best of 3A vs. best of 5A???

[STANG RED]

Say you took the top 50 or so 3A players in the state, built a team, and practiced for a few weeks. And you did the same with 5A. Could the 3A's win?
I say yes, they would have a good chance of winning. Sure would be fun to watch.
How bout if you took that same 3A team, and played the 5A state champion, that's been together all season. Could they beat them?

[LE Dad]

Originally posted by STANG RED
Say you took the top 50 or so 3A players in the state, built a team, and practiced for a few weeks. And you did the same with 5A. Could the 3A's win?
I say yes, they would have a good chance of winning. Sure would be fun to watch.
How bout if you took that same 3A team, and played the 5A state champion, that's been together all season. Could they beat them? Good odds 50 on 50, but 50 against how ever many that 5A has would be tougher. Whats the saying "I wasn't worried bout how many it would take; I was worried bout how many they were using." It would be alot like that.
:nerd:

[Emerson1]

Originally posted by STANG RED
Say you took the top 50 or so 3A players in the state, built a team, and practiced for a few weeks. And you did the same with 5A. Could the 3A's win

How bout if you took that same 3A team, and played the 5A state champion, that's been together all season. Could they beat them?
They could win. 5As would still be heavily favored.

No. Not versus a team that has been together for years

[Bullaholic]

Originally posted by STANG RED
Say you took the top 50 or so 3A players in the state, built a team, and practiced for a few weeks. And you did the same with 5A. Could the 3A's win?
I say yes, they would have a good chance of winning. Sure would be fun to watch.
How bout if you took that same 3A team, and played the 5A state champion, that's been together all season. Could they beat them?

Hard hypothetical, Red, but I would say this would almost be like taking the NFL all-stars and letting them play the college all-stars.

[Emerson1]

Originally posted by Bullaholic
Hard hypothetical, Red, but I would say this would almost be like taking the NFL all-stars and letting them play the college all-stars.
http://footballrecruiting.rivals.com/viewrank.asp?ra_key=2461

A lot of 5A players in there

[Barney Stinson]

Originally posted by Bullaholic
I would say this would almost be like taking the NFL all-stars and letting them play the college all-stars.

This is a joke, right? 3A players would have a wayyyyyyy better shot at beating 5A players than NCAA players would have against NFL players.

Not saying 3A players would have that great of a shot against 5A players but collegiate players wouldn't stand a chance against the NFL guys.

[coach]

ill take 5a any day of the week

[bobcat4life]

Originally posted by coach
ill take 5a any day of the week
+1

[GrTigers6]

Of course there are a few players that could go from high school straight to the pros. But I would bet those players come from a 5A school. More for basketball and baseball than football however. Something to think about.:thinking:

[Txbroadcaster]

I think just like if a regular 3A played a regular 5A depth would be the deciding factor

I think the top 22 starters for this 3A All-star team would compete with the top 22 starters of 5A

It is when u get to the last 22 that 3A would be reaching their limit while the 5A squad is still rolling out D1 talent ESPECIALLY in the trenches

[Sittin & Fishin]

Theoretically, it would be the same issue that you would face with any 3A vs 5A matchup. In 3A, you would be taking the top 22 players out of a total player pool of say 10,000 players. In 5A, you would be selecting the top 22 players out of a pool of say 50,000 players. The top players in 3A might be able to compare in the backfield, but would have GREAT difficulty with line play. This is seen with the recruiting charts where the vast majority of the top 100 players in Texas are from 5A and some 4A schools, with just a smattering of 3A and lower. Just my opinion.

BTW ... An NFL all star team would TOTALLY DESTROY a college all star team!!!!! More size, more speed, more strength, better training, more experience. It would be varsity verses JV.

[navscanmaster]

Cool to think of, but I think 5A just has that much more selection and better paid coaches that can really refine the top talent. However, funny when you see a 2A (Jim Ned) player competing for the Heisman, with a 3A (Gilmer) blocker protecting and a 3A (Burnet) receiver making his job easy.

[txsfootball4lif]

5A would dominate. You could gather all the best NCAA players in the country and match them up with all the "not so good" NFL players and the NFL team would stomp them.

Someone was trying to say Gilmer could beat Abilene High...I mean yea Gilmer is awesome but going that far?!

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by Barney Stinson
This is a joke, right? 3A players would have a wayyyyyyy better shot at beating 5A players than NCAA players would have against NFL players.

Not saying 3A players would have that great of a shot against 5A players but collegiate players wouldn't stand a chance against the NFL guys. No he said hypothetical

[TheDOCTORdre]

It all comes down to coaching

[GrTigers6]

5A schools and 3A schools both have talented players. The problem is obviously 5a have more to choose from per school. Now if you put together teams from each league and it was even to how much they got to practice then I think there is a possiblity that 3A could win it. But against a team thats played all year. No chance.

[Emerson1]

Originally posted by Sittin & Fishin

BTW ... An NFL all star team would TOTALLY DESTROY a college all star team!!!!! More size, more speed, more strength, better training, more experience. It would be varsity verses JV.
The worst team in the NFL would destroy a college all-star team.

[Sittin & Fishin]

Coaching is a key, but have you guys seen some of the training facilities at some of the 5A schools? Places like Allen High School have world class facilities that few 3A schools can afford. Yes, some 3A facilities are VERY impressive, but the training facilities, bigger number of coaches and trainers, and access to top level rehab facilities gives a definate edge to 5A schools.

There are MANY GREAT athletes in 3A, but if you look at the top 100 recruiting lists for the State of Texas, would you even find 22 players that come from 3A or lower classifications? You might (I don't know), but I doubt it. THIS IS NOT A KNOCK ON 3A PLAYERS AT ALL, it is just a numbers game - with the number of students and the number of dollars spent on training and coaching at the higher levels.

I love the 3A and lower levels because you see some great players and small communities that ralley around the kids. It is a very different atmosphere as it involves entire towns. The atmosphere at the Celina-Prosper game was INCREDIBLY FUN!

[Emerson1]

Originally posted by Sittin & Fishin

There are MANY GREAT athletes in 3A, but if you look at the top 100 recruiting lists for the State of Texas, would you even find 22 players that come from 3A or lower classifications?
http://footballrecruiting.rivals.com/viewrank.asp?ra_key=2461

First one I see is at #33

[Sittin & Fishin]

[i]
There are MANY GREAT athletes in 3A, but if you look at the top 100 recruiting lists for the State of Texas, would you even find 22 players that come from 3A or lower classifications? You might (I don't know), but I doubt it. [/B]

To throw some cold water on my own statement - many of the recruiting coordinators do not go to many 3A and lower games, so many of these great athletes aren't being seen. For example, if you're a recruiting coordinator and you come to Dallas, would you rather go see Argyle vs Prosper, or Allen vs Euless Trinity. They will always go to the 5A game and that hurts the visibility and notoriety of the 3A kids on these lists.

[Emerson1]

Originally posted by Sittin & Fishin
To throw some cold water on my own statement - many of the recruiting coordinators do not go to many 3A and lower games, so many of these great athletes aren't being seen. For example, if you're a recruiting coordinator and you come to Dallas, would you rather go see Argyle vs Prosper, or Allen vs Euless Trinity. They will always go to the 5A game and that hurts the visibility and notoriety of the 3A kids on these lists.
If the kid can play he will be found by recruiters. Celina has plenty of kids in D1 right now.

[Txbroadcaster]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Emerson1
If the kid can play he will be found by recruiters. Celina has plenty of kids in D1 right now. [/QUOTE

NO not Celina..they dont win on talent..they win on coaching and HEART..NOTHING but that

[Sittin & Fishin]

Originally posted by Emerson1
If the kid can play he will be found by recruiters. Celina has plenty of kids in D1 right now.

You're right about the kids being found. I was just talking about the recruiting lists. I'm basically arguing against my own point.

It's interesting that last years Celina team that went to State didn't have any seniors that went D1 in football. This year, they only have Lavey. But, they have had a few in the past that are D1 (D'Anton Lynn-Penn State, Jamie Blatnick-Oklahoma State, Adam James-Texas Tech and Troy Franklin-NorthTexas). As I'm thinking about this, I'm surprised it's only 4 past players who are D1. Am I missing some?

Several others are playing D2 or other.

[Spread It Out]

I counted only 5 3A players in the top Texas 100. As I was scrolling through all you see is kids from Allen, Skyline, Carroll etc.

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by Sittin & Fishin
To throw some cold water on my own statement - many of the recruiting coordinators do not go to many 3A and lower games, so many of these great athletes aren't being seen. For example, if you're a recruiting coordinator and you come to Dallas, would you rather go see Argyle vs Prosper, or Allen vs Euless Trinity. They will always go to the 5A game and that hurts the visibility and notoriety of the 3A kids on these lists.




If a 5A caliber kid is playing in 3A he will be known. He will dominate. Recruiters don't need to shop 3A football because any viable talent at that level will rise to the top. The easiest way to put it is to say that if you don't dominate 3A high school football then you aren't going to be able to play collage ball. Of course there is the occasional late bloomer and exception to this rule.

[big daddy russ]

Originally posted by Sittin & Fishin
BTW ... An NFL all star team would TOTALLY DESTROY a college all star team!!!!! More size, more speed, more strength, better training, more experience. It would be varsity verses JV.
You know, there was a time when they played this game. And the college team rarely lost.

[Sittin & Fishin]

Originally posted by big daddy russ
You know, there was a time when they played this game. And the college team rarely lost.

That's right. But that was many years ago, and I believe it was when many of the college players were just home from the wars and they were playing college football at age 26, and the pro ranks were rather weak. The difference is that in todays game, every NFL all star is a PROVEN winner and dominator at the HIGHEST level. The college all stars are not even remotely proven at the highest level. That's why so many sure #1 "can't miss" draft picks wind up being busts. Especially if JJ picks them.

Here's a better way to look at it. I would be curious how many of the NFL all stars would have made the college all star team when they were in college. You can go through all the great NFL players like Tom Brady who would not have been on anyones college all star team and look at them now as they are older, bigger, stronger and smarter. How many of the 2009 college all star players will potentially be flops in the pro's. That list of guys (like Ryan Leaf and Tony Madurich) is too long to mention. Look at a guy like Peyton Manning and even he struggled his first few years as a pro as he tried to figure out defenses.

Who would be the 2009 college all star QB today? Colt McCoy or Tim Tebow? I love the kids, but what would they do against a Rex Ryan schemed defense loaded with players like Dwight Freeny, Mario Williams, Allen West, Justin Tuck, Julius Peppers, Demarcus Ware, Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Joey porter, Antoine Winfield, etc. The college offensive linemen would get confused and killed by the defensive line and linebackers with all the blitze and stunt packages. However, after a couple of years of learning and growth, they might be able to compete.

Fun conversation.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by big daddy russ
You know, there was a time when they played this game. And the college team rarely lost.

yes but alot of stars on both sides played alot and by most accounts the NFL players were more worried about injuries than performance

and I think the NFL still had like a 30-9 W-L or something like that

[Sittin & Fishin]

If the question is "Could a college all-star team compete with an NFL team?", why don't you ask the question "Could a high school all star team compete with a college all star team?" The difference in age between high school and college would only be 3-4 years as opposed to the 1-20 year difference between college and pro player's. It's well known that the male body reaches full athletic potential between ages 28-33. That's why most olympic sprinters are around 28 years old and why most olympic weightlifters are early to late 30's. So, the NFL players are at full athletic potential where as college and high schoolers are still maturing.

BTW-I know the high schoolers would get totally destroyed and EMS would have to have multiple ambulances and helicopters at the ready before the game. I'm just making an absurd comparison.

[GTownballer]

Their are no David and Goliaths here, simply 17 year old highschool kids, you take a 6' 200, pound kid, that plays 3A, that runs a 4.5, and match him head to head with a 5A kid, with same physical stature, and speed, it's a horse race my friend, just because the school has more enrollment means nothing, you take 50 talented 3A kids, and take a good 5A team, and I promise you, it's a horse race, or a good game,, depth is an issue, on standard matchup's, but you have a 3A team with alot of talent, and some subs with expierance, with a good coach, then you can toss the classification out the window, because the only differance is depth, but if you have a deep 3A team and deep 5A, it's a good game, they're all just highschool kids....

[injuredinmelee]

I say no they couldnt beat them. BUt wouldnt it be fun to try.

[Old Tiger]

I'll take the back ups of the best 5a school to beat the starters of the best 3a.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by GTownballer
Their are no David and Goliaths here, simply 17 year old highschool kids, you take a 6' 200, pound kid, that plays 3A, that runs a 4.5, and match him head to head with a 5A kid, with same physical stature, and speed, it's a horse race my friend, just because the school has more enrollment means nothing, you take 50 talented 3A kids, and take a good 5A team, and I promise you, it's a horse race, or a good game,, depth is an issue, on standard matchup's, but you have a 3A team with alot of talent, and some subs with expierance, with a good coach, then you can toss the classification out the window, because the only differance is depth, but if you have a deep 3A team and deep 5A, it's a good game, they're all just highschool kids....

Again as I said earlier



I think the top 22 starters for this 3A All-star team would compete with the top 22 starters of 5A all star

It is when u get to the last 22 that 3A would be reaching their limit while the 5A squad is still rolling out D1 talent ESPECIALLY in the trenches

[STANG RED]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
Again as I said earlier



I think the top 22 starters for this 3A All-star team would compete with the top 22 starters of 5A all star

It is when u get to the last 22 that 3A would be reaching their limit while the 5A squad is still rolling out D1 talent ESPECIALLY in the trenches

I have to disagree. I dont think you would see much if any difference in the top 22, and the next 22, if your picking from all 3A players in the state. I do however believe 5A would have the advantage in the trenches. Some of those kids are monsters, very well coached, and have had the advantage of some amazing facilities to work out in. Other than that though, I dont think you'd see any real difference in talent, in the top 50 between 3A and 5A.
As for not seeing many 3As and below on the blue chip lists. First I just dont think they get nearly the amount of exposure, and second, many of the 5A kids get lots of over exposure. The 5A schools are located where all the media centers are in the state. So those kids every move is seen by multiple sports writers and scouts on a weekly basis. Whereas a great 3A player on a bad team, may get no state exposure at all. Especially if he doesnt bloom into that great player till his senior year.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by STANG RED
I have to disagree. I dont think you would see much if any difference in the top 22, and the next 22, if your picking from all 3A players in the state. I do however believe 5A would have the advantage in the trenches. Some of those kids are monsters, very well coached, and have had the advantage of some amazing facilities to work out in. Other than that though, I dont think you'd see any real difference in talent, in the top 50 between 3A and 5A.
As for not seeing many 3As and below on the blue chip lists. First I just dont think they get nearly the amount of exposure, and second, many of the 5A kids get lots of over exposure. The 5A schools are located where all the media centers are in the state. So those kids every move is seen by multiple sports writers and scouts on a weekly basis. Whereas a great 3A player on a bad team, may get no state exposure at all. Especially if he doesnt bloom into that great player till his senior year.

I think 1-50 5A is going to have more talent at the bottom than the bottom of 1-50 in 3A..Just look at where some 5A kids will be playing college football and then look at their ranking..It just simply is a numbers game

More pool of players means more talent

[STANG RED]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
I think 1-50 5A is going to have more talent at the bottom than the bottom of 1-50 in 3A..Just look at where some 5A kids will be playing college football and then look at their ranking..It just simply is a numbers game

More pool of players means more talent

And I think the bottom 50 of the top 200 5A athletes get far more exposur by state wide sports writers than the top 50 3A athletes, which accounts for much of why 5A players get many of the offers they get. I see it as more than just simply a numbers game. Strong or weak exposure due to geography is a big factor IMO.

Take Titus from Monahans (before he got hurt) for instance. He may have been one of the top 10 athletes in the state, in all classifications. But I'd bet most of the sports media in Dallas, Houston, Austin, knew almost nothing about him.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by STANG RED
And I think the bottom 50 of the top 200 5A athletes get far more exposur by state wide sports writers than the top 50 3A athletes, which accounts for much of why 5A players get many of the offers they get. I see it as more than just simply a numbers game. Strong or weak exposure due to geography is a big factor IMO.

Take Titus from Monahans (before he got hurt) for instance. He may have been one of the top 10 athletes in the state, in all classifications. But I'd bet most of the sports media in Dallas, Houston, Austin, knew almost nothing about him.

There are just as many great 5A players who are either on bad teams or teams that dont get alot exposure..just because it is 5A does not mean the stands are packed and the media covers them 3 fold.

[STANG RED]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
There are just as many great 5A players who are either on bad teams or teams that dont get alot exposure..just because it is 5A does not mean the stands are packed and the media covers them 3 fold.

But they play against other 5As that are getting big attention, so they are being seen by the people that matter.

[GrTigers6]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
There are just as many great 5A players who are either on bad teams or teams that dont get alot exposure..just because it is 5A does not mean the stands are packed and the media covers them 3 fold. When we played Diamond Hill in 04 they had a running back just blowing people away. there offense was average nearly 40 points a game, unfortunetly the defense was giving up alot more. I believe they won two games that year. But there were scouts at every game from the 3rd game of the season. So it shows that if your on a bad team you really have to shine to be noticed. The star telegram did an article on him after that 3rd game and then out came the scouts, but then again he was averaging 250 yards a game and 4 td's. Cant remember his name though I would like to see if he did anything in college.

[Twirling Time]

Originally posted by Sittin & Fishin
You're right about the kids being found. I was just talking about the recruiting lists. I'm basically arguing against my own point.

It's interesting that last years Celina team that went to State didn't have any seniors that went D1 in football. This year, they only have Lavey. But, they have had a few in the past that are D1 (D'Anton Lynn-Penn State, Jamie Blatnick-Oklahoma State, Adam James-Texas Tech and Troy Franklin-NorthTexas). As I'm thinking about this, I'm surprised it's only 4 past players who are D1. Am I missing some?

Several others are playing D2 or other.

Nathan Tune — UNT
Zach Babb — UNT
Lance Clark — Texas Tech (walk on)
Randall Cherry — Texas Tech
Adam Herrin — Rice
Adam Harvey — New Mexico State (baseball)
Jackie Lowe — Sam Houston State

Those are just this decade and I'm certainly leaving some out.

[waterboy]

The top 50 in 3A against the top 50 in 5A: it would come down to coaching. I'd have to give an edge to the 5A team in talent, but it wouldn't be an insurmountable difference.

Now if you got to the next 50 the difference would definitely be nearly insurmountable.......but could still be overcome with superior coaching.

The further into the talent pool you go the bigger the difference would be in favor of the 5A players. After 100 deep I don't think the 3A players could compete at all with the 5A players.

[TheDOCTORdre]

If you were given the opportunity to choose the coach to coach the 3A team, which 3A coach would you choose?

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by GTownballer
Their are no David and Goliaths here, simply 17 year old highschool kids, you take a 6' 200, pound kid, that plays 3A, that runs a 4.5, and match him head to head with a 5A kid, with same physical stature, and speed, it's a horse race my friend, just because the school has more enrollment means nothing, you take 50 talented 3A kids, and take a good 5A team, and I promise you, it's a horse race, or a good game,, depth is an issue, on standard matchup's, but you have a 3A team with alot of talent, and some subs with expierance, with a good coach, then you can toss the classification out the window, because the only differance is depth, but if you have a deep 3A team and deep 5A, it's a good game, they're all just highschool kids....





There are a lot of 6', 200 pound kids that run a 4.5 in high school these days. They all have different levels of "Ability" and "Commitment". With 5 times the enrollment a 5A school is 5 times more likely to find those kids with the exceptional ability. In other words if you graded the kids on a scale of 1-10, the 5A teams will have 5 (10's) to every 1 for the 3A teams. But they also have 5 to 1 kids that grade out at a 9 and 5 to 1 that grade out at 8 and so on and so on. The top 22 from 5A would be head and shoulders above the top 22 in 3A. (as a group). A big difference in coaching ability could equalize the matchup somewhat but not near close enough to give the 3A team a good chance.

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by waterboy
The top 50 in 3A against the top 50 in 5A: it would come down to coaching. I'd have to give an edge to the 5A team in talent, but it wouldn't be an insurmountable difference.

Now if you got to the next 50 the difference would definitely be nearly insurmountable.......but could still be overcome with superior coaching.

The further into the talent pool you go the bigger the difference would be in favor of the 5A players. After 100 deep I don't think the 3A players could compete at all with the 5A players.



The BEST 3A player in the state would be competetive in 5A but he wouldn't be dominate and you could likely find many, many 5A players that are just as good.
The seperation in talent between the two classifications is just as big in the top 100 as it is in the bottom 100.

[Sittin & Fishin]

Originally posted by Twirling Time
Nathan Tune — UNT
Zach Babb — UNT
Lance Clark — Texas Tech (walk on)
Randall Cherry — Texas Tech
Adam Herrin — Rice
Adam Harvey — New Mexico State (baseball)
Jackie Lowe — Sam Houston State

Those are just this decade and I'm certainly leaving some out.

When I asked earlier if I was leaving some Celina players out, I was just listing active players in college. I forgot Tune. I didn't know Babb was playing at North Texas.

If you list baseball, I believe there are quite a few at different levels, but I'm not sure where they have all gone. I was just listing football.

[waterboy]

I don't think so, Farmersfan. The gap in talent gets wider the further into the talent pool you go, that's a given, but the best players in 5A are comparable to the best players in 3A with only a slight edge to the 5A players. Of course there will be exceptions with a freak of a player here and there, as could be the case in either classification, so I think there is more balance at the very top with the gap getting wider the further you go into the talent pool. So no, the gap is not as wide in the top 50, but would be by the time you hit the top 100. Of course, nobody will ever know for sure unless we start having all-star games between classifications.:rolleyes:

[Txbroadcaster]

The best 3A players could do just as well in 5A. The problem in 3A again is the BOTTOM part of the top talent...That is where 5A seperates from 3A

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by waterboy
I don't think so, Farmersfan. The gap in talent gets wider the further into the talent pool you go, that's a given, but the best players in 5A are comparable to the best players in 3A with only a slight edge to the 5A players. Of course there will be exceptions with a freak of a player here and there, as could be the case in either classification, so I think there is more balance at the very top with the gap getting wider the further you go into the talent pool. So no, the gap is not as wide in the top 50, but would be by the time you hit the top 100. Of course, nobody will ever know for sure unless we start having all-star games between classifications.:rolleyes:





I agree! If you are talking about a single player or just a few players.
I don't think it will apply when you are talking about a group. For every player in 3A that you would grade out as a "10" there will be probably 25 or more in 5A that are equal to that.
Collage recruiters aren't stupid! They know that 5A will provide 20 D-1 players to every 1 3A player so they really don't spend much time in 3A LOOKING for the "diamond in the rough" because a true "Diamond" in 3A will be the Crème de la Crème and will not require much of a search. And even the best of 3A is a crap shoot at playing D-1 ball.

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by waterboy
I don't think so, Farmersfan. The gap in talent gets wider the further into the talent pool you go, that's a given, but the best players in 5A are comparable to the best players in 3A with only a slight edge to the 5A players. Of course there will be exceptions with a freak of a player here and there, as could be the case in either classification, so I think there is more balance at the very top with the gap getting wider the further you go into the talent pool. So no, the gap is not as wide in the top 50, but would be by the time you hit the top 100. Of course, nobody will ever know for sure unless we start having all-star games between classifications.:rolleyes:



The "Professionals" at Rivals tells us you have to go 33 players deep in 5A & 4A to get to the BEST 3A player. No! it's not even close. If you put together a team of 22 of the best 3A players 5A could field 200 players that are better. Add in 4A talent and it doubles that number.

[waterboy]

Any college recruiter will tell you why they take more looks in 5A games.......because there are more players with D1 talent playing in a single game (one spot) which makes their job easier. That's not to say that that's "always" the case, but the chances are much better. There are some 3A schools that get a lot of attention, too, based on reputation for having D1 talent on a regular basis, so they show up at some of their games to check it out, too.;) I'm sure that if you looked at all 189 (?) 3A schools you could find 22 players that could compete at the 5A level, maybe even as many as 50 most years.

[waterboy]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
The "Professionals" at Rivals tells us you have to go 33 players deep in 5A & 4A to get to the BEST 3A player. No! it's not even close. If you put together a team of 22 of the best 3A players 5A could field 200 players that are better. Add in 4A talent and it doubles that number.
Once again, it's ONLY speculation, but I can see where they could come to that summation......the smaller the school the fewer D1 prospects. 4A wasn't a part of this conversation, but the talent level IS overall greater than 3A simply because there is a deeper talent pool, but less than the 5A talent pool. Also, I think there IS a ceiling to talent in the real world, but those "freak" athletes they speak of and rate definitely are more likely to come from bigger schools because of the deeper talent pool. The level of players definitely diminishes the deeper into the talent pool you go, so the smaller the pool the difference widens in talent level exponentially.:nerd:

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by waterboy
I'm sure that if you looked at all 189 (?) 3A schools you could find 22 players that could compete at the 5A level, maybe even as many as 50 most years. [/B]




I can't disagree with this but those 22 players are competing with 200 5A players that are just as good..........

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by waterboy
Once again, it's ONLY speculation, but I can see where they could come to that summation......the smaller the school the fewer D1 prospects. 4A wasn't a part of this conversation, but the talent level IS overall greater than 3A simply because there is a deeper talent pool, but less than the 5A talent pool. Also, I think there IS a ceiling to talent in the real world, but those "freak" athletes they speak of and rate definitely are more likely to come from bigger schools because of the deeper talent pool. The level of players definitely diminishes the deeper into the talent pool you go, so the smaller the pool the difference widens in talent level exponentially.:nerd:




Very well put! There IS a ceiling on the talent. But the point is that it's rare to find the kind of talent that reaches that ceiling. 5A has 5X as much of it. Regardless of how you measure that talent you will find 5 times more of it in a classification that is 5 times bigger. Of course these are only averages and don't take specific players or schools into account.
But football for MOST high school players is technique and preparation rather than just talent. Playing in a 5A program for years gives players a DIFFERENT perspective on what it takes to be successful. Many, many of the successful 3A players could not simply move to a 5A program and compete NOW! But IF they had grown up and developed in that program they would be much more capable of competeing. Does that make sense?

[waterboy]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
Very well put! There IS a ceiling on the talent. But the point is that it's rare to find the kind of talent that reaches that ceiling. 5A has 5X as much of it. Regardless of how you measure that talent you will find 5 times more of it in a classification that is 5 times bigger. Of course these are only averages and don't take specific players or schools into account.
But football for MOST high school players is technique and preparation rather than just talent. Playing in a 5A program for years gives players a DIFFERENT perspective on what it takes to be successful. Many, many of the successful 3A players could not simply move to a 5A program and compete NOW! But IF they had grown up and developed in that program they would be much more capable of competeing. Does that make sense?
Yep, that definitely makes sense. It would be a big jump for a 3A player to go to a 5A school. There would be much more competition for the same position which would make him hone his skills that much more just to have a chance at starting. Therein lies probably the biggest difference maker.:nerd:

[Phantom Stang]

First let me say I have no doubt, that as far as as school programs go, any four this year's 3A state finalists, would beat any team in the 2009 version of District 3-5A except Abilene.

However, in a "best 3A players in the state, vs the best 5A players in the state" matchup, 5A would dominate easily. While the best player on the field could very possibly could be on the 3A team, the across the board talent of the 5A team would be much greater.

[Twirling Time]

Originally posted by Sittin & Fishin
When I asked earlier if I was leaving some Celina players out, I was just listing active players in college. I forgot Tune. I didn't know Babb was playing at North Texas.

If you list baseball, I believe there are quite a few at different levels, but I'm not sure where they have all gone. I was just listing football.

Gotcha. I misunderstood what you were asking. Harvey, by the way, originally did sign with Okie State to play football and baseball but got hurt in a car wreck that summer.