Two Primary Factors that affect Talent Pool!!!

[vet93]

1. The first is demographics. This includes two primary factors: a. Total number of athletes to choose from b. Genetic Pool of the athletes to choose from

2. The second primary factor is Socioeconomic level. Schools with a large number of kids that appoach the poverty level are disadvantaged in many ways. This is not related to race.

O.K..........Now fire away!

[JasperDog94]

Man. People must be in a bad mood today. Either they're starting threads about taking drugs (valium) or starting threads that will start controversy.:devil: :devil: :devil:

[STANG RED]

Originally posted by vet93
1. The first is demographics. This includes two primary factors: a. Total number of athletes to choose from b. Genetic Pool of the athletes to choose from

2. The second primary factor is Socioeconomic level. Schools with a large number of kids that appoach the poverty level are disadvantaged in many ways. This is not related to race.

O.K..........Now fire away!
I have seen many teams from completely diametrically opposed demographics as far as socioeconomics, go on and win a state championship in the same year.
It seems like I remember Lubbock Estecado (4A) and Austin Westlake (5A) winning state one year. You cant get a much wider demographic than that.

[whtfbplaya]

Originally posted by STANG RED
I have seen many teams from completely diametrically opposed demographics as far as socioeconomics, go on and win a state championship in the same year.
It seems like I remember Lubbock Estecado (4A) and Austin Westlake (5A) winning state one year. You cant get a much wider demographic than that.

Amen

[vet93]

I agree StangRed....that it why a made the point to include genetics and limited the discussion to "talent" and not championships. There are other factors such as coaching, tradition, character, motivation etc...that will affect any given team that does not depend on talent but has a profound affect on the outcome of a season.



Originally posted by STANG RED
I have seen many teams from completely diametrically opposed demographics as far as socioeconomics, go on and win a state championship in the same year.
It seems like I remember Lubbock Estecado (4A) and Austin Westlake (5A) winning state one year. You cant get a much wider demographic than that.

[Gobbla2001]

I'll attack the tradition one...

Go to a school with a rich tradition, walk down the halls and select who you think is a great football player on the team... chances are he is...

Go to one without a rich tradition, walk down the halls and select who you think is a great football player on the team... there's a chance he doesn't even play football...

[Black_Magic]

I think the ability of certain staffs to be able to cope with and develope the Inbread athlete can affect it as well..

[Tatum_Fan]

Originally posted by vet93
1. The first is demographics. This includes two primary factors: a. Total number of athletes to choose from b. Genetic Pool of the athletes to choose from

2. The second primary factor is Socioeconomic level. Schools with a large number of kids that appoach the poverty level are disadvantaged in many ways. This is not related to race.

O.K..........Now fire away!

Not sure that I agree with you on that one

Tatum is the 2nd smallest 3A in the state THS has 394 students and they are in the semi's. This is a prime example of genetics and tradition. Some players on this team have parent's that still hold track records at THS. Well, as far as the tradition thing goes, I have to agree with Gobbla 2001

Socioeconomic level - the district is wealthy, but the student's are not. (The wealth of this district is due to property values of TXU)

[Adidas410s]

Nobody is actually making an argument against BOTH of his points. Notice in cases where the socioeconomic level is LOW that the talent/genetics/athletic ability is VERY HIGH to offset the lack of funds to provide adequate training/practice facilites for the students. Now try and find a team from a poor district that does NOT have much talent/tradition/etc. that is STILL consistently winning games. You can't because they don't exist.

[turbostud]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
I think the ability of certain staffs to be able to cope with and develope the Inbread athlete can affect it as well..

I didnt know that athletes were developed in bread. :D

[STANG RED]

Originally posted by turbostud
I didnt know that athletes were developed in bread. :D
It's all that yeast! Thats why locker rooms smell the way they do.

[turbostud]

Originally posted by STANG RED
It's all that yeast! Thats why locker rooms smell the way they do.

lol

[Bullaholic]

Originally posted by vet93
1. The first is demographics. This includes two primary factors: a. Total number of athletes to choose from b. Genetic Pool of the athletes to choose from

2. The second primary factor is Socioeconomic level. Schools with a large number of kids that appoach the poverty level are disadvantaged in many ways. This is not related to race.

O.K..........Now fire away!


You forgot the absolute main two reasons for talent level, Vet93-----Mom & Dad. :D

Sorry, Vet93, my error---I didn't see "Genetic Pool"---

[zeus63]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
I think the ability of certain staffs to be able to cope with and develope the Inbread athlete can affect it as well..

INBREEAADDEEERRRSSS!!!!!!!

Are we talking Texas or Arkansas?

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by zeus63
INBREEAADDEEERRRSSS!!!!!!!

Are we talking Texas or Arkansas? TEXAS.. But the Arkansas Supreme Court held last week that from this point forward in Arkansas , If you get a divorce in that state you may still be considered Brother And Sister.:p

[HPLJ6L]

Last time I checked, TALENT is determined by who wins ballgames so you won't find an example of success without finding talent. Any kid who can stay eligible can be taught a system and be successful with it. But is he really talented?

Now if you follow the talent to another level then you can argue how good or bad it is...Just look at Vince v. Reggie

And they don't sell UIL trophies at WalMart. So having a lot of money isn't the answer either.

[zeus63]

Originally posted by HPLJ6L
Last time I checked, TALENT is determined by who wins ballgames so you won't find an example of success without finding talent. Any kid who can stay eligible can be taught a system and be successful with it. But is he really talented?

Now if you follow the talent to another level then you can argue how good or bad it is...Just look at Vince v. Reggie

And they don't sell UIL trophies at WalMart. So having a lot of money isn't the answer either.


BORING!!!!

We're talking about INBREADERS here, can't you see that? (just kidding).

But, to argue your point. Genetics does play a huge role in what you can or cannot do as an athlete as does socioeconomic status. It has been proven, for the mojority of people (not all), that if you come from a poorer family, as opposed to a middle class/upper class family, it is more likely that you will succeed not only in athletics but academics as well. (Not true in all cases however.) As for genetics, if you are a 4ft tall midget, you can have all the TALENT in the world and not be able to translate that into athletic success no matter how good the prgram is.

[cdlvj]

A lot of times, politics enters the picture, and the lower class individual does not get the chance to play. Little Johnny whose father was a stud gets all the playing time. Case in point Applewhite/Sims. And occurs at the HS level also.

[zeus63]

Originally posted by cdlvj
A lot of times, politics enters the picture, and the lower class individual does not get the chance to play. Little Johnny whose father was a stud gets all the playing time. Case in point Applewhite/Sims. And occurs at the HS level also.

How right you are.

[STANG RED]

Originally posted by cdlvj
A lot of times, politics enters the picture, and the lower class individual does not get the chance to play. Little Johnny whose father was a stud gets all the playing time. Case in point Applewhite/Sims. And occurs at the HS level also.

Good point! And sometimes, all you have to be is the coaches son. Never miss a down, and might be the worst athlete on the field.
We had a QB for a couple of years in the mid 90s that was the coaches son, that couldnt have made QB for the worst 1A team in the state. Both backup QBs to him were easily twice as good. We even went to the semis his senior year and got beat by Carthage. Even the Carthage people were laughing at his lack of athletic ability.

[vet93]

Thank you Adidas...that was the point I was trying to make. There are teams and communities where the demographics help give you the talent to be a champion (either through numbers or genetics) or there are districts where the majority of the kids come from a middle class socioeconomic level whose talent is potentiated by having great parental support, great facilities, the ability to go to "camps" and get extra training etc....It is rare to find a district that can succeed for long that is a relatively poor school (primarily at the home level not the district) that also has poor demographics regardless of some of the other factors that play into having a successful team.


Originally posted by Adidas410s
Nobody is actually making an argument against BOTH of his points. Notice in cases where the socioeconomic level is LOW that the talent/genetics/athletic ability is VERY HIGH to offset the lack of funds to provide adequate training/practice facilites for the students. Now try and find a team from a poor district that does NOT have much talent/tradition/etc. that is STILL consistently winning games. You can't because they don't exist.

[Adidas410s]

Originally posted by vet93
Thank you Adidas...that was the point I was trying to make. There are teams and communities where the demographics help give you the talent to be a champion (either through numbers or genetics) or there are districts where the majority of the kids come from a middle class socioeconomic level whose talent is potentiated by having great parental support, great facilities, the ability to go to "camps" and get extra training etc....It is rare to find a district that can succeed for long that is a relatively poor school (primarily at the home level not the district) that also has poor demographics regardless of some of the other factors that play into having a successful team.

anytime...yeah the perfect example of a "fall from grace" is Lubbock Estacado. A very poor part of town...well then the lines were re-drawn "over the years" and now they are good to go 2-8...

[VWG]

There are exceptions... but the more money a program has then generally the more successful they are.
SLC, Highland Park, Katy, Austin Westlake, Abilene Wylie, Canadian, etc... (and yes, don't forget that smaller communities have tons of cash, just maybe not as much quantity but per capita it would make you a believer)

[vet93]

Also the socioeconomic level of the parents is key. If you are a single mom trying to feed the kids, living at the poverty level, it is 10 times more difficult to provide the economic environment to help those kids thrive. That is not to say that there are not exceptions to this rule in regards to genetics that I talked about in the first post. Any person who is worked in a school system where there is a large proportion of kids at a lower socioeconomic level...they will tell you that those kids are more worried about the clothes on their back, finding a job to support the family or to get away of the family...than they are about going to the next Texas Tech Football Camp or busting their hump for Athletics when they don't have the support at home. Please know that I am talking in generalities here, there are certainly wonderful exceptions to this generalization.



Originally posted by VWG
There are exceptions... but the more money a program has then generally the more successful they are.
SLC, Highland Park, Katy, Austin Westlake, Abilene Wylie, Canadian, etc... (and yes, don't forget that smaller communities have tons of cash, just maybe not as much quantity but per capita it would make you a believer)

[VWG]

Originally posted by vet93
Also the socioeconomic level of the parents is key. If you are a single mom trying to feed the kids, living at the poverty level, it is 10 times more difficult to provide the economic environment to help those kids thrive. That is not to say that there are not exceptions to this rule in regards to genetics that I talked about in the first post. Any person who is worked in a school system where there is a large proportion of kids at a lower socioeconomic level...they will tell you that those kids are more worried about the clothes on their back, finding a job to support the family or to get away of the family...than they are about going to the next Texas Tech Football Camp or busting their hump for Athletics when they don't have the support at home. Please know that I am talking in generalities here, there are certainly wonderful exceptions to this generalization.


This is where a coach or a teacher, any mentor can step in.
You can take a kid that maybe doesn't have the necessary financial means that others do, and direct them into a positive outlet. Be it athletics, band, DECA, etc....
A good positive influence will do wonders. I can attest to that, as I have seen it happen myself.
On one note... look at the success that Wilmer-Hutchins had last year. That group of coaches had some tremendous players from one of the worst school districts in the state. Heck, it's now defunct. But they lifted that community up during football season.
If even some of that spirit was shifted over to the classroom, etc... from the WH players then they've created some good patterns.

[Adidas410s]

Originally posted by VWG
This is where a coach or a teacher, any mentor can step in.
You can take a kid that maybe doesn't have the necessary financial means that others do, and direct them into a positive outlet. Be it athletics, band, DECA, etc....
A good positive influence will do wonders. I can attest to that, as I have seen it happen myself.
On one note... look at the success that Wilmer-Hutchins had last year. That group of coaches had some tremendous players from one of the worst school districts in the state. Heck, it's now defunct. But they lifted that community up during football season.
If even some of that spirit was shifted over to the classroom, etc... from the WH players then they've created some good patterns.

but the big difference is how long does a Hutch type district sustain its success? Unfortunately this is where the despairity lies.