Rivals100 Five-Star Challenge survey of players

[NUance]

Rivals100 Five-Star Challenge survey of players

by Steve Megargee, National College Columnist, June 27, 2012

1. WHAT COLLEGE THAT YOU'VE VISITED HAD THE BEST CAMPUS ATMOSPHERE?

USC: 10 votes

Texas: 9

Alabama: 8

The buzz: Although participants in the survey were granted anonymity, many of the committed prospects naturally went ahead and picked the school they plan on attending. It's also worth noting that USC had more verbal commitments at the camp (eight) than any other school. "On gameday, I haven't found anything better [than USC]," one participant said. And what did voters like about Texas? "It was more of a family atmosphere to me," one Texas supporter said. There was plenty of variety in the answers, as 33 different schools received at least one vote. Many voters also couldn't limit themselves to one school and picked multiple campuses.

2. WHAT SCHOOL THAT YOU'VE VISITED HAD THE BEST FACILITIES?

Alabama: 10 votes

Texas: 7

Georgia: 5

Tennessee: 5

The buzz: This was another topic in which prospects couldn't reach a clear consensus.

3. WHO MEANS MORE WHEN YOU'RE MAKING YOUR COLLEGE DECISION - A SCHOOL'S HEAD COACH OR YOUR POTENTIAL POSITION COACH?

Position coach: 79 percent

Head coach: 21 percent

The buzz: This one was a landslide. Almost four-fifths of the respondents said the assistant who coaches their particular position meant more to them than a school's head coach. And they pretty much all gave the same reason. "He's the one I'm going to be spending the most time with, compared to the head coach," one player said.

<snip>

12. WHO'S THE MAIN PERSON YOU SEEK FOR ADVICE ON CHOOSING A COLLEGE?

Father: 22 votes

High school head coach: 18

Both parents collectively: 13

Family member aside from parents: 10

Mother: 8

Mentor or coach other than the high school head coach: 8

The buzz: A number of recruits couldn't limit themselves to just one choice in this category, but nearly every respondent mentioned either a family member or a coach. The few exceptions generally mentioned God or a clergyman.

LINK

Interesting answers. Even though the results are a bit skewed towards Alabama, UTerus, and other top recruiting schools. Since that's where many of the players taking this poll have already committed to go.

 

[kchusker_chris]

^ the position coach thing is very interesting. especially since we don't really recruit that way. we recruit more based on territories than position - though the position coach is involved he's not always the primary recruiter. not sure I agree w/ that approach after seeing this.

also might be an indication of why our o-line has been so crappy (had to throw a barney dig in there)

 

[fro daddy]

I think you left out something that is very telling and goes against everything most fans claim

What's the most overrated factor that some recruits consider when they're picking a college?

Winning tradition: 19 votes

Jerseys/uniforms/school colors: 9

Facilities: 7

The buzz: Surprised? So were we.

 

These results don't mean that winning is unimportant to the players who participated in this poll. They just have so much confidence in their own abilities that they believe they can win anywhere, not just at a school that has plenty of championship experience.

 

"There's only one school that can win a championship," one player said. "I don't look at it as what team's won championships. Any year, any team can win a championship."

 

History apparently doesn't matter all that much to many of these prospects.

 

"You can go off the past, but you're not the past," one player said. "You're the future."

 

These guys also have short memories.

 

When one player talked about people "living in the past" about particular schools, he didn't refer to Notre Dame, Florida State or any other renowned programs that haven't contended for a national title in more than a decade. He referred to teams that had won titles much more recently.

 

"People might live in the past about a school like USC because they think about the [2004] season, or LSU and Florida from [2007] or [2008],'' he said.

 

A couple of players specifically mentioned Oregon when they talked about prospects who might say they pick a school based primarily on its uniforms. This survey also might raise some questions about whether all those recent multi-million-dollar facility upgrades really have that much of an impact on a team's recruiting.

 

Plenty of other topics also came up in this category. Women, playing time and a school's name recognition received four votes each.

 

"Everyone says, 'The girls are here, the girls are there,' '' one player said. "You're going to find girls anywhere. That's not something you should base your college education on."

 

Credit one prospect for a brutally honest response that raised the question many readers also might be asking. If a school's academic strength really means so much to players, why don't the BCS rankings bear more resemblance to the U.S. News rankings?

 

That prospect wasn't dismissing the importance of academics. He just thought some prospects were disingenuous when they mentioned academics as their main reason for picking a school.

 

"When people say academics [is their main consideration], if you really cared about academics that much, you'd go to Vanderbilt or Harvard or something," he said

 

[RockyMountainOySker]

I think you left out something that is very telling and goes against everything most fans claim

What's the most overrated factor that some recruits consider when they're picking a college?

Winning tradition: 19 votes

Jerseys/uniforms/school colors: 9

Facilities: 7

The buzz: Surprised? So were we.

These results don't mean that winning is unimportant to the players who participated in this poll. They just have so much confidence in their own abilities that they believe they can win anywhere, not just at a school that has plenty of championship experience.

"There's only one school that can win a championship," one player said. "I don't look at it as what team's won championships. Any year, any team can win a championship."

History apparently doesn't matter all that much to many of these prospects.

"You can go off the past, but you're not the past," one player said. "You're the future."

These guys also have short memories.

When one player talked about people "living in the past" about particular schools, he didn't refer to Notre Dame, Florida State or any other renowned programs that haven't contended for a national title in more than a decade. He referred to teams that had won titles much more recently.

"People might live in the past about a school like USC because they think about the [2004] season, or LSU and Florida from [2007] or [2008],'' he said.

A couple of players specifically mentioned Oregon when they talked about prospects who might say they pick a school based primarily on its uniforms. This survey also might raise some questions about whether all those recent multi-million-dollar facility upgrades really have that much of an impact on a team's recruiting.

Plenty of other topics also came up in this category. Women, playing time and a school's name recognition received four votes each.

"Everyone says, 'The girls are here, the girls are there,' '' one player said. "You're going to find girls anywhere. That's not something you should base your college education on."

Credit one prospect for a brutally honest response that raised the question many readers also might be asking. If a school's academic strength really means so much to players, why don't the BCS rankings bear more resemblance to the U.S. News rankings?

That prospect wasn't dismissing the importance of academics. He just thought some prospects were disingenuous when they mentioned academics as their main reason for picking a school.

"When people say academics [is their main consideration], if you really cared about academics that much, you'd go to Vanderbilt or Harvard or something," he said

Missouri doesn't have a thing to worry about them!

 

[fro daddy]

Missouri doesn't have a thing to worry about them!

Thats right! If they arnt worried about things that happed 4,5 or 6 years ago, you can bet they dont give two poos about things that happened 17 years ago

And if they dont care about things that have happened, they you know they dont care about things that have not happened. Yeah us!! chuckleshuffle :lol:

 

[NUance]

These guys also have short memories.

When one player talked about people "living in the past" about particular schools, he didn't refer to Notre Dame, Florida State or any other renowned programs that haven't contended for a national title in more than a decade. He referred to teams that had won titles much more recently.

"People might live in the past about a school like USC because they think about the [2004] season, or LSU and Florida from [2007] or [2008],'' he said.

I thought this was interesting. To an 18-year-old guy, what USC did in 2004 is old news--history to old to be relevant. So I guess our run in the 90s is like the Neanderthal era. :lol:

 

[GSG]

These guys also have short memories.

When one player talked about people "living in the past" about particular schools, he didn't refer to Notre Dame, Florida State or any other renowned programs that haven't contended for a national title in more than a decade. He referred to teams that had won titles much more recently.

"People might live in the past about a school like USC because they think about the [2004] season, or LSU and Florida from [2007] or [2008],'' he said.

I thought this was interesting. To an 18-year-old guy, what USC did in 2004 is old news--history to old to be relevant. So I guess our run in the 90s is like the Neanderthal era. :lol:

They probably didn't even have helmets!

Or electricity!

And the pigskin was just a whole pig!

 

[NUance]

These guys also have short memories.

When one player talked about people "living in the past" about particular schools, he didn't refer to Notre Dame, Florida State or any other renowned programs that haven't contended for a national title in more than a decade. He referred to teams that had won titles much more recently.

"People might live in the past about a school like USC because they think about the [2004] season, or LSU and Florida from [2007] or [2008],'' he said.

I thought this was interesting. To an 18-year-old guy, what USC did in 2004 is old news--history to old to be relevant. So I guess our run in the 90s is like the Neanderthal era. :lol:

They probably didn't even have helmets!

Or electricity!

And the pigskin was just a whole pig!

Seriously. An 18-year old recruit probably doesn't distinguish between our 3 trophy run in the 90s and Minnesota's pre-WWII championships. :lol: