The 2019 Recruiting thread

DomeHawk":2ae3n6ck said:

JSeahawks":2ae3n6ck said:

Ducks also just landed 3 star corner DJ James from Spanish Head, Alabama. Flipped him from Mississippi State. I'll take 3 stars from down south all day long.

Click to expand...

There is this myth that players from down south are better football players than players from the west coast. I guess this is based on the SEC being in the CFP every year.

Click to expand...

Not entirely true. Although it is a component.

There are a lot of other factors at play besides population distribution

1. Climate
2. Size of School
3. Culture
4. Resources

Just to name a few. Generally speaking, there are a lot more superior athletes produced in the south than elsewhere despite what one would expect due to population. That's been a growing trend over the last several decades.

Probably the single biggest unique factor is #3 and #4 on this list. Larger schools have bigger budgets. You don't see a lot of 5A/6A schools on the west coast. These larger schools are more easily capable of hiring professional athletic training staff and strength and conditioning staff. Schools in the east/south have been far ahead of the curve in building athletes from before high school by way of training and nutrition.

You do see some smaller schools buck this trend. Most tend to be either from affluent locations or private schools with a disproportionate lean towards athletics. But in general, you don't see the resource and institutional support for these kinds of programs at a widespread level. I've seen it referenced by many coaches in this area how advanced these programs are from middle school all the way through high school. Even going back to the 90s.

In general, awareness of training/nutrition services caught on much faster in the south.

Couple of decent studies put out that don't necessarily relate to the regional differences but definitely touch on this subject:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28157403

Interesting to note, that statistically public schools have a greater access to these programs than private schools. Obviously not all private institutions are athletic focused. But interesting nonetheless to see that the public education system isn't behind in this respect as one might otherwise suspect.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4641544/

Lists some reasons that factor in why schools would resist implementing athletic trainers/nutritionists. Many of these factors (Lack of power, community interference and lack of awareness) are generally low hurdles for schools in the south. I'm confident much of that has to do with culture. Athletic departments tend to be more robust and supported in the community. Of course this is not universal and I have every reason to expect that budgetary concerns dominate the challenges for improving these kinds of programs everywhere (South included).

I also have a suspicion that climate plays a unique role in the South. The heat/humidity that is common there generally puts a premium on athletic trainers as heat related sports injuries are at a high risk there. Korey Stringer was a high profile heat stroke death (2001) at the professional level. And his case served as a clarion call for athletic programs to do a better job of preventing heat stroke. Particularly where these injuries were most acute. However there were plenty of deaths leading up to that (19 between 1995 and 2001 at the high school/college level).

So I think there isn't any one particular thing that provides a better environment for building athletes in the South. I think it's been increasingly this way over the last 20 years. The SEC/ACC have been merely the natural beneficiaries of better overall talent as a result, since most students tend to opt for schools fairly close for familial reasons.

Great post Attyla.

You dont need to look much further than the athletic complexes and stadiums deep south high schools are using to demonstrate points 3 and 4.

This isnt about numbers... its about culture.

The deep south and south will buy Angus Beef where everyone else buys off the shelf Hamburger to feed their players, that's the difference and it's been that way for 70 or so years.

chris98251":206zu9o1 said:

The deep south and south will buy Angus Beef where everyone else buys off the shelf Hamburger to feed their players, that's the difference and it's been that way for 70 or so years.

Click to expand...

Literally and figuratively i imagine.

Uncle Si":2xxmegj0 said:

Great post Attyla.

You dont need to look much further than the athletic complexes and stadiums deep south high schools are using to demonstrate points 3 and 4.

This isnt about numbers... its about culture.

Click to expand...

As Attyla posted: "Not entirely true. Although it is a component."

It is a good post and at the risk of stating the obvious, few things are ever as simple as one single element of the issue but yes, population plays a part.

Another point that he made that athletes tend to want to play closer to home also relates to the population point where it is difficult for western schools to recruit eastern athletes.

I can remember times where Alabama and the SEC were not relevant to the national discussion and that will happen again at some point.

But, if people really buy into this superior southern physical specimen some might want to check themselves that they are not referencing the Jimmy the Greek theory.

DomeHawk":34urfadz said:

But, if people really buy into this superior southern physical specimen some might want to check themselves that they are not referencing the Jimmy the Greek theory.

Click to expand...

I'm definitely not saying that. Because I don't believe that at all.

I'm reminded of a series of conversations I had with some local coaches in the area back in the mid 2000s. They had attended a coaches symposium in the early 2000s -- pre 9/11 if I recall, I can't remember where it was. But what struck me is how they described the difference in how programs functioned in the South.

Firstly, that the concept of programs (starting from elementary/pee wee all the way through high school) was definitely not in use out here, with very few exceptions. But out east (particularly in the South/Southeast) it was far more common.

Not to be diminished, but the embrace of nutrition and building mass was far more fully formed back then in that region. If you wanted a 200 lb running back, you built them up. Literally. I recall coaches marveling (or disgusted) at the idea of monitoring intake regimens for teen age boys in the 9000-12000 calories a day range. So much so that kids (if one could believe it), found it genuinely difficult to maintain without getting physically sick. Literally meal planning and monitoring it at a program level. In conjunction with more organized strength training regimens. Improving caloric intake to better maximize strength building. Physiologically building a 180 lb running back into a 205 lb running back. And 230 lb OL into 280-290.

Programs can't do this without outside help. And in these regions, they were early adherents in the widespread organizational use of athletic trainers and nutritionists to build talent from scratch. Even now here locally, it's a bit hit or miss. Many of the more successful programs here locally look like they have 20+ coaches and staff on the sideline at any game. When they play other less successful teams, they look like they have 4-5.

In my estimation, it doesn't have as much, if anything to do with 'genetic necessities' as Jimmy G/Al Campanis may have spewed venomously. It has more to do with environment, and how kids had/have much greater access to institutional means toward building their bodies over years.

And that dovetails into an inherent population advantage. Because now you're producing better/bigger/faster athletes as a percentage of participants. And your total number of participants is also larger. So now you're disproportionately producing more high level athletes per participant. And also you are producing better quality average athletes as well. The rising tide floating all athletes so to speak.

I agree, there was a time where the SEC was just kind of another conference. Florida dominated out east as they enjoyed a really rich population of talent where kids naturally could be active 12 months out of the year. The South/Southeast/East enjoyed a population advantage then too. But the gap wasn't pronounced. Suggesting strongly that something else was at play. Certainly genetics didn't change in the last 25-30 years.

Attyla the Hawk":wem9y476 said:

DomeHawk":wem9y476 said:

But, if people really buy into this superior southern physical specimen some might want to check themselves that they are not referencing the Jimmy the Greek theory.

Click to expand...

I'm definitely not saying that. Because I don't believe that at all.

I'm reminded of a series of conversations I had with some local coaches in the area back in the mid 2000s. They had attended a coaches symposium in the early 2000s -- pre 9/11 if I recall, I can't remember where it was. But what struck me is how they described the difference in how programs functioned in the South.

Firstly, that the concept of programs (starting from elementary/pee wee all the way through high school) was definitely not in use out here, with very few exceptions. But out east (particularly in the South/Southeast) it was far more common.

Not to be diminished, but the embrace of nutrition and building mass was far more fully formed back then in that region. If you wanted a 200 lb running back, you built them up. Literally. I recall coaches marveling (or disgusted) at the idea of monitoring intake regimens for teen age boys in the 9000-12000 calories a day range. So much so that kids (if one could believe it), found it genuinely difficult to maintain without getting physically sick. Literally meal planning and monitoring it at a program level. In conjunction with more organized strength training regimens. Improving caloric intake to better maximize strength building. Physiologically building a 180 lb running back into a 205 lb running back. And 230 lb OL into 280-290.

Programs can't do this without outside help. And in these regions, they were early adherents in the widespread organizational use of athletic trainers and nutritionists to build talent from scratch. Even now here locally, it's a bit hit or miss. Many of the more successful programs here locally look like they have 20+ coaches and staff on the sideline at any game. When they play other less successful teams, they look like they have 4-5.

In my estimation, it doesn't have as much, if anything to do with 'genetic necessities' as Jimmy G/Al Campanis may have spewed venomously. It has more to do with environment, and how kids had/have much greater access to institutional means toward building their bodies over years.

And that dovetails into an inherent population advantage. Because now you're producing better/bigger/faster athletes as a percentage of participants. And your total number of participants is also larger. So now you're disproportionately producing more high level athletes per participant. And also you are producing better quality average athletes as well. The rising tide floating all athletes so to speak.

I agree, there was a time where the SEC was just kind of another conference. Florida dominated out east as they enjoyed a really rich population of talent where kids naturally could be active 12 months out of the year. The South/Southeast/East enjoyed a population advantage then too. But the gap wasn't pronounced. Suggesting strongly that something else was at play. Certainly genetics didn't change in the last 25-30 years.

Click to expand...

"In my estimation, it doesn't have as much, if anything to do with 'genetic necessities' as Jimmy G/Al Campanis may have spewed venomously."

And, I am not trying to insinuate that you are although I can see it might appear that way and for that I sincerely apologize. You make some very good points and I appreciate your willingness to engage in intelligent discussion, we don't get that much here.

There are all sorts of components and another might be economics, although I don't know how much different that would be from the average west coast kid that comes from an impoverished background.

DomeHawk":1m2yf22t said:

"In my estimation, it doesn't have as much, if anything to do with 'genetic necessities' as Jimmy G/Al Campanis may have spewed venomously."

And, I am not trying to insinuate that you are although I can see it might appear that way and for that I sincerely apologize.

Click to expand...

Don't apologize. I didn't take it that way at all.

Not sure that socioeconomics plays a part. Considering that the south, broadly speaking, otherwise seriously lags behind the rest of the country in that respect in almost every range of economic indicators. If anything, the success of student athletes in this region rather defies general economic disadvantages as a whole. If there was a relationship, I'd expect it to diminish results.

Nor would it explain why things changed. Relative economics did/have not. Nor have genetics. So I think it's easy to rule those explanations out.

DomeHawk":2kekmvz1 said:

Uncle Si":2kekmvz1 said:

Great post Attyla.

You dont need to look much further than the athletic complexes and stadiums deep south high schools are using to demonstrate points 3 and 4.

This isnt about numbers... its about culture.

Click to expand...

As Attyla posted: "Not entirely true. Although it is a component."

It is a good post and at the risk of stating the obvious, few things are ever as simple as one single element of the issue but yes, population plays a part.

Another point that he made that athletes tend to want to play closer to home also relates to the population point where it is difficult for western schools to recruit eastern athletes.

I can remember times where Alabama and the SEC were not relevant to the national discussion and that will happen again at some point.

But, if people really buy into this superior southern physical specimen some might want to check themselves that they are not referencing the Jimmy the Greek theory.

Click to expand...

He listed 4. I chose 2.


Im discussing the culture of athletics in the deep south. The commitment and investment they are willing to make HS athletics. The truth is quite apparent when you visit the athletic complexes these communities provide their young athletes. I didnt say anything about physical specimens.

Ive lived on both coasts, the midwest, the southwest and traveled to the southeast for college sports. There is no comparison to what the southeast, texas, oklahoma are providing there athletes in terms of resources from community to community.

These athletes have advantages in waves.

JSeahawks":3a4ola8u said:

Likely to be a good day for USC today. Kyle Ford and Bru McCoy, both 5 star receivers (although McCoy could also play defense), expected to commit to them today at the All American Bowl. As much as I hate to think about it the Pac12 could use a return to dominance by USC.

Click to expand...

The whole cliff Kingsbury thing may end up biting usc in the ass. Read on usc’s site today that Bru McCoy May try to get out of his LOI and sign with texas instead. Even some talk that he may transfer and sit out a year if he can’t get out of his letter of intent.

Things aren’t done with Ford yet either. He did not sign early and is still talking to the ducks and huskies.

Uncle Si":2n03ea2j said:

DomeHawk":2n03ea2j said:

Uncle Si":2n03ea2j said:

Great post Attyla.

You dont need to look much further than the athletic complexes and stadiums deep south high schools are using to demonstrate points 3 and 4.

This isnt about numbers... its about culture.

Click to expand...

As Attyla posted: "Not entirely true. Although it is a component."

It is a good post and at the risk of stating the obvious, few things are ever as simple as one single element of the issue but yes, population plays a part.

Another point that he made that athletes tend to want to play closer to home also relates to the population point where it is difficult for western schools to recruit eastern athletes.

I can remember times where Alabama and the SEC were not relevant to the national discussion and that will happen again at some point.

But, if people really buy into this superior southern physical specimen some might want to check themselves that they are not referencing the Jimmy the Greek theory.

Click to expand...

He listed 4. I chose 2.


Im discussing the culture of athletics in the deep south. The commitment and investment they are willing to make HS athletics. The truth is quite apparent when you visit the athletic complexes these communities provide their young athletes. I didnt say anything about physical specimens.

Ive lived on both coasts, the midwest, the southwest and traveled to the southeast for college sports. There is no comparison to what the southeast, texas, oklahoma are providing there athletes in terms of resources from community to community.

These athletes have advantages in waves.

Click to expand...

I get it, and point taken, but you wrote that it isn't about numbers. Both Attyla and I wrote that it IS a component. That's all.

The state of Texas has always had a huge football "culture" also, with relatively unlimited resources being assigned to their HS programs, BUT that hasn't resulted in the Longhorns having a dominant program.

https://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/story?id=132425&page=1

We are talking about Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and east Texas. Big populations, certainly.

But Louisiana and Mississippi have been seeing negative growth for a decade, conversely Washington and oregon are two of the more consistently growing states. California the biggest by a large margin. Phoenix to Tuscon is as big as Dallas.4 of the top 10 largest city centers are pac 12 cities. (3 more are in Texas). Seattle meteo area is 15th.

Numbers are not a key component in my opinion.

And its not a question of whether the local college reaps the benefit. (Ignoring the number of D1 colleges that are splitting that population up. Imagine if texas had just two colleges) The players do. And the culture grows.

Football west of the divide has been losing out to the Southeast and midwest for some time now. If youve spent time in those areas, then you can see why.

So when J says he will take a 3 star from the Southeast i understand what he means. The competition and culture there is far different than out West. They are developing better football players.

I coach at a school here with 3700 kids. Its a football school. Yet... ive got more soccer players at D1 in the last 3 years than football has in the 6 since ive been there. And soccer rarely leads to scholarships.

Uncle Si":18jvg0of said:

We are talking about Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and east Texas. Big populations, certainly.

But Louisiana and Mississippi have been seeing negative growth for a decade, conversely Washington and oregon are two of the more consistently growing states. California the biggest by a large margin. Phoenix to Tuscon is as big as Dallas.4 of the top 10 largest city centers are pac 12 cities. (3 more are in Texas). Seattle meteo area is 15th.

Numbers are not a key component in my opinion.

And its not a question of whether the local college reaps the benefit. (Ignoring the number of D1 colleges that are splitting that population up. Imagine if texas had just two colleges) The players do. And the culture grows.

Football west of the divide has been losing out to the Southeast and midwest for some time now. If youve spent time in those areas, then you can see why.

So when J says he will take a 3 star from the Southeast i understand what he means. The competition and culture there is far different than out West. They are developing better football players.

I coach at a school here with 3700 kids. Its a football school. Yet... ive got more soccer players at D1 in the last 3 years than football has in the 6 since ive been there. And soccer rarely leads to scholarships.

Click to expand...

Lol, the same people are evaluating the players both east and west. If they are better then they wouldn't be a 3-star, they would be a 4-star. It's just ridiculous to say that they have two different 3-star ratings.

And, Alabama isn't just recruiting in those states, in fact there was a recent article how they are recruiting in the Pac-12 region now.

It's a simple concept really, it's called "talent pool," every organization in the world gets it.

https://fansided.com/2018/12/27/alabama ... mpionship/

Right.. and the southeast is producing a lot more talent from their pool.

It is that simple of a concept.

Of course Alabama is recruiting the best players from all over the country.. they can.

And when the majority of those come from a certain part of the country it should show you something.

In terms of the star rating.. its obviously subjective, and so when looking at 5 athletes from the same area it becomes easy to undervalue some as compared to others already knowing youre only going to have a limited number of 5 stars by most systens definition (as well as numerous ranking agencies). So yes, i believe competition in the area plays a role in the ratings assigned players. Really surprised at how dismissive you are of that natural reality seeing as how in touch you are with Husky football.

But i digress, you seem intent on defending this despite the obvious ill leave it at this.

Nfl players home state ranked by % of overall number of players to total male population (pay attention to ratio):

Florida
Georgia
South carolina
Alabama
Louisiana


And just total number:

Florida
California

201 and 199 nfl players from the top 2 respectively despite california having 17 million more people than Florida.

Curiously, ohio with just 11 million people has 84 people in the NFL georgia with just 10 million has 114 players.

Washington with nearly 8 million people has nust 19 players

And as J said, when subjectively selecting stars to place on a kid from florida, youre doubtful to compare him to kid from Washington or Oregon (just 30 NFL players combined. Hawaii has 13 and with 6 million less people than washington). Wisconsin with 2 miion less that Washington has almost twice as many players in the nfl. Minnesota has the same population as Wisconsin and same number of players in nfl as Washington.

Its culture.

We could go all day on this, but as a fan of husky football i think we both want to see improvements beyond "get the florida kid up here"

McCoy has now officially signed papers with Texas.

Both Ford and Nacua are actively looking around.

What a cluster for USC.

drrew":5mk5aany said:

McCoy has no officially signed papers with Texas.

Both Ford and Nacua are actively looking around.

What a cluster for USC.

Click to expand...

Agreed, things are not looking good in Troy.

drrew":32hzgqrx said:

McCoy has now officially signed papers with Texas.

Both Ford and Nacua are actively looking around.

What a cluster for USC.

Click to expand...

Has to sit out a year unless the NCAA grants him a waiver.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... -longhorns

DomeHawk":l658y4f5 said:

drrew":l658y4f5 said:

McCoy has now officially signed papers with Texas.

Both Ford and Nacua are actively looking around.

What a cluster for USC.

Click to expand...

Has to sit out a year unless the NCAA grants him a waiver.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... -longhorns

Click to expand...

Having said that, I think he stands a good chance of getting the waiver.

I think recruits should be able have a reasonable expectation that the coach they agreed to be coached by will be there.

DomeHawk":hr14aqp0 said:

DomeHawk":hr14aqp0 said:

drrew":hr14aqp0 said:

McCoy has now officially signed papers with Texas.

Both Ford and Nacua are actively looking around.

What a cluster for USC.

Click to expand...

Has to sit out a year unless the NCAA grants him a waiver.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... -longhorns

Click to expand...

Having said that, I think he stands a good chance of getting the waiver.

I think recruits should be able have a reasonable expectation that the coach they agreed to be coached by will be there.

Click to expand...

I agree with you if it’s the head coach. Not sure I agree when it’s a coordinator or position coach.

drrew":28lpguck said:

McCoy has now officially signed papers with Texas.

Both Ford and Nacua are actively looking around.

What a cluster for USC.

Click to expand...

I'd love to see USC hit Texas with a tampering charge. That being sad, sounds like this could only be the start for USC. Rumors of a lot more guys leaving, including possibly their freshman starting quarterback.