in certain areas of the country in high school football? Colleges in various regions benefit from having such a rich pool of talent in their own state. Included are states like:

FL, GA, AL, LA, VA, TX, CA, OH, etc.

As a result, schools like UF, FSU, Miami, USF, Texas, LSU, UGA, Alabama, USC, Ohio State, etc. basically get top pick at most of their in-state (or bordering) talent. And they are able to draw from that pool every year and cycle top talent in and out almost effortlessly. For example, in 2007 LSU offered the NFL the # 1 draft choice in JaMarcus Russell (an AL native). The very next season, the Tigers rode Matt Flynn (from TX) all the way to a national championship.

MY QUESTION IS: BUT WHY DOES IT SEEM THAT THE TALENT IS SO CONCENTRATED IN THESE AREAS? Is it because the passion is greater, or the coaching is better? Is the sport of football promoted at a younger age and training more available? Is the fan support higher - or is the south (and Cal) just the football capitals of the country? I have thought about any legitimate answers to this question and have not been able to come up with anything.

It's different with basketball because good recruits can come out of anywhere. And more of them will go across the country to play. Just look at Kyle Singler coming all the way from Oregon to play at Duke. I know football players do that too, but not in the same volume. It seems that most major college basketball programs recruit completely out of state - so their rosters feature very few in-state players.

And for all the assholes who are gonna look at my post count and post this link, fuck you and you can all go to hell. I've been on TWW since '03, so I know wtf is going on. I know someone will post it, so I'll go ahead and save you the time and post it for you.

message_topic.aspx?topic=400622

11/3/2008 9:18:11 PM

higher concentrations of slavs and polacks.

11/3/2008 9:19:48 PM

lots of farms in the deep south, lots of workers/slaves, after black people/poor whites could move around more they went to cities to work (southern cal, ohio)

[Edited on November 3, 2008 at 9:23 PM. Reason : d]

11/3/2008 9:22:19 PM

FL, GA, AL, LA, VA, TX, CA, OH

1. California 36,553,215
2. Texas 23,904,380
3. New York 19,297,729
4. Florida 18,251,243
5. Illinois 12,852,548
6. Pennsylvania 12,432,792
7. Ohio 11,466,917
8. Michigan 10,071,822
9. Georgia 9,544,750
10. North Carolina 9,061,032
11. New Jersey 8,685,920
12. Virginia 7,712,091
...
23. Alabama 4,627,851
...
25. Louisiana 4,293,204

Six of those states are in the top 12 of highest populated states, so this may be partly explained by a statistical bell curve. More people = more football prodigies. For other states, especially small towns in those states, football is the only way out for kids, other than the military. But it is most likely that football is a tradition in these area and kids are reared in that mentality and are thusly given more opportunity to develop a talent. There is also a better opportunity for coaches, which is more important at the high school level.

However, with no statistics to back up your conjecture, this post is moot.

[Edited on November 3, 2008 at 9:41 PM. Reason : ...]

11/3/2008 9:41:02 PM

Jaybee is pretty spot on

Also I think warm weather has a lot to do with it

More warm weather = more outside time = more time getting better at football

More cold weather = more inside time = more time getting better at basketball

11/3/2008 9:53:38 PM

^ how do you explain then that there are so many good basketball players that come from Georgia, NC, and Cali?

11/3/2008 9:57:45 PM

My old suitemate would quote Chris Rock and talk about "super slaves" in these kinds of debates.

11/3/2008 9:59:56 PM

^^^^ I'm glad you posted that, because it just goes to show the inconsistency with that statistic. I also entertained state population as an answer, but I think it only is part of the answer.

I mean, look at that list: all of the unbolded states (besides Michigan of course, and Penn. also) are not traditional football powerhouse states. No one thinks of NY-based schools as giant magnets of nationally competitive high school talent.

So clearly, there are other reasons out there that explain why the talent is so concentrated. I tend to somewhat agree with Jaybee1200 about the south and slaves. On a division-I college level nationally, a lot of the top talent is undeniably black. And a lot of that talent comes from the south because naturally, a lot of the generations in their families were at some point enslaved on southern farms. And unfortunately, a lot of those families are still poor and may be too poor to move out of the south..

[Edited on November 3, 2008 at 10:02 PM. Reason : .]

11/3/2008 10:01:54 PM

^^^Too tall and skinny for football

[Edited on November 3, 2008 at 10:02 PM. Reason : x]

11/3/2008 10:02:14 PM

Yeah, the sad-but-true slave history more than likely has more to do with this conjecture than anything.

11/3/2008 10:04:06 PM

First imagine the Mason-Dixon Line stretching across the US. Now look at how many of the top players come from areas below that line. I counted 67 out of Scout's Top 100 being from areas that are below the Mason-Dixon Line and are for the most part warmer than they are cold during the year.
http://northcarolinastate.scout.com/a.z?s=178&p=9&c=4&cfg=bb&pid=88&yr=2009

11/3/2008 10:06:12 PM

Its not sad at all

Thats American History

Without slavery, the NBA and NFL would suck cock

11/3/2008 10:06:28 PM

basketball and football are also ridiculously popular in states like Florida and NC. Most kids learn how to dribble and throw a football by just playin with friends. I think that activity is different compared to states like Md, Michigan or Ilinois.

11/3/2008 10:06:37 PM

Whoa now Maryland/DC/Nova is a hotbed for college basketball talent.

11/3/2008 10:08:30 PM

^^ Michigan, Illinois, Pennsylvania etc. are still learning how to eat pickles without trying to fit their heads in the jar

[Edited on November 3, 2008 at 10:09 PM. Reason : d]

11/3/2008 10:09:43 PM

Playing against strong talent is a virtuous cycle; having strong competition raises the skill of all players involved. So it's easy to have a snowball effect where once a region becomes a traditional powerhouse, they stay a strong area for talent. Jaybee's comment about slavery and the genetic stock of the South, as well as Slave Famous's comment about warm weather, may both have something to do with how those powerhouse regions evolved in the South to begin with, as compared to other areas.

As for the comparison with basketball: the talent pool in basketball spreads out around the country because the top players play against each other more often across the entire country. In football, once you hit high school you only play for your high school, which means you're playing about 15-20 games a year with playoffs, mostly with teams in your area--at most two or three playoff games from teams elsewhere in your state. But in basketball, the top players also play on AAU and teams from other leagues, and there are constantly tournaments on a regional and national level. It's only the elite kids who are playing on that intense of a level, but they play with kids from a much larger area on their teams, and play against teams from a much larger area; that spreads the talent pool around the whole country, because the all-stars from non-powerhouse areas are still honing their skills against all-stars from everywhere else.

11/3/2008 10:15:50 PM

Quote :

"No one thinks of NY-based schools as giant magnets of nationally competitive high school talent. "

that is because the total population of NY state is not representative of the state as a whole. A very large part of that is from NY city which has a huge foriegn population that doesn't have an interest in football.

11/3/2008 10:21:10 PM

I just remember listening to the commentators on TV during the NC State - South Florida game this year. It was probably during the 2nd half when USF was really handing our asses to us and when they are bored of talking about the actual game.

They talked about USF and how young the program is (I think about only 10 years). But they mentioned that something ridiculous like over 95% of the players were from the state of Florida. They talked all about how the USF coach was really building their school into a nationally respected program, in large part because of the recruiting selection they have right in their backyard. I can understand that almost any coach in America would love to have that talent right there in their hands - it would make recruiting so much easier! And some people have said, well even though they are in a talent-rich state, they still have to compete with Miami, UF, and FSU. And I say yeah, but there's so much talent there that the other schools will get their recruits and yet there is STILL more talent to be distributed. I mean, they obviously are doing well for themselves - just look at the current and previous seasons.

But what the commentators didn't talk about was WHY the area was so rich with so much GOOD talent. Maybe they've determined what we have here on TWW about tracing it back to slavery and they deemed it inappropriate to comment about on national TV. Regardless, it still makes me wonder WHY these places are like the way they. It's almost unfair!

11/3/2008 10:23:13 PM

Quote :

"which means you're playing about 15-20 games a year with playoffs"

eh????

11/3/2008 10:26:21 PM

I read somewhere that North Carolina was like 5th behind Florida, California, Texas, and Ohio in producing D-1 talent every year out of high school.

The problem is that we get poached by surrounding schools like UT, Clemson, SC, VT, etc, and we have 5 D-1 programs in the state anyway. Then every once in a while you get UF, FSU, ND, and some other faggoty big name school to steal a few recruits.

If NC State and UNC could both recruit the best players in the state to stay in state year in and year out, we would both have much better programs than we currently have. The problem is that NC talent gets spread around to about 10 - 15 big name schools every year.

11/3/2008 10:51:20 PM

^^Sorry, misspoke. I meant 10-15, not 15-20.

11/3/2008 10:54:20 PM

^^

Quote :

"Here’s the breakdown of how many Division I-A signees the traditional ACC states produce on an annual basis, relative to the number of I-A programs in the state: Georgia 75 (150 signees, two teams) prospects per school, Florida 50 (350/7), Virginia 25 (50/2), Maryland 20 (40/2), South Carolina 20 (40/2), North Carolina 12 (60/5). Here’s the breakdown when you limit the same numbers to only BCS-conference teams: Florida 87 (350/4) per school, Georgia 75 (150/2), Maryland 40 (40/1), Virginia 25 (50/2), South Carolina 20 (40/2), North Carolina 15 (60/4)."

http://www.statefansnation.com/index.php/archives/2007/02/07/football-signing-day-state-talent/
god dammit i hate sfn.

[Edited on November 3, 2008 at 11:01 PM. Reason : link]

11/3/2008 10:59:46 PM

Quote :

"ts not sad at all Thats American History Without slavery, the NBA and NFL would suck cock"

I'm going to laugh if i ever hear a black person say whites owe them reparations.

They are about to have a 1/2 black president

&&&&

They have taken over a majority of US sports (hell Tiger is the highest paid golfer) and white people pay them millions to watch them have fun playing ball.

White youth all over the country mimic hip hop culture with their music or style.

11/3/2008 11:00:54 PM

Quote :

"More warm weather = more outside time = more time getting better at football AND basketball More cold weather = more inside time = more time getting better at basketball"

fixed that for ya... thats why the south is dirty

11/3/2008 11:12:22 PM

Pennsylvania is known to churn out some quality recruits too.....

And Penn State has nabbed most of them for years.

11/3/2008 11:34:43 PM

Pitt has all but matched Penn State in PA recruiting these days... too bad Wannstedt sucks at the actual coaching of said recruits...

11/4/2008 12:54:19 AM

Quote :

"They have taken over a majority of US sports "

What? I count two, Football and basketball.....and not a big majority in football.

Whites still are big and way ahead in baseball, hockey, golf, tennis, soccer, etc.

11/4/2008 1:06:25 AM

Isnt there two seasons of football in Florida at the highschool level? If so that would have something to do with it.

11/4/2008 6:28:57 AM

^ And what seasons are those?

11/4/2008 7:18:31 AM

this thread makes me laugh "more college football players come from florida and virginia and texas 'cause of slavery!!!" that's about as stupid an assertion as i've seen on tww in about a week....

11/4/2008 8:33:35 AM

^ then please offer your brilliant explanation

11/4/2008 8:41:47 AM

it really is more about a higher focus given to high school football in these states + larger population bases. that's really what it's about.

the slave argument is just silly - the largest migrations of former slaves out of the south after the civil war were to the the chicago and NYC metro areas. yet neither of these places are a hot bed of college football recruits. this implies that there are other, more important reasons that drive the talent pool in florida, VA, CA, and TX. thank you.

11/4/2008 9:27:46 AM

^ where they lived in Chicago and NYC you didnt exactly have huge plots of land, bball was much more prevalent. The south was not a "large population base" until recent times and you mention the bigger focus on high school football there... WELLLLLL... how did that come about in the first place?

I agree that now its because of the concentration on football, but 70+ years ago football was much bigger in the NE than the south but it really caught on in the south... why? because you had a lot of farm boys (black and white, i never said JUST slaves/descendants of slaves) outside all day with a shitload of fields. My dad is from deep south Alabama and is 71 years old and came from a relatively poor family. They didnt have a big ass pad of concrete and a goal back then, never imagined sitting inside a gym to play sports, didnt even have gyms back then where he lived, but they did have A football and a lot of land






[Edited on November 4, 2008 at 10:17 AM. Reason : d]

11/4/2008 9:52:21 AM

"WHO TAUGHT YOU OCTAGON?!"

11/4/2008 10:15:54 AM

In terms of recruiting I'd have to say that the BIG 3 states that traditionally turn out the best talent nationally are

1. Florida
2. Texas
3. California

And here are some presented ideas that help support the reasoning for the volume and high level of talent:

- Slavery
- Open Space (fields, backyards, flat land, etc.)
- Warm weather
- State population relative to rest of the U.S.

But, if the things we have mentioned thus far are true, then WHY aren't states like Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, and Kansas producing the level of of talent that they ought to be? Or even Tennessee? And if they are, where are these players going, and why aren't these states being mentioned among the TOP DOGS?

I almost mentioned South Carolina, but then I thought twice about it, and they certainly do well for themselves. I'd have to say MS and OK also are probably among the top contenders that I mentioned in the first post of the thread.

[Edited on November 4, 2008 at 9:47 PM. Reason : .]

11/4/2008 9:45:34 PM

^ Tennessee for one didnt/doesnt have nearly the number of farms as the deeper south, dirts too rocky by far, thats why all the folks get their corn from a jar

11/4/2008 11:06:15 PM

states with traditionally good college teams will have traditionally good high school teams...

Florida: These kids grew up watching FSU and Miami in the 80s and 90s... UF this decade
Texas: UT, A&M, OU, Nebraska, the list goes on
California: USC

Jaybee is right, the more rural areas will have better football teams. I am from a rural area, and played football in a conference relatively along the coast against schools near Wilmington... basically beach kids that were more interested in soccer. it starts at an early age.

11/5/2008 4:40:07 AM

Quote :

"Jaybee is right"

ahhh, those sweet sweet words never get old

11/5/2008 10:53:59 AM

Quote :

"the chicago and NYC metro areas. yet neither of these places are a hot bed of college football recruits. this implies that there are other, more important reasons that drive the talent pool in florida, VA, CA, and TX. thank you."

THOSE ARE THE REASONS I'M LOOKING FOR!!!

Quote :

"The south was not a "large population base" until recent times"

What are you considering "recent times"? I can understand that a lot of the southern territories weren't really explored in like the 15th and 16th centuries, but certainly by the time the declaration was signed the population was pretty well spread out and certainly by civil war times the slave population made the south very populated. Correct me if I'm wrong.

11/6/2008 7:33:41 PM