Posted: 09/18/2012 3:59 PM
There is a lot posted on this site about the relative strengths of the various Juco conferences. Some thoughts:
I’d like to hear from any Mississippi, California, Arizona, or Iowa readers who might log on to this site.
A conference isn’t better because there is something in the water in that locale. There are good coaches all over. Talent makes the difference. On that score logic should tell us that the Texas conference should be the best. There are 23 million people in Texas and only 5 football Jucos. High school football is big in Texas and there is probably a positive disproportion of talent in that population. They have 85 man rosters and some out of state players. What is the scholarship situation? Kansas does not give full scholarships and the ones they do give must be paid by donations and not tax dollars.
Kansas has 8 football Jucos and 3 million people. They supplement that with 12-15 out of state players which is the only way the Kansas Jucos can compete with the Texas schools. Still, there is no logic or reason that should support the Kansas league being as strong top to bottom as the Texas schools. Only the schools with resources and tradition that can recruit the better out of state talent can compete year after year. Kansas gets most of their out of state players from the southeast states that have little or no Juco football (Florida, Ga, Carolinas, ) That top talent is often very, very good and is why the top Kansas schools are as good as the top Texas schools but the bottom ones aren’t. The interleague play and bowl games bear that out.
Mississippi has more football talent than Kansas but they have 14 teams to divide into their 3 million people. They have out of state players but not the 12 to 15 allowed in the Kansas league. However, I understand that in Mississippi there are full scholarships. Is that so? If so it would also make a difference since Kansas does not give full scholarships. I know you don’t see many out of state players in the Kansas league from Mississippi or Texas. If Mississippi concentrates their talent in a few schools they should be pretty salty, but then what would that do to the strength of the league overall? We don’t know because the Mississippi schools don’t play an annual matchup like the Kansas and Texas schools do. Juco football is expensive and the Mississippi schools probably don’t play other schools for financial reasons. Nonetheless, that leaves them with few legitimate bragging rights.
There doesn’t seem to be a strength difference when the better western teams play the Kansas or Texas schools in bowl games. However, that doesn’t tell us much about the middle and bottom of the leagues. That would depend on how many players they allow on roster, what the scholarship situation is. I don’t know. I know the Arizona teams I have seen play against Hutch in bowl games looked good and very well disciplined and coached. When Hutch had better talent it won, when it didn’t the Arizona team won.
What is the scholarship situation in the Iowa , Minnesota and eastern schools? That will give some basis in logic and reason to evaluate the relative strengths of the leagues. In the meantime we have to look only at the limited games we have. It is obvious that Iowa Western is very good this year. The league seems to be on the upswing. However, resources and scholarships will write the story. Iowa Western scrimmaged Hutch and has scheduled Trinity, New Mexico Military, and Georgia Military. That gives them bragging rights. It is unfortunate the better Mississippi schools don’t at least schedule one game against a traditionally better team in another conference. It doesn’t mean they are avoiding them, just that it is unfortunate for comparison purposes.
California? There are 38 million people out there but 71 football Jucos. Do they have a lot of out of state players? Scholarships? There has to be a lot of talent there but is it spread thin? Is it concentrated in a few powerhouses? Since they are their own closed system there is no comparison with the rest of the country other by way of actual games. Comparison has to come through logic and reason. Math would tell you that there is no way the typical California team should compete with the typical Texas team. Of course, there may be something in the water.
Posted: 09/18/2012 8:36 PM
Posted: 09/18/2012 9:05 PM
Posted: 09/19/2012 10:13 AM
Posted: 09/19/2012 10:22 AM
redraven1 wrote: Very well put. I have coached in the Kansas League, California (Nor Cal) and Mississippi League as well as recruited the Illinois/Iowa, Ariz/Utah and Texas leagues. My thoughts are: in 1990's and early 2000's Kansas Jayhawk was clearly dominant. Butler (Still dominating), Coffeyville, Hutch and Garden City were top 10 programs. Ft Scott was up and down, Dodge, Indy Highland Struggled. I believe over all- Miss is pretty much top to bottom the best. They give Full Scholarships, have a solid instate pool of talent that HAS TO GO TO JUCO!. California is a very close if not equal. But it shoudl be broken into at least 2 divisions: North and South. Unfair due to sheer number sof schools but.. Calif is very good talent pool, I think in general the coaching isnt as good as Kansas, Texas, Miss and Arizona leagues. But.... there are some awesome coaches there. Kansas overall is very very well coached. Facilities are getting better. Instate talent pool is very over recruited due to the JUCO's, NAIA's. MIAA etc.. all recruiting same kids plus the W/on programs at KState and KU. TExas JUCOS, are very well coached, pretty good facilities, good talent pool but most dont go to JUCO. Good talent top to bottom but tend to be very even and beat each othe rup so no chance fr national Championships usally. Ariz league-The top 3-4 are very good the rest are not so good. terrible local talent, but can have 60 + out of state. Terrible faclilties coaching for top 3-4 great not so good at others. Miss- Facilites for top programs are best in nation. Mutli Million dollar stadiums, wt rooms etc.. although Coffeyville, Hutch an dbutler have similar in kansas just Coffeyville has stadiums like Miss. Illinois league is down to one school. Iowa had 1 very dominant program and rest very medicore. Minnesota is second level .
Posted: 09/19/2012 1:30 PM
Butler79 wrote: "Just Coffeyville has stadiums like Miss."???? Maybe you've been under a rock, but Butler's new $12 million dollar stadium has to be the class of the NJCAA. If there's a better one, I have yet to see it.
Posted: 09/19/2012 3:17 PM
Posted: 09/19/2012 7:30 PM
Posted: 09/20/2012 11:42 AM
bandrat wrote: Grizzly, I wonder if the other turf teams will play better at Butler now?
Last edited 09/20/2012 11:43 AM by Butler79
Posted: 09/22/2012 10:22 AM
Posted: 09/22/2012 1:02 PM
I thought the Fort is in the middle of some turf as well. Im not sure if they are getting a new stadium but I thought they were getting some turf. Anyone have any insite???
Posted: 09/22/2012 3:45 PM
Posted: 09/24/2012 7:53 PM
Copyright © 2013
and Scout.com. All rights reserved. This website is an unofficial independent source of news and information, and is not affiliated with any school, team, or league.
MSN PrivacyLegalAdvertise on MSNAbout our adsRSS
© 2012 Microsoft|