A I-AA Playoff Question (Kinda /Sorta)

[mikebigg]

Final I-AA selections:

Tarvaris Jackson, QB, Alabama State
Paul McQuistan, G, Weber State
Chris Gocong, DE, Cal Poly
David Pittman, CB, Northwestern State
Jason Hatcher, DE, Grambling
Willie Colon, G, Hofstra
Ingle Martin, QB, Furman
Brent Hawkins, DE, Illinois State
Reed Doughty, SS, Northern Colorado
Kevin Boothe, OT, Cornell
Antoine Bethea, FS, Howard
Pat McQuistan, OT, Weber State
Fred Evans, DT, Texas State
Cortland Finnegan, FS, Samford
Marques Colston, TE, Hofstra
Kevin McMahan, WR, Maine (Mr. Irrelevant)


We have often debated the benefits or disadvantages of participating in the D1AA playoffs. It might appear that I am anti-playoffs, but actually I don't think it's in the best interest of no one but the NCAA (they make all the money).

Anyway, a lot of pro-playoff folk have stated that these games give the players exposure to NFL scouts. My question is this... How many of the players listed above participated in the NCAA playoffs during their time at the schools from where they were drafted?

[*****]

Mike,
Listen to I-AA WAVES this week because I flat-out asked Dennis Poppe if the NCAA was profiteering off the I-AA playoffs.

Anyway... AFAIK...

(5) Team made the playoffs during their career:
Chris Gocong, DE, Cal Poly
David Pittman, CB, Northwestern State
Ingle Martin, QB, Furman
Fred Evans, DT, Texas State
Kevin McMahan, WR, Maine

(7) Team did not make the playoffs during their career:
Willie Colon, G, Hofstra
Marques Colston, TE, Hofstra
Antoine Bethea, FS, Howard
Brent Hawkins, DE, Illinois State
Cortland Finnegan, FS, Samford
Pat McQuistan, OT, Weber State
Paul McQuistan, G, Weber State

(4) Could not compete in the playoffs:
Tarvaris Jackson, QB, Alabama State
Kevin Boothe, OT, Cornell
Jason Hatcher, DE, Grambling
Reed Doughty, SS, Northern Colorado

[MACHIAVELLI]

(5) Team made the playoffs during their career:
Chris Gocong, DE, Cal Poly
David Pittman, CB, Northwestern State
Ingle Martin, QB, Furman
Fred Evans, DT, Texas State
Kevin McMahan, WR, Maine


How many playoff games did each of these guys appear during their career?

[*****]

How many playoff games did each of these guys appear during their career?I give up, how many?

[89Hen]

Anyway, a lot of pro-playoff folk have stated that these games give the players exposure to NFL scouts
Mike, I don't read every thread here, but I'm not sure I've ever seen that arguement made.

[AmsterBison]

Mike, I don't read every thread here, but I'm not sure I've ever seen that arguement made.

I was thinking the same thing. Playoffs = The Best Way to Pick a National Champion. That's all there is to it.

It's not like colleges sponsor football teams in order to their students into the NFL anyway - if that's what they are trying to do, their placement rates are awful. I guess Mike thinks that "if only these schools played in bowl games, they'd get a lot more exposure to scouts and therefore these teams would get more teams into the pros." My rebuttal: BWAHAHAHA!

[AppGuy04]

Mike, I don't read every thread here, but I'm not sure I've ever seen that arguement made.

likewise...

whenever I discuss the pros/cons of playoffs, for me, I focus on the teams, the competition, NEVER individual players and how it benefits them. If this was the case, Richie Williams would have been the first I-AA QB drafted. I don't think the actual "playoff" helps players get exposed, but it does make them battle tested. This can also be accomplished by playing a good schedule during the regular season.

[GannonFan]

likewise...

whenever I discuss the pros/cons of playoffs, for me, I focus on the teams, the competition, NEVER individual players and how it benefits them. If this was the case, Richie Williams would have been the first I-AA QB drafted. I don't think the actual "playoff" helps players get exposed, but it does make them battle tested. This can also be accomplished by playing a good schedule during the regular season.

Agreed - if anyone actually did use the argument that the playoffs gives better NFL exposure then it had to be the weakest of their arguments - the playoffs are about finding a national champion in a sport where you just can't play everyone from every part of the nation every year - and it's about doing it on the field. Anything else after that is minor at best. The NFL can find quality guys no matter where they are - look at all the DII guys drafted every year - if they can pick needles out of haystacks there then they don't need games to be televised in the playoffs to find talent.

[89Hen]

However, now that we've said all of that, IMO the playoffs could help a player get an NFL job they might not have otherwise gotten, but it's certainly not why we play them. Take Andy Hall for example. I'd have to believe that his play in the playoffs in 2003 helped him get drafted by the Eagles. The fact that he didn't make it, is of little consequence, he did get drafted.

Mike Bigg, do you think that if Bruce Almighty had played for and won a I-AA title last year, he might have been drafted? If you look at Andy Hall and Bruce Eugene side by side, you'd have a great case for saying Bruce was the better QB, but one got drafted and one did not. This is of course speculation, but what do you think?

[*****]

Questions left unanswered tell their own tale.

[TexasTerror]

This argument is lame...

It's like some posters on here saying their school or conference is great because they have so many guys drafted. However, when your school or conference does not produce (as in Ws) in the playoffs or for those non-playoff schools, out of conference, what does that tell you?

Definitely doesn't make you the "leader of the pack" in terms of quality, winning, respectable football team, maybe in having a few quality NFL prospects, but that's it...because heck, even some of these "awful I-AA football playing schools" have had guys drafted..

[mikebigg]

Fellas, It's kinda unrealistic to expect me to find the exact post. I understand that it comes across as just anti-playoff rhetoric...but that was not my intent. I don't begrudge teams from participating and enjoying the playoffs. It's the NCAA payoff that makes it unattractive to me. As for the comment, with the many discussions that have been bantered back and forth, I "seem" to recall seeing that player exposure/improve chance to be seen by scouts was one of the pros to the playoffs. Of course no one will "bail" me out and say that they remember. I didn't intend this thread to be a debate...I wanted to see if it could be discussed for discussion sake.

As for Bruce...I don't think participating in the playoffs would have helped his stock at all. Jason Hunter of App State was the MVP of the championship game and he didn't get drafted. I'm not so stubbornly anti-playoffs that I won't admit that these games help give a player "another look" and some might get noticed...but in Bruce's case, it would not have helped. The scouts liked what they saw of Bruce...but his "other numbers" did him in. I think had he went into his senior year at his current weight, maintained that weight, and put up the numbers he did last year...then he would have been drafted. Maybe not in the early rounds but I think at least by round 4 or 5 (just my opinion).

[Tribe4SF]

As for Bruce...I don't think participating in the playoffs would have helped his stock at all. Jason Hunter of App State was the MVP of the championship game and he didn't get drafted. I'm not so stubbornly anti-playoffs that I won't admit that these games help give a player "another look" and some might get noticed...but in Bruce's case, it would not have helped. The scouts liked what they saw of Bruce...but his "other numbers" did him in. I think had he went into his senior year at his current weight, maintained that weight, and put up the numbers he did last year...then he would have been drafted. Maybe not in the early rounds but I think at least by round 4 or 5 (just my opinion).

NFL teams always place a question mark next to I-AA QBs because of the level of competition. In Bruce's case, the mark was bigger because of Grambling's schedule. His stats were padded against some very weak teams.

[mikebigg]

NFL teams always place a question mark next to I-AA QBs because of the level of competition. In Bruce's case, the mark was bigger because of Grambling's schedule. His stats were padded against some very weak teams.

He played the same competition that Tavares Jackson of Alabama State played (same conference) and put up better numbers. So I doubt if it was the "level of competition". You guys love to throw out that level of competition crap, but the competition that you guys play isn't a notch above.

[GannonFan]

He played the same competition that Tavares Jackson of Alabama State played (same conference) and put up better numbers. So I doubt if it was the "level of competition". You guys love to throw out that level of competition crap, but the competition that you guys play isn't a notch above.

I agree with you - the NFL will see talent regardless where it is. I may think the SWAC, as a whole, isn't as competitive as the rest of IAA, but that doesn't mean there isn't some real good talent sprinkled in there, and the past draft histories prove that out. There are plenty of good NFL players picked up out of even lower levels of football (several good DII and a handful of DIII guys) so you can find talent anywhere. NFL scouting is so pervasive and omnipresent that it's a big story when a guy comes through without being noticed. Heck, after Antonio Gates it's odd for even a basketball player to go by unnoticed. They will find the talent wherever it is.

[MACHIAVELLI]

NFL teams always place a question mark next to I-AA QBs because of the level of competition. In Bruce's case, the mark was bigger because of Grambling's schedule. His stats were padded against some very weak teams.

xlolx You still trying to make that arguement stick. xlolx


Enter the spin doctors
v
v
v
v
v
v
v

[89Hen]

He played the same competition that Tavares Jackson of Alabama State played (same conference) and put up better numbers. So I doubt if it was the "level of competition". You guys love to throw out that level of competition crap, but the competition that you guys play isn't a notch above.
You have to admit the SWAC is high-octane offense. Top four SWAC rankings in...

I-AA Passing Offense
1. Grambling
9. Southern
10. Mississippi Valley
14. Alabama State

I-AA Rushing Offense
23. Alabama A&M
24. Alcorn
33. Prairie View
54. Arkansas-PB

Not saying easier competition, but the numbers would indicate that the SWAC likes to throw the ball.

[Tribe4SF]

He played the same competition that Tavares Jackson of Alabama State played (same conference) and put up better numbers. So I doubt if it was the "level of competition". You guys love to throw out that level of competition crap, but the competition that you guys play isn't a notch above.

Jackson is, obviously, a better prospect. My point is that Eugene's stats were basically irrelevant. GF is right that the NFL will find the talent. You were claiming that his weight kept him from being a 4th or 5th round choice. Throwing three fourth quarter TDs in a blowout of Prarie View does not make you a mid-draft pick. He's a good prospect, but he's not the second coming Grambling fans sometimes made him out to be.

As to our level of competition, our guys get questioned the same way.

[MACHIAVELLI]

My point is that Eugene's stats were basically irrelevant. Throwing three fourth quarter TDs in a blowout of Prarie View does not make you a mid-draft pick.

To be fair T. Jackson vs. PV
http://swac.org/05-06/football/stats/alst1015.htm



He's a good prospect, but he's not the second coming Grambling fans sometimes made him out to be.


SWAC Career passing leaders
NAME.........................SCHOOL.....YEAR...... YARDS
2. Bruce Eugene.........Grambling.....01-05..13,530
7. Doug Williams..........Grambling.....74-77.....8,411
11. Kendrick Nord........Grambling.....93-95.....6,581
18. Lionel Hayes..........Grambling...98-99......5,308
19. Clemete Gordon......Grambling...88-89.....5,068
22. Shawn Buras......Grambling........90-91.....4,447
23. Randy Hymes.......Grambling......00-01.....4,413
25. James Harris........Grambling......66-69.....4,126
----------------------------
SWAC Career touchdown leaders
NAME.........................SCHOOL.....YEAR...... TD........ INT
1. Bruce Eugene...........Grambling.....01-05..140.......38
6. Doug Williams..........Grambling.....74-77.....93......52
9. Kendrick Nord........Grambling.....93-95.....64.......42
13. Clemete Gordon......Grambling...88-89......50........17
14. Lionel Hayes..........Grambling...98-99......49........17
17. James Harris........Grambling......66-69.....43.........26
21. Shawn Buras......Grambling........90-91....41.........16
24. Hollis Brent..........Grambling.....82-83......35.........31
25. Randy Hymes.......Grambling......00-01.....33..........22

[Tribe4SF]

To be fair T. Jackson vs. PV
http://swac.org/05-06/football/stats/alst1015.htm


A little more understandable in a game that was 13-13 after 3.

[89Hen]

Enter the spin doctors
v
v
You mean the ones with more facts than opinion. :nono: