Started By
Message
re: Georgia is the best job in the SEC but can be a nightmare
Posted on 5/7/18 at 9:11 am to jimdog
Posted on 5/7/18 at 9:11 am to jimdog
One thing I tend to look at more than recruiting services and stars is who actually becomes NFL players after college is said and done.
There have been a bunch of those over the years, and every year or two some writer beats the horse again.
They fluctuate, but more often than not Louisiana and Mississippi tend to be at the top of per capita NFL players produced.
I've seen some where SC is ahead of Georgia, and vice versa. Offhand I'd say the two states are pretty comparable for that specific measure (NFL players produced per capita).
And just from memory, I think Alabama generally does better than the rest of the Southern states, though you could see one with them ranked fourth or seventh or something.
Anyway all the Southern states do pretty well in that respect, though Louisiana and Mississippi are outliers.
And with the population, of course Georgia is going to produce more players than Mississippi and even Louisiana when you see how many kids from a state sign to play every year.
But interestingly states like Florida and Texas don't usually do as well on a per capita basis compared to some smaller states that are less heralded.
Part of it is if you are a super athlete from Slap Out, Alabama you just do not get people paying attention to you compared to a guy who may not be as good, but plays at St. Thomas Aquineas in Fort Lauderdale.
There have been a bunch of those over the years, and every year or two some writer beats the horse again.
They fluctuate, but more often than not Louisiana and Mississippi tend to be at the top of per capita NFL players produced.
I've seen some where SC is ahead of Georgia, and vice versa. Offhand I'd say the two states are pretty comparable for that specific measure (NFL players produced per capita).
And just from memory, I think Alabama generally does better than the rest of the Southern states, though you could see one with them ranked fourth or seventh or something.
Anyway all the Southern states do pretty well in that respect, though Louisiana and Mississippi are outliers.
And with the population, of course Georgia is going to produce more players than Mississippi and even Louisiana when you see how many kids from a state sign to play every year.
But interestingly states like Florida and Texas don't usually do as well on a per capita basis compared to some smaller states that are less heralded.
Part of it is if you are a super athlete from Slap Out, Alabama you just do not get people paying attention to you compared to a guy who may not be as good, but plays at St. Thomas Aquineas in Fort Lauderdale.
Posted on 5/7/18 at 10:35 am to Sunbeam
quote:
They fluctuate, but more often than not Louisiana and Mississippi
You'd be wrong and pet capita is an idiotic stat that means mothing.Per participant is a much better yardstick and Florida and Georgia are usually 1 and 2 in that category.
quote:
But interestingly states like Florida and Texas don't usually do as well on a per capita basis compared to some smaller states that are less heralded.
Why does per capita even MATTER if one state produced 35 bluechips compared to another smaller that produces 10?
State of Georgia produced more NFL draft picks than any other state in 2017.I imagine it would
lead in " per capita" draft picks for all the states but WGAS?Jusy means the state produces a ton good players...par capita or not.
This post was edited on 5/7/18 at 11:29 am
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/SR_Icon.jpg)