Colin Cowherd brought this up a few mornings ago. the basic premise is that teams like ND and Stanford will never win with dominant defenses because of their academic standards.
what is the connection, you ask? the smartest players tend to play on offense. the top 5 average wonderlic scores, by position, come from the offensive side of the ball (QB, center, tight end, rt tackle, left guard), and it is not until #6 that the first defensive position shows up (safety).
so, the belief is that schools with lower academic standards (TCU was used as an example) are going to more easily build top defenses because many of the top defensive players tend to be....um, less academically gifted. teams like Stanford, ND, Northwestern need to win with strong offense because it is easier to find top notch athletes who qualify academically on that side of the ball.
i dont know if i agree or not, but it is an interesting theory. i wonder how weis's highly rated recruiting classes breaks down in terms what % of those classes are on what side of the ball.
what is the connection, you ask? the smartest players tend to play on offense. the top 5 average wonderlic scores, by position, come from the offensive side of the ball (QB, center, tight end, rt tackle, left guard), and it is not until #6 that the first defensive position shows up (safety).
so, the belief is that schools with lower academic standards (TCU was used as an example) are going to more easily build top defenses because many of the top defensive players tend to be....um, less academically gifted. teams like Stanford, ND, Northwestern need to win with strong offense because it is easier to find top notch athletes who qualify academically on that side of the ball.
i dont know if i agree or not, but it is an interesting theory. i wonder how weis's highly rated recruiting classes breaks down in terms what % of those classes are on what side of the ball.
Last edited: