If a player doesn't go D1 and they have the opportunity to, means they don't think they are good enough to go D1, or they are afraid of competition.

 

The Aaron example, he was not "good enough" to play D1 at those other positions because he wasn't offered there.

 

My point is that a ton of kids are "recruited" by D1 schools, but only the ones that are "good enough", get offers. I believe they have to accept the offer to be good enough because i think that is part of the criteria of being good enough. They need to believe in themselves and not be so afraid of competition.

 

Wrong. Choices are made for many reasons. Some players are content to ride the bench on a good team for the sake of being on a championship team or simply being able to say they played at a big time school. Others want to be in the game which may mean going to a lower level D1 school or D2, D3 or NAIA.

 

Academics make a difference to some students. Three or four kids I know now who have college potential are all also honor students. Academics make a significant difference to them. Realizing that the NFL is mostly a pipe dream, they may pass up a big time football school for a big time academic school.

 

I never played football at any level but 30 years ago I worked with a guy who had been a back up safety for the University of Tennessee. He was short and slow. I could have walked on and been better than him. Somehow he was "good enough" to get a scholarship to a major football school but wouldn't have been a stand out in intramurals. Maybe it was because his dad was a coach at a small college. Who knows? But, there are guys out there in D1 who aren't really "good enough."

I agree that education is important, however in this thread I am talking about football only. No other outside influences or anything. Stricktly from an athletic standpoint.

 

I am not saying these players are losers or anything, I just wish they had the confidence in themselves to go play D1 football. And they may eventually do that.

 

Through this thread and talking about what "good enough" is according to the first post, I am on the fence. The players are obviously "good enough" to play D1 football, I guess in my opinion they are selling themselves short.

 

This is not a knock on anyone or any personal attack, I just believe D1 is the ultimate of college football, and thats when you know you made it. look at it this way, there are professional baseball players that play in the minors, but when people think of professional baseball players, it's the players in the majors.

Your idea of being "good enough" is when you accept a D1 offer and are good enough to sit on the bench for two or three years or maybe not even see the field your entire college career. I don't agree with you idea of good enough!!

Your idea of being "good enough" is when you accept a D1 offer and are good enough to sit on the bench for two or three years or maybe not even see the field your entire college career. I don't agree with you idea of good enough!!

 

You just proved my point even more! They are not "good enough" because they wouldn't get playing time. If they were "good enough" they would have a role on a D1 team whether it is starting, special teams only, etc. If players are so worried about playing time that they choose a lower level school, then they don't think they are good enough to play D1.

If a player doesn't go D1 and they have the opportunity to, means they don't think they are good enough to go D1, or they are afraid of competition.

 

The Aaron example, he was not "good enough" to play D1 at those other positions because he wasn't offered there.

 

My point is that a ton of kids are "recruited" by D1 schools, but only the ones that are "good enough", get offers. I believe they have to accept the offer to be good enough because i think that is part of the criteria of being good enough. They need to believe in themselves and not be so afraid of competition.

 

This is your previous post. Where does it say anything about playing time?

Wrong. Choices are made for many reasons. Some players are content to ride the bench on a good team for the sake of being on a championship team or simply being able to say they played at a big time school. Others want to be in the game which may mean going to a lower level D1 school or D2, D3 or NAIA.

 

Academics make a difference to some students. Three or four kids I know now who have college potential are all also honor students. Academics make a significant difference to them. Realizing that the NFL is mostly a pipe dream, they may pass up a big time football school for a big time academic school.

 

I never played football at any level but 30 years ago I worked with a guy who had been a back up safety for the University of Tennessee. He was short and slow. I could have walked on and been better than him. Somehow he was "good enough" to get a scholarship to a major football school but wouldn't have been a stand out in intramurals. Maybe it was because his dad was a coach at a small college. Who knows? But, there are guys out there in D1 who aren't really "good enough."

 

First of all they play for a lower level because they are not "good enough" to get playing time on a D1 team. If they were "good enough" they would play over the person in front of them.

 

I said I am talking from only an athletics standpoint. I understand that you have to have grades to play and what not, but honestly it doesn't matter to me how the players do in the classroom as long as they are eligible. Again strictly an athletics standpoint.

 

30 years ago schools were able to give out more scholarships. Today schools can't afford to give out scholarships to sub par players. You could go with a case by case basis on a lot of things but look at the percentages, the players that are "good enough" to play D1, play D1. There will always be a few exceptions but in general the "good enough "talent for D1 is in D1.

First of all they play for a lower level because they are not "good enough" to get playing time on a D1 team. If they were "good enough" they would play over the person in front of them.

 

I said I am talking from only an athletics standpoint. I understand that you have to have grades to play and what not, but honestly it doesn't matter to me how the players do in the classroom as long as they are eligible. Again strictly an athletics standpoint.

 

30 years ago schools were able to give out more scholarships. Today schools can't afford to give out scholarships to sub par players. You could go with a case by case basis on a lot of things but look at the percentages, the players that are "good enough" to play D1, play D1. There will always be a few exceptions but in general the "good enough "talent for D1 is in D1.

 

I understand what you are saying but I don't agree with you. Maybe part of the problem with society, college ball and professional ball is there are to many kids or adults that don't care about academics or doing what is morally right. Thank God for sports for without sports some of the players would never get through college or be playing in the pro's.

My statement is not fair to the players that are good role models for our kids but lets face it a coaches job is to win and there are a lot of them that feel the same way you do when it comes to the classroom. For that matter you have owners like Mike Brown who is looking for the best deal instead of the best interest of the team!!!

I know this is way off line for the subject but true. I personnally would want my son in a good academic program surrounded by coaches that care about his future than him having the opportunity to play D1.

You could go with a case by case basis on a lot of things but look at the percentages, the players that are "good enough" to play D1, play D1. There will always be a few exceptions but in general the "good enough "talent for D1 is in D1.

 

Players aren't determined if "good enough" on percentages but on a case by case basis. Yes, it is most likely that players good enough to play D1 play D1, but using playing D1 as the ruler is a poor measure but looking at them on a case by case basis gives you a much more accurate evaluation.

I understand what you are saying but I don't agree with you. Maybe part of the problem with society, college ball and professional ball is there are to many kids or adults that don't care about academics or doing what is morally right. Thank God for sports for without sports some of the players would never get through college or be playing in the pro's.

My statement is not fair to the players that are good role models for our kids but lets face it a coaches job is to win and there are a lot of them that feel the same way you do when it comes to the classroom. For that matter you have owners like Mike Brown who is looking for the best deal instead of the best interest of the team!!!

I know this is way off line for the subject but true. I personnally would want my son in a good academic program surrounded by coaches that care about his future than him having the opportunity to play D1.

 

But when you watch a football game, how often do you wonder what the kids GPA is. And people talked about not being athletically gifted, what about people that are not academically inclined? I do agree that being a good student is a good thing, but I don't believe being a good student automatically makes you good on the football field. And as I said earlier, I am basing my opinion on athletics only.

 

A player who is inbetween D1 or a lower level is often selling himself short academically or athletically. The player goes to a good school with worse football or a worse school with good football.

Players aren't determined if "good enough" on percentages but on a case by case basis. Yes, it is most likely that players good enough to play D1 play D1, but using playing D1 as the ruler is a poor measure but looking at them on a case by case basis gives you a much more accurate evaluation.

 

Well you didn't answer the origonal question... what is "good enough"?

Well you didn't answer the origonal question... what is "good enough"?

 

I answered the question in my first post. Read it.

I'll agree with those who say the kids who work hard to reach their potential are good enough. To play D1 you must have a near ideal combination of size, speed, agility, work ethic, etc. There are a few exceptions but not many. I know a couple of kids, one playing D3 and anther NAIA who could have played DI but don't because they wanted a different experience or other reasons.

 

Any kid who works hard and gives his team everything he's got is good enough for me. The ones who play college at any level have something extra and still worked hard.

 

So a kid that is absolutly horrible at football is good enough because he works hard? Maximizing your potential doesnt mean you are good at all. You could personally work harder than any football player on earth and still be absolutly terrible at the game of football. In fact I would go out and say that often the most dedicated hardest workers are not the best players.

 

We are talking about the best football players in this thread, not the hardest workers. People who work hard have a greater chance at succeeding, but it doesnt nescissarily mean they are good at what they do. Natural talent is very important in football. A kid who is an 5'8" o-lineman is already not going to make it to d1 because he is not naturally good enough to make it there. He is naturally not "good enough" to make it there. A player without any arms is not going to be a QB no matter how hard he tries. It's nice to give kids a moral victory, but even if someone works hard, they could still be the worst player on a team.

There are 199 division 3 schools. 148 division 2 teams. 111 Division 1 teams (formerly 1-aa). 91 naia schools and 120 division 1 fbs teams.

 

You can give me all the numbers you want about lower divisions producing nfl players, but they also have much more teams combined. There are 549 non-division 1 fbs teams vs. 120 division 1 fbs teams.

 

I don't want to give out the impression that I don't respect other divisions besides d1fbs, i just feel you can't argue that a player is "good enough" if he accpets a division 1 scholarship.

There are 199 division 3 schools. 148 division 2 teams. 111 Division 1 teams (formerly 1-aa). 91 naia schools and 120 division 1 fbs teams.

 

You can give me all the numbers you want about lower divisions producing nfl players, but they also have much more teams combined. There are 549 non-division 1 fbs teams vs. 120 division 1 fbs teams.

 

I don't want to give out the impression that I don't respect other divisions besides d1fbs, i just feel you can't argue that a player is "good enough" if he accpets a division 1 scholarship.

 

Think about what people are saying here, We have been giving you all the examples and great points about why great athletes don't fit the mode, but you say it is or it isn't, you are a great player because your D1A, it's not just black or white,{ it is or isn't, please it is not about race} people are different even if there may have the same size or weight it is about heart believe it or not, Terrell Davis was playing nose tackle in high school he was 5-11 less then 200 pounds had a lot of heart, no he was not a D1A nose tackle but coachs saw him differently he became a great NFL running back. I think we all understand the points that your making here, but we need to think out side the box some times to.

What about education value? Would you go to Western KY D1 over Yale (Ivy league D1-AA)? I bet this happens often enough that Yale would win often against Western.

So a kid that is absolutly horrible at football is good enough because he works hard? Maximizing your potential doesnt mean you are good at all. You could personally work harder than any football player on earth and still be absolutly terrible at the game of football. In fact I would go out and say that often the most dedicated hardest workers are not the best players.

 

We are talking about the best football players in this thread, not the hardest workers. People who work hard have a greater chance at succeeding, but it doesnt nescissarily mean they are good at what they do. Natural talent is very important in football. A kid who is an 5'8" o-lineman is already not going to make it to d1 because he is not naturally good enough to make it there. He is naturally not "good enough" to make it there. A player without any arms is not going to be a QB no matter how hard he tries. It's nice to give kids a moral victory, but even if someone works hard, they could still be the worst player on a team.

 

What we're talking about in this thread are the questions posed by RAM "When is getting a college scholarship to play football good enough? When is being in the top tier of a sport good enough? When is just being "Good" good enough? "

 

Perhaps you need clarification that with every comment I am referring to players that get college scholarships be it at D1-A, D1-AA, D3, NAIA, etc. because that is what I am talking about and what the thread is about. Not just the best but "good enough."

 

Kids who work hard but only manage a scholarship less than D1-A scholarship are good enough in my book. Some choose to go less than D1-A. If my son has a choice between Yale and WKU, as dog daze poses, you better believe he'll go to Yale.