What gets a player a D1 scholarship? How much impact does game performance have on getting to D1? My thought is there is a starting point on the measureables and if you don't have that, it takes a lot to get to D1. On the other hand, if you have good measureables, game film and performance may not matter much at all. I think more than 50% of the factors that lead to D1 scholarships are measureables. The right size, frame, speed, arm strength, athleticism, etc. gets you to D1 more than game film.

Am I wrong?

3 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

What gets a player a D1 scholarship? How much impact does game performance have on getting to D1? My thought is there is a starting point on the measureables and if you don't have that, it takes a lot to get to D1. On the other hand, if you have good measureables, game film and performance may not matter much at all. I think more than 50% of the factors that lead to D1 scholarships are measureables. The right size, frame, speed, arm strength, athleticism, etc. gets you to D1 more than game film.

Am I wrong?

I agree, especially where you see younger kids get offers. 

I would go with your second option. 

Having been around recruiting of quite a few players at the D-1 level and lower levels. There is multiple factors that coaches from any level of college football look at. The first thing a lot of D-1 coaches look at is the recruits grades, because if you don’t have grades that qualify you with the NCAA Clearinghouse a lot coaches will move on. 

Measureables are a big factor at the D-1 level, but not everything. Good game film, highlight films, competition level help. Self promotion is also a factor. With COVID last year I’ve seen some interesting takes on players trying to get there names out there.

Along the same lines high school coaches are a big factor too in the process. This time of year college coaches start reaching out to high school coaches seeing when spring practice is and kind of gaging prospects who are current targets and emerging prospects from each school. A good high school coach can pay big dividends in the recruiting process.

Also going to camps and skills combines are big too.Camps whether on campus of a school or a skills combine like the ones Nike holds are very important to getting recruited.
Lastly building relationships with the college coaches really go along way in the end. Once you have established some connections building on those with the coaching staff is big.

We did a 3 part recruiting series talking to a past top recruit in the state a Rivals reporter and 2 high school head coaches.

 

I think it depends in part on your cutoff on measurables are. I’ve know kids that wouldn’t even be looked because they were 2” too short. For every 5’9” Coastal Carolina center there are a ton of kids that don’t get a shot. I’ve also know kids that got chances because they are 6’4”. You have to have the tape to back it up as others have said. Film wise some players put together some bad Hudl highlights they send out. 
 

There are some very good smaller programs that built very successful teams by going after those guys that are a couple of inches short or considered to lite. There are some guys that get a chance despite certain measurables because they have great tape. In most of those cases it kids with really top end speed and quickness. 
 

Its certainly not an exact science. I think we’ve all seen kids get offers that we scratch our heads about or wonder why another kid isn’t getting looked at. 

The one measurable that can overcome lack of size is speed. Look at Tutu Atwell from UofL. Little guy but blazing fast. Now will be drafted.

In talking with a lot of college scouts over the years of covering HS ball, I think the bottom-line is that it's much harder to get noticed in the first place if the measurables aren't there.

The second piece to the equation is the fact that most college coaches believe that they can coach a kid to overcome other issues / deficiencies, whereas a lack of measurables is much harder to overcome.    (i..e., "I can teach him how to shoot better", "I can teach him how to get position", etc.)

There are notable exceptions.

I think people fail to give Denny Crum the credit that man deserved for turning Felton Spencer - a plodding super-sized high school center who couldn't keep up with much smaller opponents - into a powerful college center who wound up with a solid NBA career.   His efforts to improve Spencer's footwork - including famously enrolling him in ballet classes - resulted in an unbelievable improvement.    Not sure Crum would have recruited Spencer had he not been a local product (Eastern HS), but he overcame some significant "measurable" obstacles to achieve significant success.

The key is exposure, an athlete can have all the measurables, film and competitive nature but if he doesn't "market" himself, he won't get the offers.