• Welcome to Fearless Friday Bulletin Boards. Please login or sign up.

 FF is powered by:        Do Not Sell My Personal Information

PA Players at Arkansas Colleges, Compared to Other State Football Champions 2014

Started by Grond, December 10, 2015, 10:25:45 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

PA Dad

Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 09:50:04 pm
I'm not accusing any private school of any wrong. Just in the case of PA there's no doubt they have had at least recently more D1 players on the field than most other 5a schools. Hence they beat the brakes off them. Jimmys and Joes!!
When you have more talent you are going to win more.

I'm sorry if some of read this as me being negative about PA , I'm simply stating what appears to be obvious,  if it were a public school , it may have a three year run then most likely a drop off , they reload and surge on.

I didn't take your comments as being negative to PA.  I understand your argument.  We've debated this several times on this board and we'll never come to a concensus on it.

the voice

Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 09:47:59 pm
Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 09:37:44 pm
My statement was in response to the statement made they are the same. IMO if they indeed do have 2-3 D1 players every year they are far more talented than most 5a schools. As I said before, it's not illegal.  Not cheating or anything wrong. Simply saying they get better players year in and out than most others in 5a, example 2014 Wynne team took all those seniors to get there. As one poster said PA doesn't rebuild they reload. Morrilton for example won it all in 2013 , rebuilt in 14 and made playoffs this year. It takes time for most to get back because of the talent pool.
As for Fayetteville, they are a 7a school that's started keeping the talent , some of which used to go elsewhere. In 5a if you have 2 D1 players on a team you will most likely be in the hunt for the title of not win it. PA is a perfect example of this , it's not a slight or knock , just a fact.  And it's fair to say they don't have to wait and rebuild as they usually have more potential D1 players move in.  Again not accusing them of any wrong , just stating what it appears. This years championship team will not drain the talent from the team , they'll be back. Look at the margins of victory, there's no way one can say that every team they played in the playoffs was that bad , obviously they weren't.

Someone said it's not a good match up to play Fayetteville, well on average Fayetteville has 4-7 D1 players the last few years. PA has say 2-4 , most 5a schools have none , it would be similar match up as average 5a playing PA , PA would have talent but Fayetteville would have more , just saying as example, most teams PA played in 5a were out matched.

I understand your argument.  And, I agree that PA has more talent than most 5A teams.

But, is that talent natural or is it developed by good coaching?

For example, I'd  bet that if you polled 5A coaches, most would say that LRC had more raw talent than any team in 5A this year.  If that's correct, why did PA mercy rule LRC.

And, if you look at last year, I'd say Wynne had more raw talent than PA.

I think the real argument is whether PA has more raw talent or just uses the talent it has better than other teams.

It's true that PA has a good scheme , using different ways to play the game. No one questions that. It's certainly easier to scheme when you have above average talent to execute those plays. Could he win state with Clarksville? Would they be improved? Certainly they maybe but it's still the jimmys and joes. The only way this argument is settled is if the coach left and did this at school without a history of winning. I'm not taking anything from the success he has had there. A poster just made the statement he does more with less , it's kinda hard for me to see that he has less.  That's just my opinion.

So tell me this from your prospective, is PA that determined mule that wins the Kentucky derby? Are they the most talented team that runs over everyone because they are that much better ? Are they a good mix of above average talent and a coach ?

Anyone that's been around sports know you can't coach a player to run a 4.3 forty if he is a 5 flat guy. So coaching helps indeed, but it certainly plays a bigger role when talent is similar between teams. If one team is far more talented, coaching can have a much smaller role. The better wins 9 out of 10,

I mean cmon guys there's no denying they've been more talented even 13 out of 14 games , 

As for the LRC game , they were mercy ruled , I certainly think coaching and weather played a role in that. I think personally it bothers me to hear people talk about mercy ruling a team while at same time acting like they are any more talented. So yeah if you mercy rule 9 out of 10 regular season and 3 out of 4 in playoffs, yeah I would say if that's a year in and out thing , move up , if you beat some of the states best teams in that classification, to the point of mercy ruling them, step up another class , seems like it is part of the plan to mercy rule instead of just winning

PA Dad

Why didn'yPA win state championships before Kelley became the coach?  They won zero.  They had the same advantages then that they have now. 

the voice

Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 10:16:15 pm
Why didn'yPA win state championships before Kelley became the coach?  They won zero.  They had the same advantages then that they have now. 

I give him credit for that. But he is also getting a different type of player also. Central used to be very talented also. Catholic used to also.  They've been far less successful and PA isn't. He's done a good job. I'm not saying anyone could duplicate his success there. I'm just saying he has had above average talent lately also.

Grond

Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 10:10:30 pm
Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 09:47:59 pm
Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 09:37:44 pm
My statement was in response to the statement made they are the same. IMO if they indeed do have 2-3 D1 players every year they are far more talented than most 5a schools. As I said before, it's not illegal.  Not cheating or anything wrong. Simply saying they get better players year in and out than most others in 5a, example 2014 Wynne team took all those seniors to get there. As one poster said PA doesn't rebuild they reload. Morrilton for example won it all in 2013 , rebuilt in 14 and made playoffs this year. It takes time for most to get back because of the talent pool.
As for Fayetteville, they are a 7a school that's started keeping the talent , some of which used to go elsewhere. In 5a if you have 2 D1 players on a team you will most likely be in the hunt for the title of not win it. PA is a perfect example of this , it's not a slight or knock , just a fact.  And it's fair to say they don't have to wait and rebuild as they usually have more potential D1 players move in.  Again not accusing them of any wrong , just stating what it appears. This years championship team will not drain the talent from the team , they'll be back. Look at the margins of victory, there's no way one can say that every team they played in the playoffs was that bad , obviously they weren't.

Someone said it's not a good match up to play Fayetteville, well on average Fayetteville has 4-7 D1 players the last few years. PA has say 2-4 , most 5a schools have none , it would be similar match up as average 5a playing PA , PA would have talent but Fayetteville would have more , just saying as example, most teams PA played in 5a were out matched.

I understand your argument.  And, I agree that PA has more talent than most 5A teams.

But, is that talent natural or is it developed by good coaching?

For example, I'd  bet that if you polled 5A coaches, most would say that LRC had more raw talent than any team in 5A this year.  If that's correct, why did PA mercy rule LRC.

And, if you look at last year, I'd say Wynne had more raw talent than PA.

I think the real argument is whether PA has more raw talent or just uses the talent it has better than other teams.

It's true that PA has a good scheme , using different ways to play the game. No one questions that. It's certainly easier to scheme when you have above average talent to execute those plays. Could he win state with Clarksville? Would they be improved? Certainly they maybe but it's still the jimmys and joes. The only way this argument is settled is if the coach left and did this at school without a history of winning. I'm not taking anything from the success he has had there. A poster just made the statement he does more with less , it's kinda hard for me to see that he has less.  That's just my opinion.

So tell me this from your prospective, is PA that determined mule that wins the Kentucky derby? Are they the most talented team that runs over everyone because they are that much better ? Are they a good mix of above average talent and a coach ?

Anyone that's been around sports know you can't coach a player to run a 4.3 forty if he is a 5 flat guy. So coaching helps indeed, but it certainly plays a bigger role when talent is similar between teams. If one team is far more talented, coaching can have a much smaller role. The better wins 9 out of 10,

I mean cmon guys there's no denying they've been more talented even 13 out of 14 games , 

As for the LRC game , they were mercy ruled , I certainly think coaching and weather played a role in that. I think personally it bothers me to hear people talk about mercy ruling a team while at same time acting like they are any more talented. So yeah if you mercy rule 9 out of 10 regular season and 3 out of 4 in playoffs, yeah I would say if that's a year in and out thing , move up , if you beat some of the states best teams in that classification, to the point of mercy ruling them, step up another class , seems like it is part of the plan to mercy rule instead of just winning

Oh yeah?!? Well the REAL answer is........more data.  :-[

We can't base a trend on one analysis. If PA consistently puts guys at the U of A compared to other schools, then that supports the TALENT argument. I plan to do a Signee Report this February.

PA Dad

Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 10:23:25 pm
Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 10:16:15 pm
Why didn'yPA win state championships before Kelley became the coach?  They won zero.  They had the same advantages then that they have now. 

I give him credit for that. But he is also getting a different type of player also. Central used to be very talented also. Catholic used to also.  They've been far less successful and PA isn't. He's done a good job. I'm not saying anyone could duplicate his success there. I'm just saying he has had above average talent lately also.

It is an interesting debate.  I don't know where you get your information that he is getting a different type of player.  I think nearly every parent chooses PA because of academics and always has.  I don't know why his players would be any different than the players before he became the coach.

the voice

Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 09:59:53 pm
Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 09:50:04 pm
I'm not accusing any private school of any wrong. Just in the case of PA there's no doubt they have had at least recently more D1 players on the field than most other 5a schools. Hence they beat the brakes off them. Jimmys and Joes!!
When you have more talent you are going to win more.

I'm sorry if some of read this as me being negative about PA , I'm simply stating what appears to be obvious,  if it were a public school , it may have a three year run then most likely a drop off , they reload and surge on.

I didn't take your comments as being negative to PA.  I understand your argument.  We've debated this several times on this board and we'll never come to a concensus on it.

Well I'm glad to read that. I certainly don't mean to sound that way. Some posters probably just hit a nerve from time to time. I agree we won't agree. And it's not anything wrong or unfair with how they win. Hats off to them. I just don't like reading that they aren't anymore talented but yet they mercy rule most teams. They are in my opinion a great combination of talent and coaching which equals success. 

the voice

Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 10:28:31 pm
Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 10:23:25 pm
Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 10:16:15 pm
Why didn'yPA win state championships before Kelley became the coach?  They won zero.  They had the same advantages then that they have now. 

I give him credit for that. But he is also getting a different type of player also. Central used to be very talented also. Catholic used to also.  They've been far less successful and PA isn't. He's done a good job. I'm not saying anyone could duplicate his success there. I'm just saying he has had above average talent lately also.

It is an interesting debate.  I don't know where you get your information that he is getting a different type of player.  I think nearly every parent chooses PA because of academics and always has.  I don't know why his players would be any different than the players before he became the coach.

It may not be any different than before, it seems to me that years ago there were big name coaches at central and catholic high , I could be wrong but I think at those times the top players attended there and PA wasn't as attractive as it seems to be now.

the voice


PA Dad

Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 10:29:42 pm
Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 09:59:53 pm
Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 09:50:04 pm
I'm not accusing any private school of any wrong. Just in the case of PA there's no doubt they have had at least recently more D1 players on the field than most other 5a schools. Hence they beat the brakes off them. Jimmys and Joes!!
When you have more talent you are going to win more.

I'm sorry if some of read this as me being negative about PA , I'm simply stating what appears to be obvious,  if it were a public school , it may have a three year run then most likely a drop off , they reload and surge on.

I didn't take your comments as being negative to PA.  I understand your argument.  We've debated this several times on this board and we'll never come to a concensus on it.

Well I'm glad to read that. I certainly don't mean to sound that way. Some posters probably just hit a nerve from time to time. I agree we won't agree. And it's not anything wrong or unfair with how they win. Hats off to them. I just don't like reading that they aren't anymore talented but yet they mercy rule most teams. They are in my opinion a great combination of talent and coaching which equals success.

I'll take a combination of talent and coaching anytime!

I'll repeat something I've said when this subject came up before.  I agree that PA has more talent than most 5A teams.  I don't think Kelley has taken the talent that Fair has and produced the success that he has produced.  On the other hand, I think he has done a remarkable job with the talent he has.  I guess my real argument is with those who argue that any coach could have produced the same result with PA's talent.  I just don't agree with that.

the voice

I agree to give credit where it is due. I'm fan of good coaches , he's done a great job. I think he's made the school attractive to eligible athletes as well. Yeah I too would take talent and coaching everyday and twice on Friday! So I guess we can agree on something! Lol

Grond

Good discussion, PA Dad and the voice: +1 each.  :)

A little background: My oldest son plays football at a D2 college in Arkansas. Not a starter, but a successful competitor. He was a walk-on.

Consequently, I have spent the last 3 years peering through rosters, trying to figure out if my son had a reasonable chance of success. A slow decent into madness.... :-*

Check out my threads in the "Recruiting" section.


PA Dad

Let me add something that maybe slightly off subject.  I get really tickled by posters that say that Kelley wins only because his scheme is hard to prepare for.  Duh?  That's the whole purpose for his scheme.  Why did Darrell Royal run the wishbone?  Maybe because no one knew how to defend it at the time?

the voice

I appreciate that.  You should be proud as I'm sure you are. I've always told mine , you can't be the biggest or the fastest , but you can be the hardest worker on the team and that's a great thing to be.

I'll look for your posts

PA Dad

Quote from: Grond on December 11, 2015, 10:56:41 pm
Good discussion, PA Dad and the voice: +1 each.  :)

A little background: My oldest son plays football at a D2 college in Arkansas. Not a starter, but a successful competitor. He was a walk-on.

Consequently, I have spent the last 3 years peering through rosters, trying to figure out if my son had a reasonable chance of success. A slow decent into madness.... :-*

Check out my threads in the "Recruiting" section.

I give the voice +1 too.  He can engage in a rational discussion without calling names or making assumptions with no factual basis, which is unusual on this board!

the voice

Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 10:59:08 pm
Let me add something that maybe slightly off subject.  I get really tickled by posters that say that Kelley wins only because his scheme is hard to prepare for.  Duh?  That's the whole purpose for his scheme.  Why did Darrell Royal run the wishbone?  Maybe because no one knew how to defend it at the time?
Good point , it does take time to prepare for , but preparing doesn't mean success either. There's a way to beat every scheme , just takes execution. I get tired of hearing those that lose claiming you win because you cheated , for whatever reason. If you win its not because you're better or executed your plan , you cheated. Lol
More to your point , those that line up in various formations for PAT , they wind up kicking most times but you gotta spend time defending all scenarios in practice just in case

PA Dad

Quote from: the voice on December 11, 2015, 11:08:57 pm
Quote from: PA Dad on December 11, 2015, 10:59:08 pm
Let me add something that maybe slightly off subject.  I get really tickled by posters that say that Kelley wins only because his scheme is hard to prepare for.  Duh?  That's the whole purpose for his scheme.  Why did Darrell Royal run the wishbone?  Maybe because no one knew how to defend it at the time?
Good point , it does take time to prepare for , but preparing doesn't mean success either. There's a way to beat every scheme , just takes execution. I get tired of hearing those that lose claiming you win because you cheated , for whatever reason. If you win its not because you're better or executed your plan , you cheated. Lol
More to your point , those that line up in various formations for PAT , they wind up kicking most times but you gotta spend time defending all scenarios in practice just in case

I agree and I think we're saying the same thing.  The posters that say Kelley wins because his scheme is hard to prepare for seem to be implying that he's cheating.

I'm going off subject again, but can Morrilton beat Alma for the conference championship next year?  And is there any other team that can compete in the West next year?

the voice

I'm not sure what Alma brings back , they have historically been at the top of the conference. I read what track star wrote about them.  If the devil dogs are healthy with the returning skill players and new additions , yeah I think they can win the west. We are one of the smallest in 5a , and with Alma coming down I expect them to be one of the largest, at least number wise. Should be a great game.

Intelligentsia

Said it before and I'll say it again:  Success at P.A. is nearly all a combination of four factors: 
1. Commitment - School/Patrons/Parents/Students
2. Talent - A couple of exceptional athletes, a few very good athletes, and several good average players.
3.  Coaching - No doubt a very good staff with a somewhat unique overall set of strategies.
4.  Socio-economic status - The straw that tips the scale from a very good to exceptional program.  This is the issue least discussed but is THE difference maker, year in and year out.  There are numerous advantages of having a team almost exclusively middle to upper income level families.

It is a combination of ALL four factors above that set P.A. apart.  Folks who discount the socio-economic factor likely know little about the impact of poverty on studnet athletes.  And yes, other private schools don't deal with the poverty issue, but they are obviously not on the P.A. level in the other three factors.  IMO, you could place a few other top tier Arkansas coaches at P.A. and they would have the same level of success.  P.A. was set to excel when Kelly arrived, but add his ability to an increase in commitment which accompanied his arrival, and you have the program you see today. 

PercussionMan

I'll thrown in my two cents....for whatever it's worth....and I know it has probably been said more than once before.  I do agree with "the voice" in some ways....I think PA has superior talent in some areas on their team, and probably overall most years, than the average 5A school.  As far as Coach Kelley, love him or hate him, his "scheme" works....and it usually works pretty well.  I think he and his staff do a superb job of preparing each week....practicing the same things over and over and over (and if they keep working, why depart from them??).  I think they do one thing exceptionally well....regardless of how high their talent level is, they coach those players up....those players respond....not some of them, but ALL OF THEM....they buy into the system COMPLETELY!!  I think that's part of what makes them pretty well disciplined on the field.  It does help to have 2-3 or more D1 prospects and some D2 prospects on the team each year as well....that causes others on the field around them to play up a level and play very well together as a whole.

On another point, I don't agree with running up the score when a game is over, especially like at the end of the championship game against McClellan....sure made it look a lot less close than it actually was.  But, heck, they don't stop until the clock hits 00:00.

I don't like PA....never have, never will....glad Morrilton beat them at their place in 2013.  BUT, like them or not, they do what it takes to win....and usually win big.  I figure as long as Kelley is there, they will continue to do well each year.

bleudog

Quote from: Intelligentsia on December 12, 2015, 10:53:03 am
Said it before and I'll say it again:  Success at P.A. is nearly all a combination of four factors: 
1. Commitment - School/Patrons/Parents/Students
2. Talent - A couple of exceptional athletes, a few very good athletes, and several good average players.
3.  Coaching - No doubt a very good staff with a somewhat unique overall set of strategies.
4.  Socio-economic status - The straw that tips the scale from a very good to exceptional program.  This is the issue least discussed but is THE difference maker, year in and year out.  There are numerous advantages of having a team almost exclusively middle to upper income level families.

It is a combination of ALL four factors above that set P.A. apart.  Folks who discount the socio-economic factor likely know little about the impact of poverty on studnet athletes.  And yes, other private schools don't deal with the poverty issue, but they are obviously not on the P.A. level in the other three factors.  IMO, you could place a few other top tier Arkansas coaches at P.A. and they would have the same level of success.  P.A. was set to excel when Kelly arrived, but add his ability to an increase in commitment which accompanied his arrival, and you have the program you see today. 

I agree with your #4.  Kid A wants a car and has to get a job that limits the kid's ability to participate in extra curricular activities.  Kid B wants a car and gets a check from Daddy and never misses an extra curricular beat.  Kid B's biggest worry might getting to private instructions outside school in the kid's extra curricular activity of choice on time.  Kid A's biggest worry might be about getting three meals a day or not getting shot.


I'd add a #5:  Geography - How many people live within a 15-20 mile campus radius of the private school compared to how many people live within a 15-20 mile campus radius in the public schools which are in the same classification?  When there is an administration emphasis on building a dominant team, size of talent pool can be a huge advantage.

Grond

Quote from: Lionheart88 on December 11, 2015, 02:31:34 pm
Quote from: Grond on December 11, 2015, 10:55:58 am
Quote from: Grizzlyfan on December 11, 2015, 09:46:14 am
When you say D2 are you talking about true D2? or FCS (D1AA)?  UCA is FCS.  Most all the other small colleges are DII or DIII.

The colleges I looked at were as follows:

University of Arkansas (D1 - FBS)
Arkansas State (D1 - FBS)

University of Central Arkansas (D1 - FCS)
University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff (D1 - FCS)

Arkansas Tech (D2)
Harding University (D2)
Henderson State (D2)
Ouachita Baptist (D2)
Southern Arkansas (D2)
University of Arkansas at Monticello (D2)

D1 - FBS colleges have 85 scholarships.
D1 - FCS colleges have 65 scholarships, and they can be split up.
D2 colleges have 36 scholarships, and they can be split up (in other words, coaches can give partial scholarships)
NAIA - colleges have 24 scholarships, and they can be split up.
D3 have no scholarships

Lyons is the only NAIA football college in Arkansas, and their program is only about 3 years old.

Hendrix is D3 (or DIII), and gives no athletic scholarships.

I left Hendrix and Lyons out of my analysis because they are the only colleges of their class in the state.
Why does it matter that Lyon and Hendrix are the only ones of their classification in the state?  Would you leave off Fayetteville if ASU was FCS?

This is a good question that kind of got lost in the discussion, and deserves an explanation from me.

SHORT ANSWER: Hendrix and Lyon are expensive colleges ($30,000+/year, compared to $7,000/year at most Arkansas state colleges) with high academic standards. To play football at these colleges, you have to: A) be very smart (25+ ACT); B) have access to money; and C) be a GOOD football player. Since other factors besides talent determine whether a kid can play at these schools, I felt it was inappropriate to include them.

But since you asked...... ::)

LYON: Has 1 player from PA.

HENDRIX: Has 2 from Bentonville, 1 from PA, 1 from Wynne.

Remember:
- Hendrix is a D3 college, which means there are NO ATHLETIC SCHOLARSHIPS. "Pay to play."
- Lyon is NAIA, which has 24 ATHLETIC SCHOLARSHIPS. They have a roster of 100 players, but the list doesn't tell who is on scholarship.

These are good colleges, but you gotta have a money-tree to play football at them.  :-\

Fox 16 Arkansas Fox 24 Arkansas