Why recruiting is much tougher now that it used to be

[Atlanta Griz1]

Missoula high schools are a close-and-personal example of my point. They used to produce lots of FCS talent. Now, they have to beg kids to go out for football, and the teams are routinely in the bottom of the state in rankings.

I've heard time and time again how poor the Missoula schools are with developing high school talent and how the middle school / pop warner / little grizzly stuff is so screwed up here. While I have no clue if they have to "beg" kids for football I think locally there's more kids playing at the FCS level (mostly Montana) than I've seen in quite a while. Even under Hauck there would just be a handful of local kids on the team, if not just one or two.

At this point there are two local kids in the NFL, let alone the FCS. I don't recall ever a time that Missoula could claim that.

The Griz have a handful of local kids who are not just there to fill the roster but are in the 2-deep and some are starting (Janssen and Peevey). as of late I've seen more local guys on the roster and actively contributing than I have in years before.

It was predictable that you would single-out the two Missoula kids in the NFL, and once again fail to prove anything regarding my example. The Griz & Bobcats used to have 6-7 kids each on their rosters from Missoula high schools. There was about a 10-year period from 2000-2010 where the Griz had very few Missoula kids on their roster. Missoula is 4 times the size of Helena, and twice the size of Kalispell and Great Falls, yet produces far fewer FBS players than those towns.

You need to educate yourself on the populations of Montana cities.

Leave it to Tod to rise out of the abyss and focus on minutia, rather than understand the point being made. Yawn!

 

[Atlanta Griz1]

I've heard time and time again how poor the Missoula schools are with developing high school talent and how the middle school / pop warner / little grizzly stuff is so screwed up here. While I have no clue if they have to "beg" kids for football I think locally there's more kids playing at the FCS level (mostly Montana) than I've seen in quite a while. Even under Hauck there would just be a handful of local kids on the team, if not just one or two.

At this point there are two local kids in the NFL, let alone the FCS. I don't recall ever a time that Missoula could claim that.

The Griz have a handful of local kids who are not just there to fill the roster but are in the 2-deep and some are starting (Janssen and Peevey). as of late I've seen more local guys on the roster and actively contributing than I have in years before.

It was predictable that you would single-out the two Missoula kids in the NFL, and once again fail to prove anything regarding my example. The Griz & Bobcats used to have 6-7 kids each on their rosters from Missoula high schools. There was about a 10-year period from 2000-2010 where the Griz had very few Missoula kids on their roster. Missoula is 4 times the size of Helena, and twice the size of Kalispell and Great Falls, yet produces far fewer FBS players than those towns.

You need to educate yourself on the populations of Montana cities.

Leave it to Tod-the-Clod to rise out of the abyss and focus on minutia, rather than understand the point being made. Yawn!

 

[AZGrizFan]

It was predictable that you would single-out the two Missoula kids in the NFL, and once again fail to prove anything regarding my example. The Griz & Bobcats used to have 6-7 kids each on their rosters from Missoula high schools. There was about a 10-year period from 2000-2010 where the Griz had very few Missoula kids on their roster. Missoula is 4 times the size of Helena, and twice the size of Kalispell and Great Falls, yet produces far fewer FBS players than those towns.

Missoula metro area: 112,684
Great Falls metro area: 82,334
Helena metro area: 76,850
Kalispell metro area: 93,068
Billings metro area: 166,885

2011 Griz: 11 Missoula area kids, 3 Kalispell, 2 Great Falls, 3 Helena, 2 Butte
2010 Griz: 10 Missoula area kids, 3 Kalispell, 1 Great Falls, 2 Helena
2009 Griz: 11 Missoula kids, 1 Kalispell, 2 Great Falls, 2 Helena, 1 Butte
2008 Griz: 7 Missoula kids, 1 Kalispell, 4 Great Falls, 3 Helena, 3 Butte
2007 Griz: Unavailable
2006 Griz: 8 Missoula kids, 2 Kalispell, 6 Great Falls, 3 Helena, 2 Butte
2005 Griz: 6 Missoula kids, 4 Kalispell, 6 Great Falls, 4 Helena, 3 Butte

As a point of contrast:
2012 Griz: 10 Missoula area kids, 3 Kalispell, 2 Great Falls, 4 Helena, 3 Butte, 6 Billings
2012 Cats: 6 Missoula area kids, 3 Kalispell, 5 Great Falls, 5 Helena, 0 Butte, 4 Billings

So, not only is your math regarding relative population sizes horribly off, but your ass-umptions regarding the # of FCS players being produced by each area is flat-assed wrong as well. Unless all those OTHER FCS kids are going to schools outside of Montana? NOT.

FACT: The only area in Montana that comes CLOSE to producing as much FCS level talent as Missoula is Billings.

 

[BWahlberg]

It was predictable that you would single-out the two Missoula kids in the NFL, and once again fail to prove anything regarding my example. The Griz & Bobcats used to have 6-7 kids each on their rosters from Missoula high schools. There was about a 10-year period from 2000-2010 where the Griz had very few Missoula kids on their roster. Missoula is 4 times the size of Helena, and twice the size of Kalispell and Great Falls, yet produces far fewer FBS players than those towns.

You used Missoula as an example - I countered with a Missoula example. Not rocket science here.

The Bobcats used to have 6-7 Missoula kids on their rosters? Oh please show me that proof, I'm anxiously awaiting that. Griz right now have 5 or 6 I believe, GoGriz.com roster shows 4 but that roster is incomplete.

 

[BWahlberg]

It was predictable that you would single-out the two Missoula kids in the NFL, and once again fail to prove anything regarding my example. The Griz & Bobcats used to have 6-7 kids each on their rosters from Missoula high schools. There was about a 10-year period from 2000-2010 where the Griz had very few Missoula kids on their roster. Missoula is 4 times the size of Helena, and twice the size of Kalispell and Great Falls, yet produces far fewer FBS players than those towns.

Missoula metro area: 112,684
Great Falls metro area: 82,334
Helena metro area: 76,850
Kalispell metro area: 93,068
Billings metro area: 166,885

2011 Griz: 11 Missoula area kids, 3 Kalispell, 2 Great Falls, 3 Helena, 2 Butte
2010 Griz: 10 Missoula area kids, 3 Kalispell, 1 Great Falls, 2 Helena
2009 Griz: 11 Missoula kids, 1 Kalispell, 2 Great Falls, 2 Helena, 1 Butte
2008 Griz: 7 Missoula kids, 1 Kalispell, 4 Great Falls, 3 Helena, 3 Butte
2007 Griz: Unavailable
2006 Griz: 8 Missoula kids, 2 Kalispell, 6 Great Falls, 3 Helena, 2 Butte
2005 Griz: 6 Missoula kids, 4 Kalispell, 6 Great Falls, 4 Helena, 3 Butte

As a point of contrast:
2012 Griz: 10 Missoula area kids, 3 Kalispell, 2 Great Falls, 4 Helena, 3 Butte, 6 Billings
2012 Cats: 6 Missoula area kids, 3 Kalispell, 5 Great Falls, 5 Helena, 0 Butte, 4 Billings

So, not only is your math regarding relative population sizes horribly off, but your ass-umptions regarding the # of FCS players being produced by each area is flat-assed wrong as well. Unless all those OTHER FCS kids are going to schools outside of Montana? NOT.

FACT: The only area in Montana that comes CLOSE to producing as much FCS level talent as Missoula is Billings.

Growler gets owned by facts.

 

[Umista]

This is very difficult to get in a punch with so many wind milling away.

I am out until I see the half time report or a break in the brake. Please God let football begin soon...

 

[CV Griz Fan]

This theme of its harder to recruit / we don't get the same quality / FCS gaps vs FBS has been one of growler's many shtick's for years.

While a just a sample look at the amount of players the Griz have been sending to the pros in the last decade compared to the decades before that. It would suggest that Montana is either getting higher quality recruits now (which growler says isn't true) or that more NFL caliber type kids are coming to FCS programs (which growler says isn't true) or that NFL scouts are looking more at teams at the FCS level (which growler says isn't true).

This is why Growler is a good egriz poster schtick or not. He presents topics that create discussions. Although I agree with you Brint that bashing you and Obama every third post is tiresome, you gotta give Growler some credit for being provocative when it comes to football related posts. As far as past FCS talent, I don't think anybody can argue that the FCS/NFL prospects of today are as good as FCS prospects of yesteryear. There are too many former FCS/1AA players that are in the NFL HOF, or heading in that direction, to warrant a serious counter argument. As far as UM is concerned, I think you have to consider a a couple factors when you are comparing eras-

* is it a quality vs quantity thing? It would be difficult IMO to argue against Hauck, Gragg and Green as not having more SIGNIFICANT NFL careers than their more recent peers.

* where do you put the BH recruits? In the previous era or with the current crop of UM prospects? If you include his players in the previous era, then Growler's argument becomes a "slam dunk " IMO. The Griz had the FCS titles and Tittle Game appearance from those years so talent obviously was better overall. Either way, it's an excellent discussion topic.

Can you truly not understand that the discussion is about FCS recruiting, and not about whether FCS schools produced more great NFL players than FCS does now? Jeez, even Growler is saying his initial post was about FCS recruiting in general.

My point is about recruiting. Recruits that were available for the FCS 10 plus years ago were better than they are now....... You can hypothesize about the reasons but the outcome is indisputable....

 

[PlayerRep]

This theme of its harder to recruit / we don't get the same quality / FCS gaps vs FBS has been one of growler's many shtick's for years.

While a just a sample look at the amount of players the Griz have been sending to the pros in the last decade compared to the decades before that. It would suggest that Montana is either getting higher quality recruits now (which growler says isn't true) or that more NFL caliber type kids are coming to FCS programs (which growler says isn't true) or that NFL scouts are looking more at teams at the FCS level (which growler says isn't true).

This is why Growler is a good egriz poster schtick or not. He presents topics that create discussions. Although I agree with you Brint that bashing you and Obama every third post is tiresome, you gotta give Growler some credit for being provocative when it comes to football related posts. As far as past FCS talent, I don't think anybody can argue that the FCS/NFL prospects of today are as good as FCS prospects of yesteryear. There are too many former FCS/1AA players that are in the NFL HOF, or heading in that direction, to warrant a serious counter argument. As far as UM is concerned, I think you have to consider a a couple factors when you are comparing eras-

* is it a quality vs quantity thing? It would be difficult IMO to argue against Hauck, Gragg and Green as not having more SIGNIFICANT NFL careers than their more recent peers.

* where do you put the BH recruits? In the previous era or with the current crop of UM prospects? If you include his players in the previous era, then Growler's argument becomes a "slam dunk " IMO. The Griz had the FCS titles and Tittle Game appearance from those years so talent obviously was better overall. Either way, it's an excellent discussion topic.

Can you truly not understand that the discussion is about FCS recruiting, and not about whether FCS schools produced more great NFL players than FCS does now? Jeez, even Growler is saying his initial post was about FCS recruiting in general.

My point is about recruiting. Recruits that were available for the FCS 10 plus years ago were better than they are now....... You can hypothesize about the reasons but the outcome is indisputable....

First, that was not your point. Second, your point is wrong. Just plain not true. There are more top recruits in football than there used to be. The lifting, year round training, camps, play more games, start younger, and competition have improved the quality of football significantly. Bigger, faster, stronger, and more experienced.

 

[grizindabox]

 

[mtgrizrule]

:thumb: :clap: :lol:

 

[PlayerRep]

Have you ever noticed how many of the people who bring up dick measuring are dicks themselves. Very high percentage.

 

[signedbewildered]

Have you ever noticed how many of the people who bring up dick measuring are dicks themselves. Very high percentage.

The question is how tall are they?

 

[grizindabox]

Have you ever noticed how many of the people who bring up dick measuring are dicks themselves. Very high percentage.

Have you ever noticed that the people that don't bring up dick measuring probably have little chance to win....but PR, there is nothing wrong with that...at least some ladies like to tell you that....

 

[Atlanta Griz1]

Have you ever noticed how many of the people who bring up dick measuring are dicks themselves. Very high percentage.

You are wrong, as usual. Sport specialization at the high school level has significantly watered down the pool of college level athletes. Why do you continue to be so dogmatic about every topic? Do you enjoy getting your arse handed to you by multiple posters on a regular basis.

Oh, by the way, the boys and bar tenders at the MO Club just told me to give you their regards! ROFL

 

[Umista]

The Mo Club still has good gut bombs.

I have not been in for a time. I try to stop in on my travels through Msla.

When I catch ol Steve in Mo I will have him buy me a cheap tap beer. I will brag if it occurs cause I have yet to meet the guy. In the meantime I am heading back up North to beat the heat and August smoke. Slip back into town for the first game. Recruiting?

 

[Spanky]

No way recruiting is tougher than it used to be.

 

[PlayerRep]

Have you ever noticed how many of the people who bring up dick measuring are dicks themselves. Very high percentage.

You are wrong, as usual. Sport specialization at the high school level has significantly watered down the pool of college level athletes. Why do you continue to be so dogmatic about every topic? Do you enjoy getting your arse handed to you by multiple posters on a regular basis.

Oh, by the way, the boys and bar tenders at the MO Club just told me to give you their regards! ROFL

Nope, specialization has increased the quality and size of the top football recruits from high school--not decreased it.

 

[Spanky]

Yes, Player, and this is true in every sport.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Have you ever noticed how many of the people who bring up dick measuring are dicks themselves. Very high percentage.

You are wrong, as usual. Sport specialization at the high school level has significantly watered down the pool of college level athletes. Why do you continue to be so dogmatic about every topic? Do you enjoy getting your arse handed to you by multiple posters on a regular basis.

Oh, by the way, the boys and bar tenders at the MO Club just told me to give you their regards! ROFL

Sports specialization has done the exact opposite of what you claim. And in fact, most of the TOP athletes still play other sports in the off-season...

 

[Sam A. Blitz]

Technology, increases in camps, and advanced training techniques have contributed to recruiting being much easier than it was 20 year ago. When I was in high school, much of recruiting was by sending in video and attending camps. Now, kids can go to several skills camps or combines where coaches have the opportunity to analyze hundreds of recruits in one day. Social media and streaming video has also made the job much easier for coaches. Hudl makes it much quicker to get through more videos faster and compare kids easier. As far as talent pool is concerned, I'm not sure if its gotten any better or any worse. I do think kids are getting stronger and faster today with advanced training techniques, but I also seem to notice fundamentals such as tackling and blocking have seemed to be less focused on.

Only thing that may be more difficult is verbal commitments aren't honored as much.