Quote:Putting aside the opening statement regarding "school" in the name for a moment...do you take seriously the assertion that regional diet plays a factor in schools producing or not producing quality OL?  Is Indiana not in the same region of the country as Iowa and Wisconsin?

 

I don't, but I've heard people make the assertion before.


 

Regarding the closing point about the Miami RBs/recent trends, there is merit to that argument.

 

I do not assert my method is an absolute rule.  Just a "rule of thumb," or a guide, if you will.

 

For instance, a player from a football powerhouse that has produced successful players at his position is not guaranteed any success just because he went to the school.  But you know on some level, the school has demonstrated an ability to identify, recruit, and develop players at that position capable of success at the NFL level.  Conversely, Indiana has not demonstrated much ability to identify, recruit, and develop players at most positions-notably RB-capable of success at the NFL level. 

 

What I don't get about your aversion to the theory is that on some level, you subscribe to it conceptually.

 

You said you could see the difference in "the probability of success higher drafting from a big time school compared to a div 2 school."  So you acknowledge there is a difference between a division 1 and a division 2 school in terms of the quality of players that are NFL caliber prospects.  Yet if there are two division 1 schools, you act as if there can be no difference in the quality of the program even though they are on the same division.  Do you assert that, as a long time football watcher as I assume you have been, there is no difference between the Alabamas and USCs and the Armys, Dukes?  All four schools are div 1 schools, but anyone who has watched football for any appreciable length of time can tell you there is a HUGE difference in the qualities of the programs.  If you don't, I enthusiastically welcome any compelling argument that factually and logically puts those programs on the same quality footing.

 

I'm not going to disagree that there is a level of difference between schools. That's why I said there probably is a higher probability of someone in that school succeeding. That's just probability goes. The more ping pong balls you have, the more chances you have of winning. Alabama has a lot of ping pong balls .


 

But what I seem to get from you is that, you would downgrade a guy from a non-renowned school because that school's track record isn't good at producing NFL caliber players. That is where my disagreement is. Sure, allocating resources go ahead, send five scouts to the Bama/Georgia game and another five to FSU/Clemson while sending one to Mt. Union. That's fine. But once all the information comes back and your scout tells you "Player A has this and that, Player B has this and that, etc...", then you watch the film of these guys...the school thing should go out the window. You're not grading what some guy did for some school playing for some other coach from some time in the past. You should be grading what this guy is doing now, playing against some other guy, and projecting how that translates in the next step.