GUNTERSVOL
VOL FROM BIRTH
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2017
- Messages
- 7,995
- Likes
- 10,949
My head now hurts. I had always tried to equate the number of high star guys by state PRIMARILY to a function of numbers, then of course impacted by competitiveness, facilities etc. There is some correlation between the two, but the ratios seem out of whack. These are all the July 21' population numbers for the NEW SEC and I added NC due to it's regional footprint implications.
Mathmatically FL should have 3X the star power of TN not over 9X. Do AL and LA have something in the water?
Population in millions and 4&5 stars combined in Rivals state listings. Use them cause I have easy FREE access, not an endorsement of their accuracy. Is the distribution of real athletic talent really this far askew?
TX 29.5 -- 65
FL 21.8 -- 76
GA 10.8 -- 35
NC 10.6 -- 10
TN 7.0 -- 8
MO 6.2 -- 12
SC 5.2 -- 4
AL 5.0 -- 23
LA 4.6 -- 22
KY 4.5 -- 3
OK 4.0 -- 6
AR 3.0 -- 1
MS 3.0 -- 7
Mathmatically FL should have 3X the star power of TN not over 9X. Do AL and LA have something in the water?
Population in millions and 4&5 stars combined in Rivals state listings. Use them cause I have easy FREE access, not an endorsement of their accuracy. Is the distribution of real athletic talent really this far askew?
TX 29.5 -- 65
FL 21.8 -- 76
GA 10.8 -- 35
NC 10.6 -- 10
TN 7.0 -- 8
MO 6.2 -- 12
SC 5.2 -- 4
AL 5.0 -- 23
LA 4.6 -- 22
KY 4.5 -- 3
OK 4.0 -- 6
AR 3.0 -- 1
MS 3.0 -- 7