- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Was reading the Mid-Atlantic recruiting thread....
Posted on 7/17/12 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 7/17/12 at 12:59 pm
...and got curious as to how spread out talent is in each region.
Here is how I defined the regions:
South - AR, LA, MS, AL, TN, SC, GA, FL
Mid-Atlantic/NE - NC, VA, DC, MD, WV, PA, NJ, NY, New England
Midwest - OH, IN, KY, MI, WI, IL, MN, IA, MO, NE, KS, ND, SD
Texas - TX, OK
West - CA, OR, WA, ID, WY, MT, CO, NM, AZ, NV, UT
Top 250 ranked players from each region:
South - 92
Mid-Atlantic/NE - 46
Midwest - 41
Texas - 30
West - 42
And finally, how many top 250 recruits are available per D1 school in each region:
South - 3.06 per school/ 5.75 per BCS school
Mid-Atlantic/NE - 2.3 per school/ 3.29 per BCS school
Midwest - 1.32 per school/ 2.16 per BCS school
Texas - 2.31 per school/ 4.29 per BCS school
West - 1.5 per school/ 3 per BCS school
I realize that schools recruit outside their region some, but this certainly explains why college football is dominated by the southern schools and why the midwestern schools are slowly faltering.
Here is how I defined the regions:
South - AR, LA, MS, AL, TN, SC, GA, FL
Mid-Atlantic/NE - NC, VA, DC, MD, WV, PA, NJ, NY, New England
Midwest - OH, IN, KY, MI, WI, IL, MN, IA, MO, NE, KS, ND, SD
Texas - TX, OK
West - CA, OR, WA, ID, WY, MT, CO, NM, AZ, NV, UT
Top 250 ranked players from each region:
South - 92
Mid-Atlantic/NE - 46
Midwest - 41
Texas - 30
West - 42
And finally, how many top 250 recruits are available per D1 school in each region:
South - 3.06 per school/ 5.75 per BCS school
Mid-Atlantic/NE - 2.3 per school/ 3.29 per BCS school
Midwest - 1.32 per school/ 2.16 per BCS school
Texas - 2.31 per school/ 4.29 per BCS school
West - 1.5 per school/ 3 per BCS school
I realize that schools recruit outside their region some, but this certainly explains why college football is dominated by the southern schools and why the midwestern schools are slowly faltering.
7
Posted on 7/17/12 at 1:04 pm to RoscoeHarper
Good work.
I was surprised to see the Mid-ATL/NE was on par with TX as far as top 250 available per school. Just solidified my theory on if a team locked down the Mid-ATL/NE, then they would be a serious contender.
I was surprised to see the Mid-ATL/NE was on par with TX as far as top 250 available per school. Just solidified my theory on if a team locked down the Mid-ATL/NE, then they would be a serious contender.
Posted on 7/17/12 at 1:05 pm to RoscoeHarper
I would fix the title. This thread could generate some interesting discussion so I wouldn't want it to get anchored or whacked becuase of a bad title or being too derivative of another thread.
Posted on 7/17/12 at 1:10 pm to RoscoeHarper
need to do at least a four year sample for this to be valid.
Posted on 7/17/12 at 1:13 pm to Moustache
quote:
I was surprised to see the Mid-ATL/NE was on par with TX as far as top 250 available per school
1. South - 5.75 per BCS school
2. Texas - 4.29 per BCS school
3. Mid-Atlantic/NE - 3.29 per BCS school
there is more competition in the NE according to OPs numbers...
Posted on 7/17/12 at 1:20 pm to rocket31
quote:
there is more competition in the NE according to OPs numbers...
I don't see how that conclusion can be drawn. Presence =/= competition. I think there is some unquantifiable thing that must at least be acknowledged. USC and Washington St are both in the same geographic territory, but not the same program strata. Same with LSU & Bama compared to South Florida & NC State.
I think you can't look at just geography and get the whole story.
Posted on 7/17/12 at 1:25 pm to ProjectP2294
quote:
I think there is some unquantifiable thing that must at least be acknowledged
well sure, but id prefer not to get into a dukkev type argument where both parties just shout biased opinions not based on actual numbers.
as it stands now, there is more talent to chose from in the south and also less BCS schools fighting for those players in the region.
id argue that the Mid-Atlantic is the most challenging area to recruit due to not only the quantitative data above but also the SEC and BigTen presence in the area (these Mid-Atlantic prospects are being dispersed nationally instead of staying locally); there is a reason why no single program has been able to lock down the elite prospects in the area (more programs are hiding in the backyard)
This post was edited on 7/17/12 at 1:32 pm
Posted on 7/17/12 at 1:26 pm to RoscoeHarper
quote:
Top 250 ranked players from each region:
Ranked by whom?
Posted on 7/17/12 at 1:26 pm to RoscoeHarper
quote:
this certainly explains why college football is dominated by the southern schools and why the midwestern schools are slowly faltering.
there is a lot of truth to that but there is also a bit of bias in some areas because some regions just care less about football 24/7/12
So for example a recruit in the midwest may also be more likely to fly under the radar there than in the south. a recruiting thread in kansas just generates less interest than a recruiting thread in arkansas
Posted on 7/17/12 at 1:31 pm to rocket31
quote:
id argue that the Mid-Atlantic is the most challenging area to recruit due to not only the quantitative data above but also the SEC and BigTen presence in the area; there is a reason why no single program has been able to lock down the elite prospects in the area.
Yes and no. The competition at the top is as fierce as anywhere, because the national programs are going after the best players wherever they are.
I think what makes it tougher for the MA/NE schools is the lack of depth of prospects. And that adds recruiting competition all over the spectrum of talent in the South, Cali, and Texas.
Posted on 7/17/12 at 2:00 pm to RoscoeHarper
quote:
I realize that schools recruit outside their region some, but this certainly explains why college football is dominated by the southern schools and why the midwestern schools are slowly faltering.
Yes it will be very health for the game if one region dominates college football. The rest of the country wants to see a SEC team play a SEC team every year for the title.
Look what UConn and Tenn has given us in women's basketball.
I actually want the game to be healthy nationally. The reason why the NFL is the top league is due to parity.
I do want LSU to win the title often, but I'd like to see them beat pac 10, and big ten teams once in awhile.
Posted on 7/17/12 at 3:16 pm to rocket31
quote:
d argue that the Mid-Atlantic is the most challenging area to recruit due to not only the quantitative data above but also the SEC and BigTen presence in the area (these Mid-Atlantic prospects are being dispersed nationally instead of staying locally); there is a reason why no single program has been able to lock down the elite prospects in the area (more programs are hiding in the backyard)
That's exactly what my thread was about though. Which school had the best chance of being that ONE program that can lock down teh elite prospects in the mid atlantic.
And then you came in and said "FLA,TX, adn CA have more talent than the NE/Mid atlantic."
Posted on 7/17/12 at 3:17 pm to RoscoeHarper
Good work getting all those numbers together.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News