Watered down talent

[Milktruck74]

This season has been marked by some unlikely teams stepping up and beating some traditional powerhouses (not just yesterday at the marker, but many). Several of the traditional bottom feeders are having solid seasons....As much as I hate to use the word Parity, that is what is happening. I don't see the bottom getting more talented as much as I see the top getting watered down. With all the moves (FCS to FBS, D2 to FCS, 0 to FBS, 0 to FCS) there is probably 10-20% more scholarship opportunities out there than 10 years ago. To me it is watering down the talent pool and hence causing parity.....Thoughts?

[MR. CHICKEN]

.....NO THOUGHTS......JES' PADDIN'....DUH POST COUNT........AWK!

[MUfan]

.....NO THOUGHTS......JES' PADDIN'....DUH POST COUNT........AWK!
I have to agree with Mr. Chicken on this one.

[Milktruck74]

Just thinking through the SoCon over the last 10 years.... Ga State-Statesboro +22, App +22, Mercer +63, ETSU +63, GO back a few more years and you have Marshall +22, Elon +27, Wofford +27....... That is a lot more schollys for the same number of HS players.

[KPSUL]

Disagree

[CID1990]

If there is more parity anywhere it appears to be between FCS and FBS. There seem to be a lot more players in FCS that in years past would have been playing FBS.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[MR. CHICKEN]

.....YEAH BUT MANY....COME BACK TA FCS.....WHEN KEELER OFFERS....xcoolx.........PLAYIN' TIME........WHAA DID AH GET INVOLVED....xconfusedxxdontknowx............FIRE BRAWK!

[bonarae]

Meanwhile...

It is more often seen at both Division I football subdivisions and at the Division II as well as NAIA levels. Division III seems not affected by this trend.

[Milktruck74]

Not counting NAIA or D3 (which also helps pull talent away from the traditional powers), there have been 1226 scholarships added since 2008 on teams starting/restarting programs (FBS-5, FCS-7, D2-10). This doesn't count any teams that transitioned up levels.

[MR. CHICKEN]

.....HOW MANY....WOOD BE WALK-ONS....NOW.....ABSORB...DUH FREE RIDERS..xconfusedx.............FIRE BRAWK!

[BearDownMU]

This season has been marked by some unlikely teams stepping up and beating some traditional powerhouses (not just yesterday at the marker, but many). Several of the traditional bottom feeders are having solid seasons....As much as I hate to use the word Parity, that is what is happening. I don't see the bottom getting more talented as much as I see the top getting watered down. With all the moves (FCS to FBS, D2 to FCS, 0 to FBS, 0 to FCS) there is probably 10-20% more scholarship opportunities out there than 10 years ago. To me it is watering down the talent pool and hence causing parity.....Thoughts?

Certainly possible, but this would also have to assume the number of high school players remains static. There are high schools popping up around Atlanta constantly. Plus charter and private schools. And the population is increasing. So, I think you have a worthwhile premise, but we would really need to know if the demand (# of scholarships) is actually outpacing supply (# of "qualified" high school football players)

[Theee Catrabbit]

(not just yesterday at the marker, but many). .....Thoughts? Ummm...SDSU is in the playoffs every year for how many years, they are ranked #11, not sure why you threw that in here. Those are my thoughts.

[kalm]

I see bigger, faster, better athletes across the board in FCS. Disagree.

[Milktruck74]

Ummm...SDSU is in the playoffs every year for how many years, they are ranked #11, not sure why you threw that in here. Those are my thoughts.

Fair enough, I could have easily said Chattanooga (was a 6-8th place SoCon team for 20 years)....now sitting on 3 straight Conf Championships....probably not a 4th after yesterday. Point is the Middle has become more competitive in most conferencess, is it because they have gotten better or the top has weakened?

[Milktruck74]

I see bigger, faster, better athletes across the board in FCS. Disagree.

I agree the athletes are much bigger and faster than they were 15 years ago. I'm 20 years removed, and I do not think I could have played on the FCS level, which I was a solid player (not great, solid). My father was an All Pro (started 13 nfl seasons, and he actually played with Cooper Cupp's grandfather) in the 70-80s, he was a HUGE DT at 6'8" 280#..... In this environment he probably wouldn't even have played at his college...let alone started. I'm not saying individual players aren't as talented as the players 20 years ago (actually opposite), I'm saying the talent pool as a whole is better, it is just spread thinner due to the total number of teams....and it isn't a bad thing, just an observation.

[Milktruck74]

Certainly possible, but this would also have to assume the number of high school players remains static. There are high schools popping up around Atlanta constantly. Plus charter and private schools. And the population is increasing. So, I think you have a worthwhile premise, but we would really need to know if the demand (# of scholarships) is actually outpacing supply (# of "qualified" high school football players)

Good points, but I would also input that the number of players currently playing HS football is actually lower than it was in the 70s/80s/90s. Kids are specializing in a single sport earlier and earlier, there are many more options (sports and otherwise) and parents are actually discouraging kids from playing. Even thought the population is growing and schools are popping up everywhere, the numbers on the teams are shrinking....I'll try to find actual facts that support this....I could be completely wrong...either way, it is a fun discussion.


Edit: I found some data regarding years and number of HS players... in 2009 a total of 1,113,062 kids played HS football in 2013 it was 1,088,158. I'm not sure if this is a trend, but it does support my claim that fewer kids are playing, regardless of the growing population and the number of teams/High Schools growing.....it may just be these two years, but.....

[Bucs2016]

This season has been marked by some unlikely teams stepping up and beating some traditional powerhouses (not just yesterday at the marker, but many). Several of the traditional bottom feeders are having solid seasons....As much as I hate to use the word Parity, that is what is happening. I don't see the bottom getting more talented as much as I see the top getting watered down. With all the moves (FCS to FBS, D2 to FCS, 0 to FBS, 0 to FCS) there is probably 10-20% more scholarship opportunities out there than 10 years ago. To me it is watering down the talent pool and hence causing parity.....Thoughts?

I completely agree. Not just move ups but new programs. UNC Charlotte. Coastal. Limestone. Kennesaw State. Campbell. All FBS, FCS, D2 teams just around the SC/NC/GA corridor competing for a lot of the same kids that didn't exist 15 years ago.

I played at Charleston Southern early 2000s. We were mediocre hovering .500ish several years until that magical 2005 season.

NOW they're incredibly good. But watched some practices up close. They ARE better than we were...but not THAT much. Not nearly as much better as their incredible run would have some think.

And that's where I agree with you. Power programs moving up. New programs being created. It's really spread the talent out a lot.

And I love it!!! Almost like NFL where any team any year could emerge.

[Bucs2016]

I agree the athletes are much bigger and faster than they were 15 years ago. I'm 20 years removed, and I do not think I could have played on the FCS level, which I was a solid player (not great, solid). My father was an All Pro (started 13 nfl seasons, and he actually played with Cooper Cupp's grandfather) in the 70-80s, he was a HUGE DT at 6'8" 280#..... In this environment he probably wouldn't even have played at his college...let alone started. I'm not saying individual players aren't as talented as the players 20 years ago (actually opposite), I'm saying the talent pool as a whole is better, it is just spread thinner due to the total number of teams....and it isn't a bad thing, just an observation.

Nah man. The reason is because the world of strength and conditioning has BOOMED THE past 20 years. Huge breakthroughs. If your 17 yr old self was teleported to today....you'd have been bigger and faster also. And vice versa for today's players if they went back. 20 years ago creatine was still iffy and bench press max "mattered". The players aren't genetically bigger and faster. They're just trained much better and much earlier. You would've been just as good today. Just bigger and faster.

[lionsrking2]

This season has been marked by some unlikely teams stepping up and beating some traditional powerhouses (not just yesterday at the marker, but many). Several of the traditional bottom feeders are having solid seasons....As much as I hate to use the word Parity, that is what is happening. I don't see the bottom getting more talented as much as I see the top getting watered down. With all the moves (FCS to FBS, D2 to FCS, 0 to FBS, 0 to FCS) there is probably 10-20% more scholarship opportunities out there than 10 years ago. To me it is watering down the talent pool and hence causing parity.....Thoughts?

It's a lot easier and cheaper (relatively speaking) to recruit today than it was 10+ years ago. Youtube and Hudl has made for easy access to highlight videos, not to mention social media and networking apps help coaches develop long distance relationships with kids they never would have been able to in the past. In the old days, it was handwritten letters, landline phone calls, and face-to-face visits. Not to mention, in order to watch recruit video, you either had to visit the school in person, or have VHS copies made and mailed, which cost money and time, especially for the high school coaches. And in the old, old days, prior to VHS video, it was 8mm reel-to-reel film, which made it nearly impossible to evaluate off of the recruits campus.

With all that said, I think the biggest reason for parity in the last few years is the continued development of spread offenses, and spread QBs. The era of trench warfare has ended as we once knew it, and if you have a good QB, and solid set of skill players around him, you can give yourself a chance on a given day. In the old days, the biggest, fastest and strongest dominated. They still do, but the ability to spread the field and isolate skill in space has opened the door to more upsets.

[Milktruck74]

Nah man. The reason is because the world of strength and conditioning has BOOMED THE past 20 years. Huge breakthroughs. If your 17 yr old self was teleported to today....you'd have been bigger and faster also. And vice versa for today's players if they went back. 20 years ago creatine was still iffy and bench press max "mattered". The players aren't genetically bigger and faster. They're just trained much better and much earlier. You would've been just as good today. Just bigger and faster.

I agree, but I still say what was a Very Solid FCS (1AA) player 20 years ago and a very Elite Pro player from 40 years back wouldn't even be preferred walk ons on a 2016 FCS team. The game has dramatically changed....and for the better.

- - - Updated - - -

And you mean my Bench Max doesn't matter? Hell, I'm still bragging about that!!! hahaha

[Bucs2016]

I agree, but I still say what was a Very Solid FCS (1AA) player 20 years ago and a very Elite Pro player from 40 years back wouldn't even be preferred walk ons on a 2016 FCS team. The game has dramatically changed....and for the better.

- - - Updated - - -

And you mean my Bench Max doesn't matter? Hell, I'm still bragging about that!!! hahaha

Good points. S&C is so advanced and mainstream now. That's the difference

[Go...gate]

.....NO THOUGHTS......JES' PADDIN'....DUH POST COUNT........AWK!

I'm with Mr. Chicken on this one!

[grizband]

Individual talent may have improved. However, don't think Georgia Southern, Marshall, App State, etc wouldn't still be competing for the top talent

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[ngineer]

If there is more parity anywhere it appears to be between FCS and FBS. There seem to be a lot more players in FCS that in years past would have been playing FBS.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I agree. I think more players realize that getting actual playing time means more than being on the three deep at an P-5. A good number of FCS wins over FBS schools this year, too. I don't consider this watering down, but a wider distribution of talent, which makes for a lot more exciting games.

[Gil Dobie]

I've seen some great players coming into Fargo this year. Legit NFL receivers on EWU and SDSU.

[Twentysix]

Aren't there less FBS players now though. 20 years ago didn't FBS teams have 100 or 150 man rosters? Where teams like Michigan would recruit kids just to keep them from other teams etc. That stuff stopped, and as an effect has caused NFL/CFL level players to trickle down deeper and deeper into the lower FBS and FCS.

[Bisonoline]

This season has been marked by some unlikely teams stepping up and beating some traditional powerhouses (not just yesterday at the marker, but many). Several of the traditional bottom feeders are having solid seasons....As much as I hate to use the word Parity, that is what is happening. I don't see the bottom getting more talented as much as I see the top getting watered down. With all the moves (FCS to FBS, D2 to FCS, 0 to FBS, 0 to FCS) there is probably 10-20% more scholarship opportunities out there than 10 years ago. To me it is watering down the talent pool and hence causing parity.....Thoughts?

The FBS can only offer so many schollies. So the kids have to go some where. Kids coming out of high school are bigger stronger and faster. They go to camps all over during the summer. Kids in HS are paying to go to strength and conditioning places with instructional specialties for QBs linemane etc etc.
They get to college most schools now have a strength and conditioning coach. The bottom is getting better right out of the box because they all cant go FBS.

How many D2 schools went FCS ?.

How does offering more schollies water anything down? How does the top get watered down? Never heard that one before.

- - - Updated - - -


Aren't there less FBS players now though. 20 years ago didn't FBS teams have 100 or 150 man rosters? Where teams like Michigan would recruit kids just to keep them from other teams etc. That stuff stopped, and as an effect has caused NFL/CFL level players to trickle down deeper and deeper into the lower FBS and FCS.

You are correct.

[Bisonoline]

I agree, but I still say what was a Very Solid FCS (1AA) player 20 years ago and a very Elite Pro player from 40 years back wouldn't even be preferred walk ons on a 2016 FCS team. The game has dramatically changed....and for the better.

- - - Updated - - -

And you mean my Bench Max doesn't matter? Hell, I'm still bragging about that!!! hahaha

In the skill positions I think you are wrong. The optimal size of the players change about every 7-10 years. Running backs and wide receivers that were good back in the day would be great in this day and age with all of the advancements in training, nutrition etc. Back then we worked out on our own and didnt really work out all year long.

The game hasnt really changed. Football is still football. Size and speed has changed.

[Thumper 76]

I think the parody just has more to do with certain programs getting good coaches while a couple others have made bad hires. You also had a couple larger state schools move up in the Dakotas that bring some solid resources and also brings an FCS presence to an area choked with DII schools and a couple big name FBS schools. So now those teams are getting the pick of the litter over those DII schools for midwestern recruits and have good $ backing their programs helps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ursus arctos horribilis]

I see bigger, faster, better athletes across the board in FCS. Disagree.

Absolutely agree with you in your disagreement with Trucker. I do agree with him that there is becoming a bit more parity at the top and middle of FCS but I think it is for the exact opposite reason he stated.

There are more players that have very honed talents in the FCS that I think we have ever seen. Man look at the lines at some of the top FCS schools and you could put them in a lot of big time jersyes and they would like correct.

Look at the skill positions, there are so many amazing players in those spots on so damn many teams.

The biggest rise in FCS to me is the QB position. There are just so many key players in that spot on so many teams and they make a big difference in what you see going on. If one of them has a special day then the opposition is likely to have a bad day...no matter how good they are.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Fair enough, I could have easily said Chattanooga (was a 6-8th place SoCon team for 20 years)....now sitting on 3 straight Conf Championships....probably not a 4th after yesterday. Point is the Middle has become more competitive in most conferencess, is it because they have gotten better or the top has weakened?

I'm glad you ask it but the answer seems really clear to me since the top of our subdivision is flat knocking off more FBS teams, and better ones all the time. At least I am under the illusion that FCS is doing this lately. I haven't actually looked at the numbers.

[smallcollegefbfan]

Certainly possible, but this would also have to assume the number of high school players remains static. There are high schools popping up around Atlanta constantly. Plus charter and private schools. And the population is increasing. So, I think you have a worthwhile premise, but we would really need to know if the demand (# of scholarships) is actually outpacing supply (# of "qualified" high school football players)

There are less kids playing ball in youth sports, which is likely dropping the overall number. Also, many of those migrating here from other countries are not playing football. I think players today are better athletes than 25 years ago but we are seeing less top end talent and more parity. There will always be talent but your example in Atlanta is just seeing those additional players going to teams like Kennesaw State and others popping up so instead of seeing a traditional power or others just get more talented because of there being more players in an area like that, you see the talent spreading out among many more teams. Just look at GA alone and you have KSU and Georgia State both having popped up as programs in the last 8 years plus Ga Southern and App who recruit there moving up (another 44 scholarships) plus Coastal Carolina has added 85 more in the last 15 years, etc.

FCS is definitely a little bit watered down. There will always be talent but there is certainly less legit NFL talent than I remember there being. As of right now in the SoCon there are probably just 2 legit NFL players in a league that use to have 5-6 every year. Those 2 being the DE at UTC and maybe the S at Furman. There are some others who are "maybe types" but not slam dunks like we use to see. Even the top one last year who got drafted in the 2nd round has proven to be over drafted and had a year in the SoCon where there really was just him and very little other than a couple of back end of the 53 man or practice squad types.

[Thumper 76]

There are less kids playing ball in youth sports, which is likely dropping the overall number. Also, many of those migrating here from other countries are not playing football. I think players today are better athletes than 25 years ago but we are seeing less top end talent and more parity. There will always be talent but your example in Atlanta is just seeing those additional players going to teams like Kennesaw State and others popping up so instead of seeing a traditional power or others just get more talented because of there being more players in an area like that, you see the talent spreading out among many more teams. Just look at GA alone and you have KSU and Georgia State both having popped up as programs in the last 8 years plus Ga Southern and App who recruit there moving up (another 44 scholarships) plus Coastal Carolina has added 85 more in the last 15 years, etc.

FCS is definitely a little bit watered down. There will always be talent but there is certainly less legit NFL talent than I remember there being. As of right now in the SoCon there are probably just 2 legit NFL players in a league that use to have 5-6 every year. Those 2 being the DE at UTC and maybe the S at Furman. There are some others who are "maybe types" but not slam dunks like we use to see. Even the top one last year who got drafted in the 2nd round has proven to be over drafted and had a year in the SoCon where there really was just him and very little other than a couple of back end of the 53 man or practice squad types.

Is that more of a SoCon specific problem or nation wide?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MacThor]

Rudy would have gone FCS.

[FUBeAR]

Is that more of a SoCon specific problem or nation wide?

Assuming the assessment is accurate, it's a SmallCollegeFBFan and/or an NFL "problem" only.

The SoCon TEAMS are as strong, top to bottom, as I've ever seen them and I've been closely following the SoCon since 1977.

[Milktruck74]

Aren't there less FBS players now though. 20 years ago didn't FBS teams have 100 or 150 man rosters? Where teams like Michigan would recruit kids just to keep them from other teams etc. That stuff stopped, and as an effect has caused NFL/CFL level players to trickle down deeper and deeper into the lower FBS and FCS.

Limited Schollys entered the picture in 1978. its been closer to 40 years.

[walliver]

There are more players, but I don't think the talent has really been diluted.
I think a big change has been the spread offense. Now, if you have a good QB who can run and throw, and a few good receivers, you can move the ball and score points.
You need a complete team to win championships, but a few good players can give you a good chance on any given saturday.

[UNH_Alum_In_CT]

D-IA/FBS scholarship limits

1972: 105
1978: 95
1992: 85

[Bisonoline]

Limited Schollys entered the picture in 1978. its been closer to 40 years.

They then reduced D2 schollies even more in the late 80s early 90s?

[Milktruck74]

good discussion so far. I feel the talent pool is the same size as it was years ago....players are bigger and faster and stronger, but that is all players...so the talent pool may have elevated, but the overall size remains the same. That constant amount of talent has gone from about 450 opportunities nation wide to 750 opportunities. so with almost doubling the teams out there, the concentration of top level talent on each team is a little thinner. Schools are having to recruit against programs that did not exist 10 years ago. In years past, being on TV was huge in the recruiting process..I can now watch d3/HS/Jucos play on TV, with streaming, every game is broadcast, so that is partially taken off the table (sure there is a difference b/t streaming on ACSN and the national 3:30 game, but....).

[Twentysix]

Limited Schollys entered the picture in 1978. its been closer to 40 years.

In 1978 scholarships were cut from 105 to 95, but in 1992 FBS teams still had 95 scholarships which they do not have today.

But, you are right about the number of teams. FBS had 107 teams in 1992 and has 128 this seasons.

So those 107 teams have 1070 less scholarships, but the teams added represent 1785 new scholarships.

One other thing to consider is that there are 70,000,000 more people in the US from 1992 to 2016, which likely means there are more high schools and thus more high school football players.

In 1991 there were 23,500 HS in the USA. In 2013 there were 30,500. That's potentially 7,000 more high school football teams as of 3 years ago.

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84

http://www.multpl.com/united-states-population/table

http://www.aseaofblue.com/2013/6/11/4409982/ncaa-football-a-brief-history-of-ncaa-football-scholarships

[Milktruck74]

70,000,000 more people in the US[/U] from 1992 to 2016, which likely means there are more high schools and thus more high school football players.

Yeah, but they are all Mexican and their ball doesn't have pointy ends....I mean, we all agree Kickers have gotten better!!!!

[Bisonoline]

In 1978 scholarships were cut from 105 to 95, but in 1992 FBS teams still had 95 scholarships which they do not have today.

But, you are right about the number of teams. FBS had 107 teams in 1992 and has 128 this seasons.

So those 107 teams have 1070 less scholarships, but the teams added represent 1785 new scholarships.

One other thing to consider is that there are 70,000,000 more people in the US from 1992 to 2016, which likely means there are more high schools and thus more high school football players.

In 1991 there were 23,500 HS in the USA. In 2013 there were 30,500. That's potentially 7,000 more high school football teams as of 3 years ago.

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84

http://www.multpl.com/united-states-population/table

http://www.aseaofblue.com/2013/6/11/4409982/ncaa-football-a-brief-history-of-ncaa-football-scholarships

Interesting stats. The thing is the number of schollies doesnt water down the talent. It just means more athletes are getting paid. Look at our QB. He turned down an offer from Rutgers and came to NDSU. How is that watering down the FCS? We get kids who were offered walkons at bigger schools. I dont see how that waters down the FCS either.

[Twentysix]

Interesting stats. The thing is the number of schollies doesnt water down the talent. It just means more athletes are getting paid. Look at our QB. He turned down an offer from Rutgers and came to NDSU. How is that watering down the FCS? We get kids who were offered walkons at bigger schools. I dont see how that waters down the FCS either.

The argument is exactly the opposite of watering down the FCS and even conservative numbers show that.

The number of schollys at the FBS level has only increased by 715 divided by the 3-5 years each scholly is consumed, while the number of high school football players has likely increased by tens of thousands annually. If only 30% of the new schools created in that time period have football teams and each senior class has only 15 football players on average that is 31,500 new football HS seniors every single year with only about 160 new FBS scholarships to split among them. Even at this conservative number that means the FBS collectively only has the ability to offer scholarships to the top .005% of each senior class of football recruits created in addition to the existing HS football teams that were already around in 1992.

This means that there are thousands and thousands of additional football players that cannot be taken by FBS scholarships.

Everywhere I've been all of the high schools have football teams, so only 30% having football teams seems like a really really low estimation. There are probably way more than 31,500 additional hs fb seniors each year when compared to 1992.

[Mattymc727]

I think the CAA is watered down this year. Seems to be just a huge lack of talent than even 6 years ago. Even the bottom feeders within the CAA are worse than they were 6 years ago. Maybe its just me, but watching the JMU/UNH game, I was watching some bad football all around. I dont remember it being like that 6 years ago.

The UNH/Dartmouth game this year was one of the worst football games ive watched at this level. It honestly looked like D3 football.

[Bisonoline]

I think the CAA is watered down this year. Seems to be just a huge lack of talent than even 6 years ago. Even the bottom feeders within the CAA are worse than they were 6 years ago. Maybe its just me, but watching the JMU/UNH game, I was watching some bad football all around. I dont remember it being like that 6 years ago.

The UNH/Dartmouth game this year was one of the worst football games ive watched at this level. It honestly looked like D3 football.

I can understand that. Lack of incoming talent will water it down. But there are lots of places where the incoming talent keeps getting better.

[Milktruck74]

Interesting stats. The thing is the number of schollies doesnt water down the talent. It just means more athletes are getting paid. Look at our QB. He turned down an offer from Rutgers and came to NDSU. How is that watering down the FCS? We get kids who were offered walkons at bigger schools. I dont see how that waters down the FCS either.


It isn't about the FCS...It is about FB as a whole. The top P5s schools are losing to G5s, who are losing to FCS, who are losing to D2 and even some D3....10-15 years ago Your QB wouldn't have gone to NDSU....He would have heard how great the playing in the Big East was and that was his chance to be on TV. IF anything the addition of scholarships has strengthened the FCS (developing talent vs recruiting it) vs FBS. I guess the whole statement of "watering down" is probably not what I'm trying to convey...I don't mean individually, I mean the schools that always got the lion's share of talent are now competing with others. They are still getting talented players, just less of them....thus more parity in the game as a whole.