Player Stats - Good players at great schools vs good schools

[Fred]

The discussion over the QB triggered a thought about player stats.  I've been watching the top player stats for passing, receiving and rushing here in Ga.  There are some really outstanding numbers by some clearly talented kids.  What I find interesting is that the good to great players on on good to average teams tend to stand out more than the good to great players on the better teams.  It seems as though the good to average teams tend to be more one player shows (or a couple of players) whereas the good to great teams tend to share the wealth so to speak between more players on the team thereby depressing the individual numbers. 

Here's the question.  If you want to have a good year would you rather be playing for a great team that has potential to make the run and be highly ranked or would you rather be playing for the good to average team where the team might not get the looks but you might as a standout player?

[HawgGoneIt]

This is an interesting question.

 

I think it could certainly depend on what you are looking for as a player/family. If you are wanting to pad stats in hopes for more scholarship offers, then maybe the good-average team is the right fit. 

 

If you want to have the best opportunity to win a championship then obviously you want the team capable of making the run.

 

Anyway,it seems like this all hinges on the type of offense the school runs and the available skill players etc. if we are looking at it from a QB viewpoint. A great passing QB probably doesn't want to be on a team that is primarily power run etc. 

 

 

 

[PrepGridiron]

I heard a great perspective from a father of a basketball player. He said, when his son is the best player on a team (AAU), that's when he finds him a new team to play for. The idea being that you can't get better if you are the best. It's the old proverb, "as iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another." 

[Guest LOSer]

3 hours ago, Fred said:

Here's the question.  If you want to have a good year would you rather be playing for a great team that has potential to make the run and be highly ranked or would you rather be playing for the good to average team where the team might not get the looks but you might as a standout player?

I've always argued that kids who to go to STA (or other such schools) are making more of a sacrifice than people think.

Even if they are super talented they are likely going to share the ball with several other similar athletes.

 

[TheRealCAJ]

9 hours ago, LOSer said:

 (or other such schools) 

 

[JustMe]

I have to side with the team concept. The thing that stands out for me is when you practice, yes practice, against better competition day in and day out your overall development is better.  Stats don't always tell the story. You can get stats at a particular  level but when you move up to whatever the next level is there are more what they call "dudes" who can ball. You see it on every level even the professional ranks, a guy dominates in college and gets forgotten soon after being drafted because the "dude" ratio rises. Give me the better team.

[noonereal]

13 hours ago, Fred said:

The discussion over the QB triggered a thought about player stats.  I've been watching the top player stats for passing, receiving and rushing here in Ga.  There are some really outstanding numbers by some clearly talented kids.  What I find interesting is that the good to great players on on good to average teams tend to stand out more than the good to great players on the better teams.  It seems as though the good to average teams tend to be more one player shows (or a couple of players) whereas the good to great teams tend to share the wealth so to speak between more players on the team thereby depressing the individual numbers. 

Here's the question.  If you want to have a good year would you rather be playing for a great team that has potential to make the run and be highly ranked or would you rather be playing for the good to average team where the team might not get the looks but you might as a standout player?

 

Good question Fred.

I'd rather play at my local school whether it be great football or terrible football.

But that is not what you asked. You asked, "if you want to have a good year." 

Well Fred, you need to define what a good year is and if football considerations trump all other factors that go into a kid's "good year" of life. 

I will say that on the field, a good year will be had at either school if the off field work is done. That is what makes a good year. Not the level of the high school play. 

If you are looking or recognition, although the small school kid may be at the top of the stat sheet, there tends to be a definite bias again giving the major awards to small school kids. 

As far as recruiting, it's irrelevant. These guys do this for a living and understand the ins and outs of big medium or small school. 

So as to recruiting, do the work off the field. That is what leads to a good year. 

 

 

[Guest LOSer]

43 minutes ago, TheRealCAJ said:

Are you suggesting that there are no schools like STA?

I'm called arrogant but I don't even believe that.

[noonereal]

10 hours ago, LOSer said:

I've always argued that kids who to go to STA (or other such schools) are making more of a sacrifice than people think.

Even if they are super talented they are likely going to share the ball with several other similar athletes.

 

 

good point

the poster after you suggest that playing at the better school brought a player to his fuller potential..... but if the are sitting 3 years would not the lower level team have given them more experience... brought them closer to their potential in the end? 

 

Bottom line, it's the work off the field that matters. Not the team. 

[Guest LOSer]

21 minutes ago, noonereal said:

good point

the poster after you suggest that playing at the better school brought a player to his fuller potential..... but if the are sitting 3 years would not the lower level team have given them more experience... brought them closer to their potential in the end? 

I think competition and being around other high-achieving individuals matters.

If a kid transfers from STA to a smaller, less-competitive school the first thing a college recruiter asks is 'why did you leave a competitive environment for an easier one?'

Precious few kids who have taken that route have succeeded or achieved any success at the next level.

[TheRealCAJ]

33 minutes ago, LOSer said:

Are you suggesting that there are no schools like STA?

I'm called arrogant but I don't even believe that.

Name one.

[noonereal]

14 minutes ago, LOSer said:

I think competition and being around other high-achieving individuals matters.

If a kid transfers from STA to a smaller, less-competitive school the first thing a college recruiter asks is 'why did you leave a competitive environment for an easier one?'

Precious few kids who have taken that route have succeeded or achieved any success at the next level.

Good reply. I would suggest that although practising daily around other high end athletes is worth much... generally speaking it does not do much in the big picture.

Follow me.

In college sports, the biggest improvement comes between Freshman and Sophomore year typically. In football, red shirting is often used for this. 

So, although a player playing at a better school might be more prepared for college than one coming from a small school, by Sopmore year it just doesn't matter. And how often does a true freshman play. 

By sophomore year, the kid with the higher potential is almost always the better player. So make your high school decisions on off filed considerations. Like social, family and classroom. This is my considered opinion. 

 

Obviously I respect differing opinions..... even though they are wrong! lol

[Guest LOSer]

1 hour ago, TheRealCAJ said:

Name one.

Bishop Gorman, Centennial, St, John Bosco.

Just off the top of my head with 5 seconds to think.

[TheRealCAJ]

25 minutes ago, LOSer said:

Bishop Gorman, Centennial, St, John Bosco.

Just off the top of my head with 5 seconds to think.

Those schools are good at basketball. STA, not so much.

And, Landry-Walker has more NFL players than those schools.

 

 

 

[Guest LOSer]

Just now, TheRealCAJ said:

Those schools are good at basketball. STA, not so much.

You once again saying some silly, unrelated babble about something or the other.

It reminds me of a rant you went on a few years ago about how STA wasn't good at anything other than football.

That was classic.

[TheRealCAJ]

STA compares to IMG Academy.

 

[Guest LOSer]

9 minutes ago, TheRealCAJ said:

STA compares to IMG Academy.

In practically zero ways.

But nice try, Caj.

We know that STA inhabits a corner of your mind, rent free.