConnDan97]

So now your point is some kids should pick UConn over Wake and the reason for this is some have?

Are you guys arguing that there are potential NFL players on Syracuse’s bench and they would have had a better NFL route if they went to UConn?

You think more kids should pick G5 schools over P5 schools even though some do? Somehow this is the better road to the NFL even though Huskymedic’s data just proved that laughably wrong?

And the problem is that even Medic's data doesn't show that to be wrong. All it shows is that the 3 star kids that made it came from the P5. It doesn't show the 3- star kids at the P5 who didn't make it because they couldn't crack the 2-deep. So Medic's data only shows that the G5 had not been the historical avenue for those kids more often than not...

 

[UConnDan97]

This is a start...

Do recruiting rankings matter? The 2017 NFL Draft says yes

>>Of the 90 three-star draftees, 72 of them played for Power Five programs.<<

Hey Medic, do you know historically how many kids are rated 3 stars roughly? The article you have says they are the largest talent pool, yet only produced about 20 more NFLers than the 4 stars.

Part of that I'm sure is simply because they are less talented. But another part of that must be that they are buried in the same teams if their numbers are much larger...

 

[whaler11]

And the problem is that even Medic's data doesn't show that to be wrong. All it shows is that the 3 star kids that made it came from the P5. It doesn't show the 3- star kids at the P5 who didn't make it because they couldn't crack the 2-deep. So Medic's data only shows that the G5 had not been the historical avenue for those kids more often than not...

Medic shows that your assumption based of anicdotes was horrifically wrong.

Please stop pretending there are NFL caliber players who don’t crack 2-deeps. It’s an absurd assumption.

 

[whaler11]

No. My point was that there are more kids on the MSU bench that could equally get a contract if they got more exposure vs another player there on the 2-deep. That's all I've been saying. Literally nothing more than that...

That’s just what you want to be true.

It doesn’t even hold up to the slightest amount of scrutiny.

Player is good enough to play in NFL but not good enough to crack the 2-deep at Michigan State? Come on

 

[Hornet22]

Oh so you just want to decide where people should have gone to school after their careers are over. Sure you’ll do a better job of distributing talent in that case.

Ha!
Just simply saying that all the kids you eventually transferred out of those P5’s, had they thought strategically rather than with their egos, could have avoided the inevitable.
Morrison probably looked at the UConn roster and licked his chops. Again, FBS football is FBS football. Especially when you’re talking next level potential. When you land at a P5 or G5 you are in a sweet spot. The deciding factor, in my opinion, is playing time. Go to an FBS where you have a pretty good chance of seeing the field. I’m strictly assessing this from an NFL perspective and having the best shot.

 

[whaler11]

Ha!
Just simply saying that all the kids you eventually transferred out of those P5’s, had they thought strategically rather than with their egos, could have avoided the inevitable.
Morrison probably looked at the UConn roster and licked his chops. Again, FBS football is FBS football. Especially when you’re talking next level potential. When you land at a P5 or G5 you are in a sweet spot. The deciding factor, in my opinion, is playing time. Go to an FBS where you have a pretty good chance of seeing the field. I’m strictly assessing this from an NFL perspective and having the best shot.

Yet thousands upon thousands of players, their families and their coaches have looked at it and come to the opposite conclusion...

 

[Hornet22]

Medic shows that your assumption based of anicdotes was horrifically wrong.

Please stop pretending there are NFL caliber players who don’t crack 2-deeps. It’s an absurd assumption.

I’m sure there are players who leave P5’s and head to an FCS that make it to the NFL.

 

[whaler11]

I’m sure there are players who leave P5’s and head to an FCS that make it to the NFL.

Are you sure like Dan was 3 stars make if from the G5 and not the P5?

 

[UConnDan97]

That’s just what you want to be true.

It doesn’t even hold up to the slightest amount of scrutiny.

Player is good enough to play in NFL but not good enough to crack the 2-deep at Michigan State? Come on

Again, you're missing the point of what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that there are in some instances equivalent players on the bench vs the ones on the field for those schools. Both "could" get drafted. One does, due to exposure.

I mean, we had players like Knappe and Levy getting on 53 man rosters in the NFL when most UConn fans thought they were marginal at best! And you know they wouldn't have made the field at MSU. Yet there they were in NFL camps.

That's what I'm saying. And I'm saying there are a bunch of players like that, too...

 

[Hornet22]

Yet thousands upon thousands of players, their families and their coaches have looked at it and come to the opposite conclusion...

And lots of those players sat the pine and didn’t get developed via game reps and fizzled out (gave up on football, got in trouble, etc).
I don’t care if you were a high caliber player that got recruited. If you don’t see the field and get developed that way your skills won’t improve. You’re simply saying if they don’t see the field then it’s because they weren’t good or NFL caliber. I disagree.

 

[whaler11]

Again, you're missing the point of what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that there are in some instances equivalent players on the bench vs the ones on the field for those schools. Both "could" get drafted. One does, due to exposure.

I mean, we had players like Knappe and Levy getting on 53 man rosters in the NFL when most UConn fans thought they were marginal at best! And you know they wouldn't have made the field at MSU. Yet there they were in NFL camps.

That's what I'm saying. And I'm saying there are a bunch of players like that, too...

Pretty much everyone with a pulse at Michigan State or equiv gets an NFL camp invite.

Rutgers had like 17 a few years ago.

 

[huskymedic]

Hey Medic, do you know historically how many kids are rated 3 stars roughly? The article you have says they are the largest talent pool, yet only produced about 20 more NFLers than the 4 stars.

Part of that I'm sure is simply because they are less talented. But another part of that must be that they are buried in the same teams if their numbers are much larger...

It’s the season of giving... Your guide to the stars: What the ratings for college football recruits really mean

>>There are currently 1,779 three-star recruits for this class. Three-star recruits and above represent the top 60.5 percent of students on the list and about 0.78 percent of all high school seniors.<<

 

[whaler11]

And lots of those players sat the pine and didn’t get developed via game reps and fizzled out (gave up on football, got in trouble, etc).
I don’t care if you were a high caliber player that got recruited. If you don’t see the field and get developed that way your skills won’t improve. You’re simply saying if they don’t see the field then it’s because they weren’t good or NFL caliber. I disagree.

Hey maybe everyone is wrong and you are right. Happens to me sometimes .

 

[Hornet22]

That’s just what you want to be true.

It doesn’t even hold up to the slightest amount of scrutiny.

Player is good enough to play in NFL but not good enough to crack the 2-deep at Michigan State? Come on

So let me ask you a simple question Whaler. And please give me a simple answer. Considering the 2 deep. Let’s say for instance Alabama has 15 scholarship DB’s and of those 5 are 5 star and the rest are 4 star. All of those guys can’t play can they? So you’re telling us the ones that can’t crack that two deep shouldn’t have had stars and aren’t good enough to make the NFL? Doesn’t it become a numbers game? Teams only take 65 players or so on the road. So you’re telling us all the guys that are left behind (scholarship guys) are not good on Bama’s roster?

 

[UConnDan97]

It’s the season of giving... Your guide to the stars: What the ratings for college football recruits really mean

>>There are currently 1,779 three-star recruits for this class. Three-star recruits and above represent the top 60.5 percent of students on the list and about 0.78 percent of all high school seniors.<<

Thanks for doing that.

So what we're looking at is that the 3 star athletes outnumber the combined 4/5 star athletes by more than 4 to 1. That's not even including the two star or no star.

Now I'm convinced I'm right. There are a bunch of players on those rosters that are not getting looks. I won't argue the point anymore, but the numbers tell me what I needed to know.

Come to UConn, folks! You'll get your 6th round pick locked up...

 

[whaler11]

So let me ask you a simple question Whaler. And please give me a simple answer. Considering the 2 deep. Let’s say for instance Alabama has 15 scholarship DB’s and of those 5 are 5 star and the rest are 4 star. All of those guys can’t play can they? So you’re telling us the ones that can’t crack that two deep shouldn’t have had stars and aren’t good enough to make the NFL? Doesn’t it become a numbers game? Teams only take 65 players or so on the road. So you’re telling us all the guys that are left behind (scholarship guys) are not good on Bama’s roster?

Let’s say they have 15? 2 redshirt, 1 is hurt - maybe 12 are available Saturday.

They play 7-8 in a close conference game. 10 in one of their constant blowouts.

They also give you 5 years to play 4.

They also have a pro workout days and they give camp invites to anyone willing to play tackling dummy.

Why don’t these NFL caliber bench warmers transfer? Why is the transfer market jammed up with Tre Bell and not NFL McFourstar.

 

[whaler11]

Thanks for doing that.

So what we're looking at is that the 3 star athletes outnumber the combined 4/5 star athletes by more than 4 to 1. That's not even including the two star or no star.

Now I'm convinced I'm right. There are a bunch of players on those rosters that are not getting looks. I won't argue the point anymore, but the numbers tell me what I needed to know.

Come to UConn, folks! You'll get your 6th round pick locked up...

You do realize you are making the exact opposite argument you’d make on the soccer board right?

By the logic in this thread Americans should play in MLS than go to Europe.

 

[UConnDan97]

You do realize you are making the exact opposite argument you’d make on the soccer board right?

By the logic in this thread Americans should play in MLS than go to Europe.

Actually, I've made the same argument on the soccer board, and it is absolutely true. American players had a better chance of making the national team via the MLS starting squads versus riding the pine in Europe, and I've said as much.

The problem is that you are trying to answer a different question than the one I'm answering. I'm not saying which one makes you a better or more impactful professional player (Europe probably does). I'm saying which one gives you a better chance to get there! And the soccer analogy is a perfect one to describe why that's true...