I'm not sure how many here pay attention to highschool football but it is just crazy how much better kids are these days then say they were twenty or thirty years ago. Went to a game last night and the qb (who probably won't be playing the game after highschool is over) on the run dropped a thirty yard pass right into the hands of the receiver in the corner of the endzone. And these aren't isolated events either as you will probably see two or three passes like that in a game. And these aren't kids who will be receiving much attention from colleges. They are just your normal highschool football players. Highschool football teams are throwing the ball all around the yard these days. It's not uncommon at all to see twenty to twenty five passes a game by a team in this day and age of highschool football.
Now compare that to say highschool football in the '90's you would be lucky to see two or three passes a game. And saying the word pass would be kind as the term 'shotputtin it' would probably be more accurate. Twenty five years ago a general highschool offensive gameplan generally consisted of 90% running the ball up the middle relying on a good offensive line and a strong back to break a play open. If the back had much speed they would run him to the outside a handful of times during the game as well (and that is often where they got their biggest plays was when the back with speed ran the ball to the outside.
It's gotten this way because highschool sports are much more specialized now then they were back twenty to thirty years ago. You don't see kids playing three sports nearly as much anylonger. Instead it is much more common to pick one sport and focus strictly on that year round. Now virtually every team (at least in the upper classes of each state) go to team camps during the offseason and participate in 7 on 7 passing tournaments.
I think this is the biggest reason we regularly see freshmen come right into college football making an immediate impact and rookies going right into the nfl making an immediate impact. College programs and nfl teams don't have to groom the kids nearly as much as before because all that extra work they did when they were 15, 16, and 17 brought them much closer to their potential then they would have been otherwise.
Of course all the specialization of highschool football does have its draw backs. I think kids now having to focus on one sport year round in order to be able to excel has had as much to do with the decreasing numbers of highschool football over the last ten years as the concussion issue has. There are still over a million kids playing highschool football but the numbers have been going down since about 2010 or so (they were also at all time highs prior to that though so a lot of those numbers are a little relative).
Anyways it is just crazy what highschool football is like in this day and age. Now your regular every day kids can do things that really only the D1 recruits were expected to do twenty years ago. And college and the nfl has definitely benefitted from it.
Specialization of hs football and its affect on cfb and nfl
Re: Specialization of hs football and its affect on cfb and
I just went to a game last night and I agree with you. I have pointed people here to the high school games when they are discontented with the current pro game. It is a good mix. Not teams just running constantly like they used to.
Also, most teams have kickers that can kick field goals as well. Again, that might be entertaining and more of what the pro game used to be like. Not like it is today, with a 50 yard field goal nothing special.
Also, most teams have kickers that can kick field goals as well. Again, that might be entertaining and more of what the pro game used to be like. Not like it is today, with a 50 yard field goal nothing special.
Re: Specialization of hs football and its affect on cfb and
Similar to Jay Z I've said the same about how enjoyable HS football is to watch, and it's always been my favorite level of the sport anyway for numerous reasons but one is that you still see different offenses and defense -- unlike college and pro where each game looks roughly the same.
In WA Thursday and Friday night I saw a team running their wing-T out of shotgun against a team that ran an option offense out of shutgun. Then I saw a team that runs a wing-T never anyone split out so all 11 are tight against a team running the run&shoot. And a team running Power-I option against your typical CFB/NFL 'spread'. And saw double-wing v. split backs.
I would disagree that players are better, what you're seeing is wholly dependent on the game you're watching. Matt Ryan could throw the ball while he was in HS but that's not the type of offense his team ran. Doesn't mean now a kid that throws 30 times a game is 'better'. HS passing opened up the same reason as CFB/NFL did, the rules make it easier. I watched HS teams in late 80's through 90's that had the QB's and WR's to throw all game and there was teams that did throw 30-40 times a game and their QB got hit every play and the WR's got blown up because it was football. Can't do that now, passing is 'safer' than it was, QB's are protected even at HS and WR's run unmolested.
Also, again dependent on which game you're watching at the time, but private schools consolidate talent even more than they did 20-30 years ago, and the public schools that can get away with it do the same. That's why you have backup QB's who get scholarship offers before they've even played in a varsity game. So HS looks better than it did when you watch two private schools that have recruited the best HS players from around the country, but HS doesn't look better than it did when you watch two rural 500 student public schools -- but better is relevative because that latter game is extremely interesting because it's schools that have played eachother for over a 100 years and it's traditional, just kids representing their hometown. None going to college but not needed for it to matter (or be watchable from the outside) because it's HS football and you'll get to see the wishbone being ran and teams playing a 4-4 stack defense and classic 6-2 and so on.
There's definitely specialization which does help with being more prepared, though. Though also, there's a misconception that a million summer camps existing and 7on7 is 'new'. The primary difference is the marketing of those things and that people pay attention to them because of recruiting. And that's really what's different. Recruiting with recruiting sites and televised 7on7 tournaments, TV, streams and so on. But that stuff isn't new. I played in 100s of 7on7 'games' (and for my lone appearance on defense I got burned by Reggie Williams but their QB threw it 20-yards over his head) in the late 90's/early 00's and it wasn't new then. Only difference is some tournaments still used "Passing League" (instead of the branded 7 on 7) but others already had been going with 7 on 7. And went to QB camps and college camps and had all the options available then as now. The Elite 11 even existed back then.
Either way, 100% agree on the point and everything else said about how enjoyable high school football is. Just isn't a new thing, to me, at least. High School football has always been great in my lifetime and in terms of watching football there's no level of the sport and nothing I'd rather watch more than HS football in my state.
In WA Thursday and Friday night I saw a team running their wing-T out of shotgun against a team that ran an option offense out of shutgun. Then I saw a team that runs a wing-T never anyone split out so all 11 are tight against a team running the run&shoot. And a team running Power-I option against your typical CFB/NFL 'spread'. And saw double-wing v. split backs.
I would disagree that players are better, what you're seeing is wholly dependent on the game you're watching. Matt Ryan could throw the ball while he was in HS but that's not the type of offense his team ran. Doesn't mean now a kid that throws 30 times a game is 'better'. HS passing opened up the same reason as CFB/NFL did, the rules make it easier. I watched HS teams in late 80's through 90's that had the QB's and WR's to throw all game and there was teams that did throw 30-40 times a game and their QB got hit every play and the WR's got blown up because it was football. Can't do that now, passing is 'safer' than it was, QB's are protected even at HS and WR's run unmolested.
Also, again dependent on which game you're watching at the time, but private schools consolidate talent even more than they did 20-30 years ago, and the public schools that can get away with it do the same. That's why you have backup QB's who get scholarship offers before they've even played in a varsity game. So HS looks better than it did when you watch two private schools that have recruited the best HS players from around the country, but HS doesn't look better than it did when you watch two rural 500 student public schools -- but better is relevative because that latter game is extremely interesting because it's schools that have played eachother for over a 100 years and it's traditional, just kids representing their hometown. None going to college but not needed for it to matter (or be watchable from the outside) because it's HS football and you'll get to see the wishbone being ran and teams playing a 4-4 stack defense and classic 6-2 and so on.
There's definitely specialization which does help with being more prepared, though. Though also, there's a misconception that a million summer camps existing and 7on7 is 'new'. The primary difference is the marketing of those things and that people pay attention to them because of recruiting. And that's really what's different. Recruiting with recruiting sites and televised 7on7 tournaments, TV, streams and so on. But that stuff isn't new. I played in 100s of 7on7 'games' (and for my lone appearance on defense I got burned by Reggie Williams but their QB threw it 20-yards over his head) in the late 90's/early 00's and it wasn't new then. Only difference is some tournaments still used "Passing League" (instead of the branded 7 on 7) but others already had been going with 7 on 7. And went to QB camps and college camps and had all the options available then as now. The Elite 11 even existed back then.
Either way, 100% agree on the point and everything else said about how enjoyable high school football is. Just isn't a new thing, to me, at least. High School football has always been great in my lifetime and in terms of watching football there's no level of the sport and nothing I'd rather watch more than HS football in my state.
Re: Specialization of hs football and its affect on cfb and
@Reaser yes the private schools do consolidate talent but so do the good public schools as well. THe main difference between private schools and public schools and why such a large percentage of private schools often become good in sports is because they have better community support than most public schools do. It is more expensive to go to a private school which means the parents that send their kids there are either A. More well off then a lot of families that send their kids to public schools....or/and....B. more invested in their kids education and school activities than a lot of public school families are.
A lot of the parents of public school kids don't even show up to the kids games. Where as with the kids at the private schools not only will the parents show up but so will the cousins, aunts and uncles, and grandparents.
Honestly I think all these states that have created separate divisions for private schools or put multipliers on them simply because they are a private school is totally the wrong approach and does nothing but make public schools think that the answer isn't to work harder to win.....but to instead to try to create rules that will make it easier for them to win.
Go out there.....higher a good coach.....get some good support from the parents...…...but instead they are just are out to not have to play the private schools at all.
Maybe all the non playoff teams in the NFL each season should get together and come up with a rule that will suspend all the playoff teams from playing in the upcoming season. That's about what some of the public schools are trying to do.
A lot of the parents of public school kids don't even show up to the kids games. Where as with the kids at the private schools not only will the parents show up but so will the cousins, aunts and uncles, and grandparents.
Honestly I think all these states that have created separate divisions for private schools or put multipliers on them simply because they are a private school is totally the wrong approach and does nothing but make public schools think that the answer isn't to work harder to win.....but to instead to try to create rules that will make it easier for them to win.
Go out there.....higher a good coach.....get some good support from the parents...…...but instead they are just are out to not have to play the private schools at all.
Maybe all the non playoff teams in the NFL each season should get together and come up with a rule that will suspend all the playoff teams from playing in the upcoming season. That's about what some of the public schools are trying to do.
Re: Specialization of hs football and its affect on cfb and
Yup, I said public schools do as well.
Again, it's area and state dependent. HS football is different state-to-state.
Here in Washington, it's not like that at all with private schools being separated. Also isn't a multiplier. They just go in the classification their enrollment puts them in, same as all the public schools (then teams can opt-up, some do, some don't but that's not a private school thing, public schools opt-up also.) For example my Soph. year we played a private school in the state playoffs and beat them (same program that was on ESPN last week) and my Jr. year played a different private school in the state playoffs and got blown out but I never felt cheated or anything. We had 11 on the field and so did they. Perhaps different for me since I come from a town that's identity is tied to football, so the exact type of place I would have wanted to grow up. Where we have the community support and I got the more traditional HS football experience where we just lined up and played with the kids from our town.
Also opposite of what you said -not that I disagree but to point that it's different depending on state- is Texas. Where private school football doesn't really matter much. I've watched TAPPS (their private school league) games before and no one is ever in the stands. What matters and what gets the 10,000 people at games and has the community support is public school Texas HS football.
Regardless, I don't like excuses when people lose so I agree with you there. The only thing here in WA that can be questioned is that private schools can have students and thus players from a 50-mile radius. While the public schools can only have students/players that live in their school district. So that's a different talent pool, by rule. Never bothered me but I'd at least understand that complaint. Though, similar to what you were getting at, most complaints are just because they lost and want to make excuses for it.
Positives and negatives for private/public school in general. I'd definitely say getting better teachers and stuff in private school but football is the topic. State dependent and the specific private school dependent on if it's better than playing at a public school. The one thing I do think a lot of private school players miss out on is representing their hometown. If you're from Seattle and goto O'Dea HS (private school in Seattle) then that's similar experience to the public school players around the state. But if you're one of the many players that play(ed) in WA in recent years that's from Arizona, Utah, California, Oregon, Texas, etc., and transfer to one of the private schools here just to play football. Then I think those kids miss out on the representing of your town, community, playing with your friends you grew up with, and so on that you get with public school football.
Either way, i brought up private school (and the public schools that are similar in that way) consolidating talent just in response to the talent in HS football depending on what you're watching. If you watch Mater Dei v. St. John Bosco it's going to look a lot different from a random 2A game from New Mexico.
Again, it's area and state dependent. HS football is different state-to-state.
Here in Washington, it's not like that at all with private schools being separated. Also isn't a multiplier. They just go in the classification their enrollment puts them in, same as all the public schools (then teams can opt-up, some do, some don't but that's not a private school thing, public schools opt-up also.) For example my Soph. year we played a private school in the state playoffs and beat them (same program that was on ESPN last week) and my Jr. year played a different private school in the state playoffs and got blown out but I never felt cheated or anything. We had 11 on the field and so did they. Perhaps different for me since I come from a town that's identity is tied to football, so the exact type of place I would have wanted to grow up. Where we have the community support and I got the more traditional HS football experience where we just lined up and played with the kids from our town.
Also opposite of what you said -not that I disagree but to point that it's different depending on state- is Texas. Where private school football doesn't really matter much. I've watched TAPPS (their private school league) games before and no one is ever in the stands. What matters and what gets the 10,000 people at games and has the community support is public school Texas HS football.
Regardless, I don't like excuses when people lose so I agree with you there. The only thing here in WA that can be questioned is that private schools can have students and thus players from a 50-mile radius. While the public schools can only have students/players that live in their school district. So that's a different talent pool, by rule. Never bothered me but I'd at least understand that complaint. Though, similar to what you were getting at, most complaints are just because they lost and want to make excuses for it.
Positives and negatives for private/public school in general. I'd definitely say getting better teachers and stuff in private school but football is the topic. State dependent and the specific private school dependent on if it's better than playing at a public school. The one thing I do think a lot of private school players miss out on is representing their hometown. If you're from Seattle and goto O'Dea HS (private school in Seattle) then that's similar experience to the public school players around the state. But if you're one of the many players that play(ed) in WA in recent years that's from Arizona, Utah, California, Oregon, Texas, etc., and transfer to one of the private schools here just to play football. Then I think those kids miss out on the representing of your town, community, playing with your friends you grew up with, and so on that you get with public school football.
Either way, i brought up private school (and the public schools that are similar in that way) consolidating talent just in response to the talent in HS football depending on what you're watching. If you watch Mater Dei v. St. John Bosco it's going to look a lot different from a random 2A game from New Mexico.
Re: Specialization of hs football and its affect on cfb and
I agree that there is more specialization, but I don't think its the main reason for the HS offensive diversity. Even back in my day, we had 7 on 7 passing tournaments...which ended up being rather pointless because we ran the Delaware Wing-T and ran the ball to the strong side of the formation 99% of the time. Once a game we'd spring a reverse on the bored and unsuspecting defense.lastcat3 wrote:It's gotten this way because highschool sports are much more specialized now then they were back twenty to thirty years ago. You don't see kids playing three sports nearly as much anylonger. Instead it is much more common to pick one sport and focus strictly on that year round. Now virtually every team (at least in the upper classes of each state) go to team camps during the offseason and participate in 7 on 7 passing tournaments.
I think the main reason is due to the proliferation of strategic coaching information. My HS coaches were evidently descendants of Jock Sutherland, but so were the majority of HS coaches in my conference. The strategic changes in football moved at a glacial pace. With every college and pro game on TV, videos being posted on the internet, coaches from different regions of the US being able to email each other instead of traversing the country to attend clinics, etc. there are strategic shifts in football every year. HS coaches aren't so 'set in their ways', and in some sense, if they want to win in today's game they have to be flexible. JMO
-
BD Sullivan
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm
Re: Specialization of hs football and its affect on cfb and
Public high school coaches have to work with the players from their local community, which helps motivate plenty of them to be willing to try something seemingly crazy to at least try to compete with other schools that may have more talent or are bigger.
Private schools have the luxury of recruiting top talent--even though that's allegedly not allowed.
It's always interesting when a Catholic school ISN"T in the playoffs.
Private schools have the luxury of recruiting top talent--even though that's allegedly not allowed.
It's always interesting when a Catholic school ISN"T in the playoffs.Re: Specialization of hs football and its affect on cfb and
I think you would be surprised how many public schools recruit as well. They are doing it just as much as the private schools are.BD Sullivan wrote: Private schools have the luxury of recruiting top talent--even though that's allegedly not allowed.