After playing my high school football in C-bus and then coming down to GA. to live and watch my kids play football here the Differents starts when school ball starts. Middle school and high school football both have spring camps and lefting programs in the off seasons. I do not think that Ohio high schools allow spring football. They also start 7 On 7 really early down here too. Finally the last thing is they do not have as mini kids tring to be 2 and 3 sports stars down here they are focused on just on sport mostly.
(bye using SEC was comparing to GA. FLA. and Bama.)
Can some let me know if Ohio is allowing spring football up there.
I know this was bandied about last March. It was voted down by the OHSAA in April of 2011. However, since Urban Meyer gave this topic his support, I still have not seen anything as to whether it was approved or not.
I've been a big proponent of this for years. I think it not only improves the overall quality of the high-school programs as well as the state's recruiting base for college football, thereby giving more opportunites to those involved.
“Right now, Michigan is not at the pinnacle of college football, and that’s all Urban Meyer cares about...He’s been there and knows what it takes to get there.”
I feel like there's not as much of a difference as you think between Ohio football and SEC HS football as far as talent wise. The State of Ohio traditionally plays pretty well when playing teams vs other states power house teams. I agree that spring ball would help even further but I can't imagine our talent is that far behind. It would probably make a difference what programs you are comparing too. If your comparing Glenville, Trotwood, Massilon, St. X, Cardinal Mooney, St. Ignatious to their top schools you have to imagine the talent level is pretty close. I guarentee you every one of those schools have strict year round lifting programs and many kids get around spring ball by practicing on their own and going to camps.
It's not so much about the TEAM, but the individual players on teams from the south. While I agree that from a team standpoint there likely isn't much of a gap, but when looking at individual talent....there is just more of it in the south.
I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on that one. Ohio has plenty of talent. I played HS ball on the same team with 2 kids who are in the NFL and against many more that are as well. Theres plenty of individual talent its just whether the scouts wanna give the kids credit.
So did I, but facts dont lie. Look at NFL rosters....more and more players are coming from the south(look at recent years). Like I said, we aren't talking about teams here...its about individual players, particularly from small schools and on the off and def lines.
I forget the team(might have been Hillard Davidson), but it was a few years ago that they won the state championship with a single player going on to a D-1 school that year. Teamwork and coaching are different than individual talent.
I feel that the major difference, in Ohio's favor, would be the level of coaching found here in our great state.
True they have spring ball in florida too. Just the lifting and being around it year round has to be an advantage.
After Hurricane Katrina, some kids from Louisiana transferred up to my local high school and joined our football team because their home was destroyed in the flooding (I think it was the first or second week of our season), and they were shocked at how relaxed our conditioning program was (we made the playoffs that year, DII state semifinals both years after). They only stayed for one semester, but I think they went on to play for Southern Miss or something like that. Anyway, I would love for football to have more of a presence in the Spring.
I think our top HS programs match up well with southern schools, but when you look at the big picture, the talent pool is much deeper at the smaller schools in the south. There are so many more kids in poverty in the south. Sports is all most of them have, thats why they are so good. If you breed a physical ultra competitive enviorment (survival of the fittest) you will end up with more talnted harder working kids. Not as intellegent, but more physically talented.
Academics are a large part of it as well. We tend to hold kids to a higher standard, knowing most of them wont play college football of go pro, and will be members of our communities. It's simple IMO, the best football players aren't great students because all they care about of focus on is football. The best students aren't the best athletes because they value education more than a sport. So it goes.
Dustin Fox was our leading tackler as a corner.... because his guy always caught the ball.
You make some good points. If you look at the SEC outside of Vanderbilt academically, and compare them to the B1G, PAC 12, ACC it isn't even close.
Not sure about this. Football is king in the south. The same southern states with the relatively low educational attainment and low proficiency exam scores, etc., are not producing relatively high numbers of basketball players.
And, anecdotally, it seems to me that many of the top h.s. football programs in Florida and other southern states are Christian or non-religious "academies" with relatively good resources - e.g. St. Thomas Acquinas. I don't know if these football powerhouses tend to be above average academically, but they do not seem like ultra-low performing schools, either.
If you've ever seen the 80s movie Wildcats, it played off the stereotype that the most under-resourced, worst performing innercity schools would occasionally produce a 4/5 star player, but otherwise fielded football teams that were garbage. Well, we know that stereotype was never really (consistently) true. The espn documentary on the rise of the U in the early 80s talks about the awesome talent that was beginning to flow out of urban schools in greater Miami. Nevertheless, a lot of potentially great athletes in bad schools across America also slipped through the cracks, too - did not graduate, got in with the wrong crowds, etc.
For comparisons sake, some of the bigger football powers in southern California are in relatively well-off Orange County or greater San Diego "suburbs" with school names like Mater Dei, Mission Viego or Rancho something or other.
It's not Ohio that is the problems with the south having more talent than the midwest. Ohio and Western PA are basically the only football 'hotbeds' and do their share in providing the Big10 with quality players. Everywhere else around here has the occasional good player, who grows up playing relatively weak competition (Michigan, Indiana, etc.)
What we need are football vocational schools. Stick with me here.... Any kid who chooses to can go to football vocational school. They will only get a GED, but every day prospects will run/ lift weights/ and study film. Because of their enviorment these kids will become better football players and recieve more offers. The catch would be, if they don't make it past college, they would end up working at Anytime Fitness, or at another football vocational school due to the lack of school budget. But who knows, maybe one of those kids goes pro, gets a fat contract, and donates a small fortune to the Football vocational school. I think if we want better football players, and thats all they want to be, let em do it. -end Mike Slive rant
Dustin Fox was our leading tackler as a corner.... because his guy always caught the ball.
An entire school for those who ain't come there to play school! Why not?
Those who stay will be CHAMPIONS!
~Bo Schembechler
I do agree that Ohio does provide the whole big ten with talent and yes the other states in the big ten needs to provide more talent too. There is just more then one and a half states down here the gives talented kids to the SEC frist and for most then the ACC and alittle to the bigeast. The piont is down here they eat sleep and dream Football from the ages 6,7 and 8 up to high school. and it is tackle football all the way down here not no flag football.
Camden county which is one of ga. power programs that stay ranked in the nation down here has the kids running and learning the High schools base O and D from the time they are 9 and 10 up.
Most of the kids down here are programed to think that they are ment to play football only or just baseball they have a few kids that cross over to other sports. The parents down here start the progaming way to early and lots get in trouble cause of it.
Football in Ohio, PA, and California is a sport you play. Football in Georgia, Florida and Texas is a life you live.
To me that's the big difference- its largely cultural. The south is not simply filled with better athletes. That's a myth. Go across rosters at the pro level of all the major sports and you'll see quickly its pretty evenly distributed. Where the gap is though is in what sports are emphasized in what regions. Hockey is a culture in states like Minnesota, and that shows in the number of college players and pros from there. Basketball is a culture in the midwest and northeast, and that shows in the number of players from those regions. Football is a culture in the south.
"Talent" and "speed" are pretty evenly distributed across the nation in my opinion. If there were some sort of genetic test, I think testing three year olds across the country would find the percentages of athletes with those factors fairly similar in terms of percent of population in different parts of the country. What determines what happens with those factors is then largely a cultural thing. Some of that culture is regional (examples basketball in NY, football in GA), some is class level examples (less wealthy people can't afford hockey), some is racial or ethnic (examples Canadians love hockey, baseball is more popular with Latinos than other groups), and some is familial (grew up in a household where the Dad loves football).
In the south, football is a culture. Kids who want to play football are expected at young ages to do that and commit to that. They workout and lift year round in routines designed for football, they play in every league they can, they don't play other sports, and they receive praise for single-minded commitment.
In the midwest, that is much less common. Kids play multiple sports, and a great athlete is likely to be on both the football and basketball teams. Football isnt the over-riding end-all be-all. When kids do adopt single-minded commitment to work year round for improvement in a single sport, it is more likely to be basketball than football.
In a state like California, the culture can be completely different. Many kids that are athletic never even get involved in sports. They work out to look good at the beach while they hang out with friends. Not everybody does that, of course, but a percentage of athletes never becomes players of sports because sports is not what elevates those kids to a level above their piers.
Obviously this is a lot of generalizing, but I think its important generalizing. Ohio is a populated state and produces tons of athletic talent, but that talent is not, in general, as committed to football on a year round basis as talent in Georgia, another populated state.
This is why it is vital for OSU football to recruit areas like Georgia, Florida, and Texas. You can make whatever changes you want to HS and junior football, but culture takes generations to change.
I think you can find a lot of small towns in Ohio that high school football is a "way of life." I remember going to the local gas station in high school to get my morning Mt. Dew and paper, to read what was being said about our game that night, and all the old timers sitting there drinking coffee wanting the inside scoop from me about how the was going to go that night. For away games there was always a sign that read "The last one out of Thornville remember to turn off the lights." Maybe I was just lucky growing up where I did but now that I'm a teacher and coach I've seen this kind of attitude all around Ohio.
True enough- like I said, I was generalizing. Certainly there are small towns in Ohio that are football-crazed. On the whole, though, the state just doesnt treat football like a Georgia or a Texas does.
I have lived in the south and can tell you that football is not a way of life down there...I went to a game in FL with two of the top ranked teams in the state and it didn't even sell out the small high school stadium. The state of OH is way more football crazy than most southern states, save Texas. Someone else mentioned it on here...the main difference is overall, D-1 type talent in the small schools. While we have some great small school football here in OH(whose teams would prob crush the best in the south) we just don't have the individual talent that many of these teams have. What we do have are hard working kids who are well coached and understand the team concecpt.
Excellent comment. I agree that by far the biggest factor is differences in regional cultures.
Id have to say to really determine it you have to look at the second tier teams. (Consider it as a depth chart). I say this because everyone is going to have their standouts and stars. And you were talking as a whole. I may way off on this assumption cuz im way to lazy to look anything up. But typically teams north recruit from the north and south the south and so on. But anyways back to the point. MAC>sunbelt/wac/ whatever confrence they have. To me just means better quality football up here as a whole.
I like the idea of 2 or 3 weeks of practice followed by an inter-squad scrimmage or against a visiting team. One game only. When you start getting into multiple games thats where the conflicts arise, especially with the other spring sports in Ohio and especially with the unpredictable weather. One thing the south definitely has going for it is its typically 70-80 degrees and sunny in the early spring. If you've ever lived in Cleveland you know it could snow or rain for days on end in March and April. I'll never forget the Indians home opener where it snowed 5 feet, first week of April and they had to play their home game in freaking Milwaukee.
"Sherman ran an option play right through the south" - Greatest.Civil.War.Analogy.Ever
The only state that beats Ohio in terms of overall NFL talent in the southeast is Florida. Look up the numbers.
Per capita, the southeast (Louisiana and Mississippi in particular) are the best producers of NFL talent. This isn't shocking considering their demographics. They are among the highest percentage of African-Americans living in their state.
Notice how California and Texas, the top two states in terms of overall talent, really drop down when you look at it per capita. Ohio remains solidly in the Top 5-6 in per capita.
No matter how you slice it, overall or per capita, Ohio is a great state for high school foortball.
MYTHBUSTED.
Interesting data, but how far back does this go? If this includes any player who has ever played in the the NFL since its inception then this looks about right. The issue of the south vs the north has really only become noticeable in the last 10-15 years. With population shifts and the ability to play the sport year round I don't think it would be far fetched to think that map would look completely different if you looked at only the last decade or so.
Those maps are based on recent figures to the best of my knowledge.
Link
Top 10 breakdown of NFL players from each state in 2010:
1. California (211)
2. Texas (181)
3. Florida (177)
4. Ohio (85)
5. Georgia (80)
6. Louisiana (68)
7. Pennsylvania (56)
8. New Jersey (55)
9. Michigan (53)
10. Alabama (50)
The top 3 aren't shocking considering population. There are 4 B1G states represented and 5 SEC states represented.
Pennsylvania underperforms here, and New York + Illinois are shockingly underperforming
I always thought Illinois was a very under rated state in terms of talent-hell, Kirk Ferentz owes at least a few of his millions and coach of the year awards to the great state of Illinois. I'm not naieve enough to put it with PA, OH, FL, TX, CA, what have you but I'd say Illinois sits firmly at the top of the second tier of schools. Illinois and Nerdwestern can't figure it out but the Chicago land area, specifically the suburbs, and the E. St. Louis area are pretty rich in talent. Decatur and Joliet spit out some ballers too. Shame on the local schools for letting Iowa, OSU, et all pillage.
4-6 seconds from point A to point B and when you get to point B, be pissed off
All the scouts see are the spring and off season work out that make ohio kids look like they are falling behind. Do we have great talent yes is it well coached yes but are the kids D1 ready when they leave ohio high school football not to many they are a few steps behind. They are not use to having spring ball and crazy streght and conditioning programs that must D1 schools run. Look at what happend when Urbs came in and brought his streght coach. That made a hugh differents. Kids here are groomed to play a sport not to play all sports the parents are more into there kids being ready for the next challange and step up as well as the kids must of the really good kids that got skillz down here also burn out so often. I have seen the pros and cons of it.
What it come down to is that the state of Ohio supplies more schools with talent. Where as down south there is just more then a state and a half that supplies the talent down here.
Where is the SEC state? I never heard of a state called SEC?
This OP seems familiar. poor grammar, from southern coastal state, text typing as if from a cell phone. Someone who was ban hammered to the point he posted his quitting notice.
No Squirrel Master i am from C-bus but got stuck down here in GA. after 4 years in the army would love to go back home and get the kids out of the south but my wife is from here. one other thing is that grammer was never my strong suit.(using SEC to compare to the GA, FLA and Bama area)
this is proof enough that you are not the person I was thinking about. +1
I know, FYI italics usually means being sarcastic around here. Comparing Ohio always seems to involve all of the SEC and not just one state. Happens all the time.
as long as you don't consistently murder the post with bad grammar, you shouldn't get harrassed!
The schools in the south, as stated above by the original post, all have more in depth practices in earlier grades. Not to mention, they have more time to practice. The spring practice really helps the kids in the south get more experience. If I remember right (and I haven't read one post above besides the original blog post) Urban was pushing for OHSAA to start spring practice because SO many schools in the south have this luxury. I personally hope they do and also start to pay MS and HS coaches better. If you do the math with the hours they put in and compare that to what they get paid for an hour...it's like less than a dollar an hour for the rural areas like where I grew up....that's a shame for the time coaches put in.
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you."
"I love football. I think it is most wonderful game in world and I despise to lose."
Woody Hayes 1913 - 1987
There's the 10000 hour rule for mastering anything, whether we're talking about chemical engineering or playing football. Every extra practice, every extra film study matters. Playing spring football in the south gives those players a decided advantage. It matters and it's why when he first arrived at OSU, Urban was strongly encouraging Ohio to institute spring football.
I do so agree with you. The football staffs down here have almost all there caoches only coaching football some cross over to other sports but 3/4 of the staff is working on off seasons conditioning and drills for spring to emproving the team. The coachies down here are tring to set the high schools in the same molds as the Colleges so these kids can walk in and have no drop off or be shocked by what they see.