Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

# of players playing collegiate ball by state

Ouch!!!! Good Find. Colorado produces more HS football players than either Washington or Arizona with a smaller population base. Very Interesting.
 
This looks a lot worst if you take out the # of walkons (they counted every guy on every roster).

We probably have about 10-15 D1 prospects per year who receive scholarships. Worst, we have a population that is from "elsewhere". So our guys tend to first of all not necessarily all grow up as Buff fans. There's a lot of Corn fans living in Colorado, not to mention Jayhawks, Gophers, Badgers, Fightin' Illini, etc. We are a state that doesn't have really deep roots like those to the east. Everyone here is from somewhere else. Go to a Rockies/Brewers game. I think there's more fans rooting for the Brewers at Coors than in Milwaukee!

Also - we seem to have an inordinate number of D1 prospects who catch the eye of Stanford and the like.

2010 Colorado kids with offers to Stanford:
Martin (Cal), Hinder (Cal), Colter (Northwestern), Bonnell (Stanford), Hemschoot (Stanford), Spond (Notre Dame). My point? Stanford recruits everywhere in order to find kids with the criteria they need to accept them. It's a top-notch private institution. I don't think it's a coincidence that 6 of the top players in the state had Stanford offers.

Colorado kids seem to be pretty high IQ and have no problem choosing one of those top academic institutions over CU. I don't think that will change anytime soon. We will continue to lose kids to those institutions and we will continue to have issues where in-state kids are Wolverine fans, or whatever. That just means we need to look harder in Texas in my opinion. Or move to the Pac-10 (which I prefer).
 
Buffaholic-

I don't know why the State of Colorado would produce any more walk-ons than any other state. Therefore, I've got to call BS here and with your assertion that Colorado only produces 10-15 D1 prospects on an annual basis. I've thought this same thing before, so I'm not pointing fingers, but the numbers don't lie.

I do agree that the state has an inordinate number of children of transplants, and this makes it difficult to recruit kids to CU when they haven't necessarily been fed CU from the baby spoon.
 
I think it's saying Colorado produces more prospects per capita than Missouri...not more overall prospects.
 
My theory (and I have no facts to back it up) is that Colorado is a huge football hungry state. Denver Broncos are king. Period. End of story. The average kid here grows up thinking he's going to play for the Bronco's. He's also middle class, and college-bound. And he's not as athletic as his counterparts in Florida (in general). For every Danny Spond, there's 400 others who have the dream, but lack a bit on the athletic side.

Add it up: college bound, can afford to go to college, wants to play football. Badly. Just my observation having come from a very different environment myself where I needed a scholarship to go to college, or I would have been working at the docks....
 
actually, and surprisingly, it says it produces more players (not prospects) per capita and overall, than Missouri.
 
BuffMania said:
I think it's saying Colorado produces more prospects per capita than Missouri...not more overall prospects.
Click to expand...

Both actually.

Colorado - 194 rostered (ranked 20th), 1.13/1,000 (ranked 18th)
Washington - 184 rosterd (#21), 0.73/1,000 (31st)
Missouri - 174 rostered (#23), 0.81/1,000 (30th)
Arizona - 168 rostered (#24), 0.73/1,000 (36th)
 
I think having other multiple FBS teams in the state definitely helps the total number...instate walk-ons.
 
BuffMania said:
I think having other multiple FBS teams in the state definitely helps the total number...instate walk-ons.
Click to expand...

Colorado really only has two FBS schools (CU and CSU), as Air Force is a national service academy and "walking on" there isn't a given. Arizona, New Mexico, Idaho, Kansas, Washington, and Oregon all have two schools. Utah, however, has three FBS schools and their numbers do seem to be inflated on the "per capita" basis, ranking 12th overall.

On the flip-side: then that logic should apply to Nebraska, but in reverse. However, that is not the case as the state still ranks 9th in per capita players, despite having only one FBS school.

This issue makes Hawai'i being #1 all the more outstanding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top