Midwest Football Talent

don't give a fuck.

 

Football is more year round in the south and out west. You'll see a lot more 7 on 7 type things taking place in the offseason and the coaching and emphasis on football is greater too. So while the B1G footprint makes up 24% of the Midwest recruiting! the lack of emphasis on year round football and coaching sees them drop to 9% (give or take depending on the randomness of the year) when it comes to making up the top recruits.

And yes, this is going to be a problem for Michigan and the Big Ten in general. They are going to have to go in to the south and west and win a lot more head to head recruiting battles.

Here's an article from the public radio show Marketplace on the subject (with one of the unintentionally dirtiest titles you'll ever see on a serious article):

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/education/learningcurve/midwestern-co…

 This one doesn't get into the numbers so much, but college recruiting (not for athletes, just for regular students) is becoming an issue at many schools in the midwest as the applicant pool declines.  It's going to get worse:

The other thing is, they play spring football in places like FL and TX, so it's year round.  And kids probably just spend more time outside playing overall, which is where you develop that athleticism.  Also, chasing rabbits.  

Having coached in youth football in Florida, the difference is this:
Football is King A #1 down there all year around. Summer Camps, spring leagues. 

Other regions of the country the kids play baseball, basketball, hockey, lacrosse, soccer etc.

Read this artice, this was the program I was involved in:

www.tampabay.com/hometeam/blog/east-lake-entrenched-pinellas-countys-pr…

 

I think football is king down south and people play less sports due to money so they'll pick one sport and focus on it.  My parents couldn't afford it but I had lots of friends growing up playing hockey and then baseball/golf in the spring and then soccer early fall.  Weren't particulalry great except for the random freak athlete.  Down south gootball is king -- no question.  

I think it's a little bit of everything. But at the same time, I think there's far less resources scouting the mid-west versus down south, so I bet there's a fair amount of midwest talent that goes unnoticed by scouting services as a result that would potentially be up in the top 100.

Recruit West Michigan.

I wonder if the deficiency of midwest recruit rankings might be similar to the apparent deficiency in smaller states.  For instance, I suspect that recruiting agencies are not likely to visit states that require them to travel but are too small to justify the expense.  How many supposedly "big-time" recruits then come from "little" states.  So, I checked on RI recruits.  On 247 sports, there were zero players with any stars at all in the years I checked from 2014-6.  There were less than 2 players per year who were even listed at all as recruits.  I know that RI is truly a "little" state, which it is not likely to have many "big-time" recruits.  But I wondered if the scouts even bothered coming to RI.  If not, then there may be a "verification" bias--the recruits are seldom if ever evaluated.

On a less extreme scale, the same might apply in comparing midwest vs southern or calif players.  Are the services less likely to evaluate players in the midwest than in other areas?  For the midwest, do the recruiting services station evaluators or pay for their travel there less often?  If so, one might expect a lower proportion of highly rated midwest (vs southern or calif) HS recruits than NFL players.  Why?  Presumably, the NFL would have greater motivation and resources for finding hidden gems that other teams might overlook.  And that could lead them to a more systematic search of the midwest than done by much poorer and less motivated recuruiting services.  Also, if there is greater passion for FB in southern states than in the midwest, then there will be fewer revenue-generating clicks on recuiting websites if the recruiting services highlight midwest or eastern recruits. If the midwest guys are not even considering many southern schools, they why should rabid southern fans care about their ratings?

A possible example of verification bias.  The Pats QB-in-waiting after Brady retires (Jimmy Garoppolo) came from a little-publicized FCS midwest school (eastern illinois).  Many now think he is the best QB drafted in his NFL class.  The Pats got him as a steal in the 2nd round.  But as a HS recruit, he was only a 2-star by Rivals and not even rated by Scout..

Our athletes are spread among basketball and football, which is one of the reasons why we're so good at basketball. In the South, for various cultural reasons, football is the sport you play.

It's simple:
High school football is more important down South than it is in he Midwest. Better coaches, better off season training, more 7 on 7 tournaments. It all adds up to more top level players. If a high school coach/player/parent is psychotic over football in the South, thats normal and acceptable. If a guy is like that in the upper Midwest, he looked at as a weirdo/nut/outcast.

It's about priorities. The South places a higher priority in life on high school football.

An article by Jamie Newberg looking at the last 3 drafts and where draft picks come from.

 

http://www.scout.com/story/1404139-draft-stats?s=143

You can see the full lists in the article.  But of the top 15 in total draft picks, the new BIG footprint has 5 (Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, New Jersey, Michigan).  These 5 states have produced 109 draft picks over the last 3 years.  For comparison, California has produced 86 draft picks over the same time frame, but no other Pac 12 state sits in the top 15.

However, the per capita top 15 features only 2 in the BIG footprint (D.C. and Ohio).

So how to interpret the data?  It seems like there are more elite players in the midwest than the scouting services think, but it probably makes more sense for them to scout the states with a higher percentage of elite players (better competition etc).

I think there are a lot of factors at play, and perhaps I'll take heat for some of them.

First of all, the weather is an issue. There are constant seven-on-seven practices and tournaments in the south. That's not the case in Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, etc. At least in some states (Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Texas, South Carolina I believe, etc.), spring football practices are allowed, so teams get 15-ish extra practices in the spring while Ohio/Michigan/Illinois players are sitting on their butts, just lifting weights, or playing baseball/running track.

Second, I get the feeling that southern schools are more liberal with the rules. With closer geographical locations, Player X from the middle of nowhere in Alabama knows that he can get/get away with certain things at Auburn, Alabama, Ole Miss, etc. because his friend or cousin goes there and has passed the word along.

Third, I think the economy in the south leads some people to "look for a way out." When a kid hits middle school and looks like a star football player, I think doors open up and I think that kid gets a little extra motivation/encouragement because that could be mommy and daddy's paycheck or at least a way to pay your way through college. I don't think that's such a motivating factor in the north except for in certain places (such as inner cities like Detroit, Chicago, etc.).

Let's see if our percentage goes up. Remove those using PEDS as well and then reshuffle. Lastly check for those not accepting booster bennies. Red deer antler spray a major SEC sponsor of the top teams.

Dont forget academic hurts big ten schools also..most southern school could care less about academics