Iguana's chart was a real eye-opener.  As noted in OR's post, most guys reach B- in their freshman year; B+ is the most common by the end of their Soph year.  But the GPA's and WE's of the players that reach those benchmarks vary widely.   In my brief study, two guys with a 3.7 GPA and WE's of 86 and 58 went from B-, B- to B+, B+.    But so did a guy with a 2.6 GPA and a 28 WE.  Maybe the guy with the 2.6 WE barely made it to B+ B+ in the last game of the season, while the two guys at 3.7 with the good WE's already have 200 minutes banked towards A-.   Don't know.  Maybe the guys with the higher GPA will end their careers at A, or maybe even A+ for a few games, while the laggard student peaks at A-.  But--and this is a big but--is the difference between an A and an A- on offense and defense quantifiable in any way?  And what if you adopted the opposite strategy--keeping your guys in the 2.8-3.0 range, giving you a few extra points to pump into a player's areas of high potential, usually LP and PE?   Learning a lot from this discussion--which is what this forum is all about.

Its the high school GPA that matters for IQ purposes, not the accumulated college GPA,

Posted by arssanguinus on 11/6/2010 10:31:00 AM (view original):
Its the high school GPA that matters for IQ purposes, not the accumulated college GPA,

yep - ted - this really is not the pot of gold you are looking for, pretty much turn the crank, rote, 20 minutes per day yields X and 25 minutes per day yields Y, there is no smoking gun to speak of in terms of GPA / WE

Posted by oldresorter on 11/6/2010 12:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 11/6/2010 10:31:00 AM (view original):
Its the high school GPA that matters for IQ purposes, not the accumulated college GPA,

yep - ted - this really is not the pot of gold you are looking for, pretty much turn the crank, rote, 20 minutes per day yields X and 25 minutes per day yields Y, there is no smoking gun to speak of in terms of GPA / WE

OK, so we are saying you can't make a player smarter by building up his GPA in college?  That you just maintain them at 2.6-2.8, where they won't be vulnerable to ineligibility, and stick the extra SH points into a skill in which they have upside?   That we should place more emphasis on recruiting guys with good HS GPA's because if you recruit a 2.5 guy and build him up to over 3, he will still learn only at a 2.5 rate?   Needs more study--will have to figure out how best to approach it.   Obviously the info is available, except for how many minutes a given coach allots to his or her sets, and the HS GPA for Sophs and above.  

Precisely.  

Bump

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/4/2010 11:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pablo_ohio on 11/4/2010 9:54:00 PM (view original):
This is hardly concrete data but I have a 86 WE player on my Smith team who is part of a 6 man class, currently 9 games into their junior season, who is still only at B+ in my offensive and defensive sets when 4 of the 6 in his class hit A- in each set before postseason play in their sophomore season. I didn't recruit him as I took over the team while they were freshmen but I remember his HS GPA being sub-2.5

This, along with the results from my own recruits relative to their own GPAs, leads me to believe that work ethic has little to no bearing on learning offense and defense

You've clearly never recruited a low-WE player.  Guys with 1 or 2 WE improve their IQs very, very slowly.

No kidding. The second part of that initial post just might be the most off base statement I've seen in these forums in quite some time. Work ethic plays a major role in determining how fast or slow a player learns the O and D.

Posted by dcy0827 on 4/17/2016 3:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/4/2010 11:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pablo_ohio on 11/4/2010 9:54:00 PM (view original):
This is hardly concrete data but I have a 86 WE player on my Smith team who is part of a 6 man class, currently 9 games into their junior season, who is still only at B+ in my offensive and defensive sets when 4 of the 6 in his class hit A- in each set before postseason play in their sophomore season. I didn't recruit him as I took over the team while they were freshmen but I remember his HS GPA being sub-2.5

This, along with the results from my own recruits relative to their own GPAs, leads me to believe that work ethic has little to no bearing on learning offense and defense

You've clearly never recruited a low-WE player.  Guys with 1 or 2 WE improve their IQs very, very slowly.

No kidding. The second part of that initial post just might be the most off base statement I've seen in these forums in quite some time. Work ethic plays a major role in determining how fast or slow a player learns the O and D.

+1

+3.14159

6 year old thread, im sure we've had more off base statements than that in the last 6 years :)