Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on December 10, 2015, 01:04:37 PM
Not sure about real TV, but you can definitely watch online via ESPN3 or the WatchESPN app.

(and if you have a cable subscription, I think you can log in through the ESPN site, you just have to enter your cable login and password - this is how I watched a couple of Central Michigan games this year when I couldn't be up there)

I run it from the computer onto the 48" using HDMI cable. Looks just like regular broadcasting

Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 18, 2015, 03:42:46 PM
Shameless self promotion:

The Head Football Coach at my HS resigned on Friday morning and I was named Interim Head Coach.  We won Friday night 55-27.

I should retire now with an undefeated record.   

Awesome!! Good Luck the rest of the way, Coach

Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on October 06, 2015, 12:39:57 PM

Quote from: flaballcoach on October 06, 2015, 12:32:24 PM

Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 06, 2015, 12:17:19 PM

Quote from: reality check on October 05, 2015, 04:27:54 PM

Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 05, 2015, 01:24:36 PM

Quote from: reality check on October 04, 2015, 10:18:53 PM
I had to start from scratch.  From tagging them to each player, clipping, spot-shadowing, and picking the order.  I had to clean up a lot of the stats along the way because some of the plays I knew should be tagged weren't showing up.  HUDL is awesome, don't get me wrong.  But there was a lot of work to do as well.

I make the kids tag their own highlights and then I put together the final product for them.  Puts the onus on them to do some work.

Yeah but I feel like they don't understand what is and isn't worthy of a highlight all the time.  They tag their own but I still had to do a lot of cleaning up along the way.

I find it amusing on how many plays my players actually tag as a highlight.  I may have to hold a seminar to go over it with them.  They'll totally be out of position, make terrible reads, get lucky when a player cuts back to them and they make a tackle 20 yards downfield and they'll tag it.

LOL!! Go through this all the time with the kids. They'll show me their "highlight" picks, then I'll tell them what a coach will see when he looks at it. Needless to say, their highlights get "trimmed down" a little after that!

So I played before Hudl was a thing (wayyy back in the early 2000's) and making my highlight tape was an arduous process of cutting and pasting from game tapes, but a few thoughts here: the kids may not be sure how many "highlights" they will have (or are supposed to have).  I was an offensive and defensive lineman, and I remember trying to put together a highlight tape after my sophomore season and finding, like, four plays that were actual "highlight" plays.  The rest were basically "Oh, you controlled the gap you were supposed to on a sweep to the other side" or "you sealed off your man nicely on the backside of a 70-yard TD run" plays.  So I don't blame the kids a little for casting a wide net from the start.

I am sure you guys are right, and I'm not really disagreeing, just thinking out loud about why kids might tag a few extra "highlight" plays that don't make the final cut.

Really solid observation.Your comments make a very good point about highlights being "positional" .... As was in your case, if you are a lineman on either side of the ball, there are things that will stand out to a prospective coach that go beyond pancake blocks and sacks. You obviously want to see strong push back, power and an athlete that can play low to the ground with speed. Defensively, controlling your gap, pursuit angles, etc., are all very important. Offensively, seal blocking, front recognition, blitz recognition and pick up, etc., are all highly important, as well.  And, of course, technique is very important on both sides of the ball. As a coach, I take it as my responsibility that each of my kids have the opportunity to fully develop each facet. In this age of the ESPN highlight plays, kids often get swept away with the sensational and ignore the solid, and fundamentally strong. But coaches don't.

Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 06, 2015, 12:17:19 PM

Quote from: reality check on October 05, 2015, 04:27:54 PM

Quote from: Kira & Jaxon's Dad on October 05, 2015, 01:24:36 PM

Quote from: reality check on October 04, 2015, 10:18:53 PM
I had to start from scratch.  From tagging them to each player, clipping, spot-shadowing, and picking the order.  I had to clean up a lot of the stats along the way because some of the plays I knew should be tagged weren't showing up.  HUDL is awesome, don't get me wrong.  But there was a lot of work to do as well.

I make the kids tag their own highlights and then I put together the final product for them.  Puts the onus on them to do some work.

Yeah but I feel like they don't understand what is and isn't worthy of a highlight all the time.  They tag their own but I still had to do a lot of cleaning up along the way.

I find it amusing on how many plays my players actually tag as a highlight.  I may have to hold a seminar to go over it with them.  They'll totally be out of position, make terrible reads, get lucky when a player cuts back to them and they make a tackle 20 yards downfield and they'll tag it.

LOL!! Go through this all the time with the kids. They'll show me their "highlight" picks, then I'll tell them what a coach will see when he looks at it. Needless to say, their highlights get "trimmed down" a little after that!

Quote from: Dr. Acula on October 01, 2015, 03:28:18 PM
I wouldn't think they would get tired of winning big.  It's probably a big part of their sustained success.  Blowing people out allows you to get your younger kids a lot of varsity PT against other teams' starters.  Plus you're playing 50% more games than almost anybody else every year.  That's 5 more games, 5 more weeks of practice reps, etc. that your kids get EVERY YEAR.  That's huge for the development of your young guys.  It's literally giving them an extra season of development by the time their junior season starts.

Also, I'm not sure if I'd say they usually blow everyone out until the Stagg Bowl.  Often times during their run the OAC has had a strong 2nd team.  Admittedly not as often as we'd like lately with the exception of JCU the last 2 years.  And they've definitely been pushed hard in the playoffs before Salem.  UMHB, Wesley, NCC off the top of my head have all pushed them to the brink recently in Alliance.

Totally agree on the benefit of extra practice time for the younger guys. Makes a HUGE difference. But, also having a JV program is a big help. Regardless of the blow outs, 98 % of the freshmen don't even dress for varsity games and those that do really don't get in much regardless of score, Lowery is the exception this year. But they do get playing time on the JV squad,along with some sophomores who wouldn't see alot of playing time on Saturdays, which really helps experience wise. Another big factor in player development at MU is the quality of competition the freshmen and sophomores go up against in practice when running a joint practice or serving as the scout teams. Even down here, for years, the kids at UM would say they improved the most practicing against each other. Appears to me that while varsity playing time for a freshman is extremely limited, and playing time for most sophomores is slightly more, you have players, who by their Junior years, are ready to step in......reminds me of an assembly line!!  lol!!!

Quote from: flaballcoach on September 24, 2015, 12:32:15 PM

Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 24, 2015, 10:22:41 AM

Quote from: Raider 68 on September 24, 2015, 10:00:14 AM
- With the competitive nature of recruiting now with more D2 schools, those bigger guys are going for the scholarship
  programs. Over the last few years HScoach made this point several times.

- The Raiders have not really had a 200+ pound back since Chuck Moore, who was just a little over that, but big and fast.

It's funny, I had this whole long post typed (I'll still write it below) but Raider 68 showed up and made the same basic point.  Kudos to you, 68, for saying this more succintly.










---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote from: flaballcoach on September 24, 2015, 09:37:20 AM
I can't help but think what a 225 pounder with good speed might have done. No disrespect to Logan....I think that kid has tremendous heart and really leaves everything on the field, but it still would be nice to have a guy back there that nobody on the defense wants to have to tackle... a guy that on 4th and 1 can get you that yard even if the blocking breaks down.

Well, yeah.  Every team would love to have a 225 pounder with good speed.  But this is kind of an obvious red-herring...oh, you want a 225 pound back with speed?  Guess where most guys fitting that description end up?  Playing Division I football!  I'm being a little facetious, because admittedly there are some successful bigger backs that play D3 ball - I played with a very good one.  However, it's just not something that you can find off the shelf, even if you're Mount Union.  You'll get one of those once in a blue moon.

I have carefully danced around this issue a few times, but I do want to toss it out there, politely but with conviction.  I say this with some trepidation, because I love and support Division III football, I believe that the level of competition is generally higher than it's given credit for amongst the general football-watching population, and know that there is some overlap across divisions (I genuinely do believe that Mount and UWW would be low-top-25-caliber programs in Division II).  So, with all of that said:

I think that some fans of the nation's best Division III teams (please note the "some") have gotten a little disconnected from the rest of Division III, because they've been so dominant for so long, that they've forgotten they are still just a Division III program.  Guys that get Division I scholarship offers aren't just turning them down to play at Mount and UWW instead; most of the guys playing for UW-Whitewater and Mount Union would be playing Division I football if they could be.  I am quite certain that some fans would like to believe that the attraction of playing for such a winning program has overridden the desire to play on a higher level or have a scholarship, but I am guessing that for 95+ percent of the roster at Mount and UWW that isn't true.  Some guys no doubt got a few letters from Division I schools, maybe even took an official visit, but how many of them actually had an offer for a Division I scholarship in hand and turned it down to play for Mount or UWW?  Not a newspaper column that says they got a letter from a Division I coach, or went to a Division I camp, but an actual scholarship offer?  I'm guessing that's only a few.

Which brings me back to my original point: 225-pound running backs with legitimately speed just don't end up in Division III football that much.  Same thing with 300-pound linemen that can move well enough to really play.  Admittedly, there have been NFL-caliber players that have fallen through the cracks (Garcon and Shorts being the obvious recent examples); it's not impossible to end up with a Division I-caliber talent who (sometimes for inexplicable reasons) did not get noticed in high school.  I just don't think it's that easy to say "Oh, we need a bigger back with speed?  Let's just go get one!"

It's funny, this same basic discussion happened on the WIAC boards with the idea that UW-LaCrosse needs to get bigger guys.  Yeah.  We all want bigger and faster guys!

They DO have 220 and 225 lb Freshman LB's that run sub 4.7......they are probably not in D1 due to heights of 5'10" to 5'11", and being looked at as linebackers only, but I would be willing to bet that they do have past ball carrying experience...  I know it is hard to find backs that fit that description...I played D1 ball......it was just a thought as to where they could look for someone to fill that role, since they often find WR's from other original positions. Look....I'm not posting this stuff so others can prove how much smarter than me they are. I have been involved with football for over 26 years as a coach and a player, and have seen more than a few of my athletes go on to compete in D1,D2,and D3. I don't pretend to know everything but I have learned a FEW things along the way.

And I NEVER said you can find a back like that "off the shelf"  as you put it, or had the ideology of "We need a bigger back with speed. Let's just go get one!"...show me where I said that....you don't need to be condescending or sarcastic.....give me some credit for my years and experiences in the game. Don't you think as a coach I KNOW that any HS RUNNING BACK with those physical attributes is most definitely headed for D1. My whole point was IF Mount Union WANTED to add that aspect t their game, and since going out and getting a back like that isn't very likely at the d3 level, they might look to the freshman LINEBACKERS I mentioned who DO have the physical attributes, and more likely than not did have experience in the past running the ball. IF I was in a situation like that and I WANTED TO incorporate that aspect into my offense, but had no RUNNING BACKS on my roster who had those physical attributes, I'd be walking over to that freshman LB in practice and asking, " did you ever run the ball?", and "how would you feel about doing it again?"

Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on September 24, 2015, 10:22:41 AM

Quote from: Raider 68 on September 24, 2015, 10:00:14 AM
- With the competitive nature of recruiting now with more D2 schools, those bigger guys are going for the scholarship
  programs. Over the last few years HScoach made this point several times.

- The Raiders have not really had a 200+ pound back since Chuck Moore, who was just a little over that, but big and fast.

It's funny, I had this whole long post typed (I'll still write it below) but Raider 68 showed up and made the same basic point.  Kudos to you, 68, for saying this more succintly.










---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote from: flaballcoach on September 24, 2015, 09:37:20 AM
I can't help but think what a 225 pounder with good speed might have done. No disrespect to Logan....I think that kid has tremendous heart and really leaves everything on the field, but it still would be nice to have a guy back there that nobody on the defense wants to have to tackle... a guy that on 4th and 1 can get you that yard even if the blocking breaks down.

Well, yeah.  Every team would love to have a 225 pounder with good speed.  But this is kind of an obvious red-herring...oh, you want a 225 pound back with speed?  Guess where most guys fitting that description end up?  Playing Division I football!  I'm being a little facetious, because admittedly there are some successful bigger backs that play D3 ball - I played with a very good one.  However, it's just not something that you can find off the shelf, even if you're Mount Union.  You'll get one of those once in a blue moon.

I have carefully danced around this issue a few times, but I do want to toss it out there, politely but with conviction.  I say this with some trepidation, because I love and support Division III football, I believe that the level of competition is generally higher than it's given credit for amongst the general football-watching population, and know that there is some overlap across divisions (I genuinely do believe that Mount and UWW would be low-top-25-caliber programs in Division II).  So, with all of that said:

I think that some fans of the nation's best Division III teams (please note the "some") have gotten a little disconnected from the rest of Division III, because they've been so dominant for so long, that they've forgotten they are still just a Division III program.  Guys that get Division I scholarship offers aren't just turning them down to play at Mount and UWW instead; most of the guys playing for UW-Whitewater and Mount Union would be playing Division I football if they could be.  I am quite certain that some fans would like to believe that the attraction of playing for such a winning program has overridden the desire to play on a higher level or have a scholarship, but I am guessing that for 95+ percent of the roster at Mount and UWW that isn't true.  Some guys no doubt got a few letters from Division I schools, maybe even took an official visit, but how many of them actually had an offer for a Division I scholarship in hand and turned it down to play for Mount or UWW?  Not a newspaper column that says they got a letter from a Division I coach, or went to a Division I camp, but an actual scholarship offer?  I'm guessing that's only a few.

Which brings me back to my original point: 225-pound running backs with legitimately speed just don't end up in Division III football that much.  Same thing with 300-pound linemen that can move well enough to really play.  Admittedly, there have been NFL-caliber players that have fallen through the cracks (Garcon and Shorts being the obvious recent examples); it's not impossible to end up with a Division I-caliber talent who (sometimes for inexplicable reasons) did not get noticed in high school.  I just don't think it's that easy to say "Oh, we need a bigger back with speed?  Let's just go get one!"

It's funny, this same basic discussion happened on the WIAC boards with the idea that UW-LaCrosse needs to get bigger guys.  Yeah.  We all want bigger and faster guys!

They DO have 220 and 225 lb Freshman LB's that run sub 4.7......they are probably not in D1 due to heights of 5'10" to 5'11", and being looked at as linebackers only, but I would be willing to bet that they do have past ball carrying experience...  I know it is hard to find backs that fit that description...I played D1 ball......it was just a thought as to where they could look for someone to fill that role, since they often find WR's from other original positions. Look....I'm not posting this stuff so others can prove how much smarter than me they are. I have been involved with football for over 26 years as a coach and a player, and have seen more than a few of my athletes go on to compete in D1,D2,and D3. I don't pretend to know everything but I have learned a FEW things along the way.

Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 24, 2015, 08:47:06 AM
How much of the offensive scheme is dictated by the fact that they just can't get the big Clydesdale O linemen they got years ago?  When I was in school 15 years ago my buddy was the smallest starting linemen.  He was 6'2" 285.  Today I think he might be the biggest starter.  They're just getting different kids I think.

That being said their line and Nemeth ran between the tackles with success against UWW last year so I'm not doom and gloom here.

As for the WR group I'd preach patience.  Outside of Namdar it's a work in progress.  It's going to take some game reps for everyone to get clicking.  The biggest thing to me regarding the pass game is zero interceptions.  Scott is making good decisions with the ball.  That and he's shown the knack for hitting the deep ball to Namdar in stride.  The thing that we haven't seen but will is a pass where Scott gets flushed out of the pocket and next thing you know it's a 50+ yard run.  That's coming.

DR..........respect your opinion and look to you as most knowledgeable person here concerning things Mount Union. But given that Nemeth had 90 yds against Whitewater and a lot of it between the tackles, and, as you noted,with a smaller type of line than they used to have, I can't help but think what a 225 pounder with good speed might have done. No disrespect to Logan....I think that kid has tremendous heart and really leaves everything on the field, but it still would be nice to have a guy back there that nobody on the defense wants to have to tackle... a guy that on 4th and 1 can get you that yard even if the blocking breaks down. That's a scenario that can happen deep in the playoffs that can bite you in the @#$........not doom and gloom, just my honest opinion. I think MU has an outstanding football team and is definitely a top contender for the national title. And I think in no way should there be a change in the basic offensive scheme. But having an option of a real inside power game when needed would only be a plus.I still stand by my statement that I would like to see more physicality, ( again, consider the competition when looking at stats), on BOTH sides of the ball. More often than not, that's what wins big games. Alabama has always been noted for their physical play. So how did they lose to Ohio State last year?........Ohio State beat them physically.

Quote from: resqdog on September 23, 2015, 11:37:39 PM
I agree with hsbsballcoach.  Not sure what to think about the other receivers either.  Better teams will bracket Namdar and then what?  Kennedy is good but is really small and has good but not great hands.  Hargrove, although he is fast, doesn't impress me with his ability to catch the ball. I have always thought that he played because of his pedigree and not his production.  Of course Mount has always loved speed but if you don't run routes and/or can't catch, how much does speed really matter? Don't yet see a guy who can catch the ball in traffic late in the year when people are hanging on them and the flags are tucked deep in the waistbands. Ask Meachum how much he got held the last few games last year including getting mugged in the Final.

Overall I have to say that I am not overly impressed with the offense so far.  I know, lots of points, but those two defenses were horrible.  Bethany was lost all day and Musky tried the street fighting approach to no avail. I believe Scott will get better every game but I don't like the play calls for him so far.  How about throwing some confidence building routes in and let  him get comfortable? I see the same thing for the future as the last few years.  No power back and a receiver they think is invincible.  Nemeth runs the way I like a back to run but he weighs less than my dog. Would love to see a 225 lb'er out there for ten runs a game.  End result, someone will stuff the run and shut down the outside guy and boom, it's  a long ride back from Virginia.  It's early...maybe some others will emerge as offensive threats.  Defensively, I think Mount is lights out and just needs to stay healthy.

My thoughts: Mount will be very successful as always, and probably make a deep run in the playoffs again, but my concern is that they are not physical ENOUGH.  DEFENSE:Last year Whitewater's o-line dominated them up front, and they also had a big back who got  key yards between the tackles almost at will. While the MU defense is seriously fast and flies to the ball, I did not see anyone delivering those crushing , in the hole type of hits that can intimidate an offense and set the tone of a game.  Against Whitewater,what I did see was a lot of holding on, dragging down, gang tackles 4-5-6 yards down the field. I know someone will point at their defensive stats and talk about how they dominated during the season, but honestly, what kind of competition are they getting in the OAC?  It's pretty easy for a team with  the talent they have to look physical and dominate against that competition. OFFENSE: resqdog made a very valid point about the MU running game. Tackle to tackle they do not have a big back that can grind out those tough yards or intimidate a defense physically. Nemeth does run hard but at 180+ ? lbs. he's not putting the fear of God in any defensive player. I honestly feel that despite all the stats MU would be better served in the LONG TERM to be winning games 30-0, and developing a physical ball control element to their game, instead of 60-0 with the pinball offense. Somewhere in the playoffs you will meet a physical team that also has comparable talent and can defend the spread offense and you have to be able to slug it out with them. I am NOT saying wholesale offense change. Keep the spread as your base offense....I AM saying develope a big back, ball control element to it. Another thought: Where is this "big back" gonna come from since MU seems to recruit smallish running backs?.....look at the freshman roster....great LB class and I guarantee you some of those physical ILB were fullback/running backs somewhere in their HS careers. You got freshman at 5'10''- 6'0",  220-225 lbs. running in the 4.6's and squatting over 500 lbs!.......you think maybe a kid like that with a LB mentality, could be intimidating to a defense?! They switch kids all the time ...especially QB to WR. why not look there?  Just saying ......I know I am talking about a change that is very unlikely to take place, but I am just giving my opinion. I always tell my kids "in the end football is simple....you have to beat the man in front of you"

Quote from: hsbsballcoach7 on September 23, 2015, 07:30:21 PM

Quote from: Dr. Acula on September 22, 2015, 05:49:17 PM
I didn't realize that freshman QB Matt Lowry got in the game Saturday and ran for 66 yards and his first collegiate TD.  Congratulations to him!  They just stockpile these dual threat QB's it seems.

After watching some of the freshmen highlight films, Lowry was definitely the one that I was most excited about. There is no question that he is an athlete. IMO, he is faster and quicker than any Mount QB I can remember, including Scott. He has a decent arm with some accuracy. My big question is his size because his game seems to be better when he is able to run, if he gets hit a couple of times, can his body take it? Also, can he throw into tight coverages and under pressure in the pocket. I hope we don't have to find out what he has this season. Scott has done well so far with what they've asked him to do and Lowry can get another year of strength and understanding of the offense.

An interesting thought I had on our WR's is that it doesn't seem that the staff has brought in a ton of WR every year that stand out, but it's interesting that so many QB's are now making the change to WR.

My big question for the season will be Mount's WR's as a whole and Scott getting them the ball. Namdar is obviously picking up where he left off, but I'm concerned about what the others can offer when Mount runs into a defense that can match up with Namdar and hold our run game. That may not happen until the later round of the playoffs, but you never know with JCU and Heidelberg.

Lot's of scattered ideas, but just some things going through my head.

Kid has ALOT of talent. Height is a valid concern.......actually looks to be 5'7"-5"8", tops, but IF he can stay healthy he will make some plays. I agree with my fellow coach above, more playing time with JV and a solid off season of lifting and Spring ball should make a difference. Don't discount this kid because of size alone. .......and l am NOT saying anyone is,....He looks to have something special.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on September 22, 2015, 09:49:32 AM

Quote from: flaballcoach on September 22, 2015, 12:48:50 AM

Quote from: bceagle80 on September 21, 2015, 09:58:49 PM

Quote from: flaballcoach on September 21, 2015, 02:40:28 PM

Quote from: joelmama on September 18, 2015, 02:20:24 PM
If you look at the totality of D3 players that have made an NFL roster in the last 15 years I think by position it has been dominated by receivers.  Linemen are generally shorter or lighter than most NFL players at those positions where size is helpful at receiver but there are plenty of small receivers that have been successful.  I think quarterbacks other than Johnny football and Drew Brees are pretty much 6 2" or greater.  Linebackers and D-Backs are also places where the best of D3 can also make it a bit easier.  Quarterbacks are such a longshot that even the best from D3 usually just get a passing look and that is all with the exception of Ballard but that was the mid nineties also.

If an athlete is playing d3 , in all likelihood the NFL will never be an option for over 99% + of them, even at the elite schools such as Whitewater, MU etc. . The kids playing football at this level are playing because they love the game... They love playing football and this was their chance to do what they love for 4 more years beyond high school. I am often times amazed that given that, the above mentioned get so many athletes. I understand the attraction of a winning program, but, again these kids are looking to PLAY the game they love not WATCH someone else play ahead of them for 3 and maybe 4 years......bottom line...you are not going to the league, you love being on that field PLAYING, and there are MANY d3 schools that offer a great education so why not go where you can get on the field and play.

My son chose Mount Union for many reasons. There are many players at the D3 level who had multiple options at D1A, D1AA and the D2 level as well. One reason he chose Mount Union is the fact the financial package at Mount Union was better than 2 D2 schools. He also was invited to walk on at 3 D1 schools. He chose Mount Union because it had the majors he is interested in. The fact they have a winning football program was part of equation but the only factor. In many ways, Mount Union is very similar to many higher athletic level schools at least in football.

In addition, the kids who play D1 love football too. They just happen to have more of the characteristics that define D1 recruits & athletes than many athletes at D2 & D3 schools.

Many players have many goals from whatever football program they play. My son wanted to be wirh a winning program no matter what level he played. Every school he considered had a winning season last year. He wanted a school he could play the game at but also wanted to earn his playing time at the same school against teammates that were better than just good. He could have gone to many other D3 programs and had a better chance to earn playing time. Most football players who play in college have healthy egos and want to be the very best. In order to be the best, must beat the best.

All this said, it is not impossible to play D3 and play in the NFL. It's just more difficult.

Estimated number of athletes playing d3 football in 2012:  17,000
Number of former d3 football players in NFL in 2012:  16
Not impossible, but people here who are smarter than l can do the math.
I'm a coach.....I played d1 ball and l know the value of competition with peers as opponents and as teammates.As a player l never was on a National Championship team, but l would not trade my experiences as a player, the lessons l learned, and the lifetime friends l made where l went to school for anything. Winning is great and it something any athlete worth his sweat strives for, but it isn't the only thing. The best lessons from playing football as they apply to life go far beyond winning and losing on a scoreboard.
As a coach l want to see kids have the opportunity to get on that field and play.l also am a realist.

The math is worse than that -- we have about 25,000 people playing Division III football, and those 16 players represent the best pro players from multiple D-III graduating classes.

Thanks for the correction on the numbers, Pat. ..,...I had no idea the numbers playing were that high. ..,...again, l want to emphasize this is not a knock on d3 football or the kids playing. I personally know some terrific young men who are also terrific athletes playing at that level. My whole point has been it is VERY likely the last 4 years these kids will ever play football.......why not play instead of watch. Has nothing to do with " not wanting to compete against the best"....has everything to do with playing the game you love.

Quote from: desertraider on September 21, 2015, 10:51:17 PM

Quote from: flaballcoach on September 21, 2015, 09:04:02 PM
You're right never said it and NEVER thought that either. I am a big fan of both.
I know the education at both is top notch but there are others as well that offer more of an opportunity to get on field. That's all. Especially for the kids that would never really see any significant playing time over the entire 4 years. Remember what they say when you assume anything.

Not to nit-pick but I didn't assume. I stated it "sounds" and placed an emphasis on that. Had I assumed that is what you were saying I would have simply tore into the post. I guess what I am saying is...never assume anything was assumed.  Back to regular broadcasting.

No further assumptions made. 

Quote from: bceagle80 on September 21, 2015, 09:58:49 PM

Quote from: flaballcoach on September 21, 2015, 02:40:28 PM

Quote from: joelmama on September 18, 2015, 02:20:24 PM
If you look at the totality of D3 players that have made an NFL roster in the last 15 years I think by position it has been dominated by receivers.  Linemen are generally shorter or lighter than most NFL players at those positions where size is helpful at receiver but there are plenty of small receivers that have been successful.  I think quarterbacks other than Johnny football and Drew Brees are pretty much 6 2" or greater.  Linebackers and D-Backs are also places where the best of D3 can also make it a bit easier.  Quarterbacks are such a longshot that even the best from D3 usually just get a passing look and that is all with the exception of Ballard but that was the mid nineties also.

If an athlete is playing d3 , in all likelihood the NFL will never be an option for over 99% + of them, even at the elite schools such as Whitewater, MU etc. . The kids playing football at this level are playing because they love the game... They love playing football and this was their chance to do what they love for 4 more years beyond high school. I am often times amazed that given that, the above mentioned get so many athletes. I understand the attraction of a winning program, but, again these kids are looking to PLAY the game they love not WATCH someone else play ahead of them for 3 and maybe 4 years......bottom line...you are not going to the league, you love being on that field PLAYING, and there are MANY d3 schools that offer a great education so why not go where you can get on the field and play.

My son chose Mount Union for many reasons. There are many players at the D3 level who had multiple options at D1A, D1AA and the D2 level as well. One reason he chose Mount Union is the fact the financial package at Mount Union was better than 2 D2 schools. He also was invited to walk on at 3 D1 schools. He chose Mount Union because it had the majors he is interested in. The fact they have a winning football program was part of equation but the only factor. In many ways, Mount Union is very similar to many higher athletic level schools at least in football.

In addition, the kids who play D1 love football too. They just happen to have more of the characteristics that define D1 recruits & athletes than many athletes at D2 & D3 schools.

Many players have many goals from whatever football program they play. My son wanted to be wirh a winning program no matter what level he played. Every school he considered had a winning season last year. He wanted a school he could play the game at but also wanted to earn his playing time at the same school against teammates that were better than just good. He could have gone to many other D3 programs and had a better chance to earn playing time. Most football players who play in college have healthy egos and want to be the very best. In order to be the best, must beat the best.

All this said, it is not impossible to play D3 and play in the NFL. It's just more difficult.

Estimated number of athletes playing d3 football in 2012:  17,000
Number of former d3 football players in NFL in 2012:  16
Not impossible, but people here who are smarter than l can do the math.
I'm a coach.....I played d1 ball and l know the value of competition with peers as opponents and as teammates.As a player l never was on a National Championship team, but l would not trade my experiences as a player, the lessons l learned, and the lifetime friends l made where l went to school for anything. Winning is great and it something any athlete worth his sweat strives for, but it isn't the only thing. The best lessons from playing football as they apply to life go far beyond winning and losing on a scoreboard.
As a coach l want to see kids have the opportunity to get on that field and play.l also am a realist.

You're right never said it and NEVER thought that either. I am a big fan of both.
I know the education at both is top notch but there are others as well that offer more of an opportunity to get on field. That's all. Especially for the kids that would never really see any significant playing time over the entire 4 years. Remember what they say when you assume anything.

Quote from: joelmama on September 18, 2015, 02:20:24 PM
If you look at the totality of D3 players that have made an NFL roster in the last 15 years I think by position it has been dominated by receivers.  Linemen are generally shorter or lighter than most NFL players at those positions where size is helpful at receiver but there are plenty of small receivers that have been successful.  I think quarterbacks other than Johnny football and Drew Brees are pretty much 6 2" or greater.  Linebackers and D-Backs are also places where the best of D3 can also make it a bit easier.  Quarterbacks are such a longshot that even the best from D3 usually just get a passing look and that is all with the exception of Ballard but that was the mid nineties also.

If an athlete is playing d3 , in all likelihood the NFL will never be an option for over 99% + of them, even at the elite schools such as Whitewater, MU etc. . The kids playing football at this level are playing because they love the game... They love playing football and this was their chance to do what they love for 4 more years beyond high school. I am often times amazed that given that, the above mentioned get so many athletes. I understand the attraction of a winning program, but, again these kids are looking to PLAY the game they love not WATCH someone else play ahead of them for 3 and maybe 4 years......bottom line...you are not going to the league, you love being on that field PLAYING, and there are MANY d3 schools that offer a great education so why not go where you can get on the field and play.