A disadvantage big time. How many championships does BYU have with all there returned missionaries?? How many BCS bowls have they been at?? Saying returned missionaries is an advantage you would think that having 80% would help you win over teams with 0....
Ed - 9 years ago
A 6'5" O-lineman at 22 or at 24 is the same. Consider this. The older guy hasn't played a single minute more either in practice or a game. He's been away from the game for two years, remember. Maturity? Where? The "structure" of the game requires certain discipline and compliance that both players must adhere to.The older guy isn't getting to bed any earlier or lifting more weights than the younger. The practice structure makes all players equal. So, you have the 22 year old that is 6'5" and 310 lbs and so is the 24 year old. Both have played and practiced exactly the same amount of time. Where's the advantage.
Blaine - 9 years ago
It is definitely a disadvantage, and the coaches agree. To find the answer, is all you need to do is watch how the out of state coaches handle kids that want to go on a mission. They avoid the kids that want to go on missions unless they are good enough that they are willing to deal with the mission. If it truly was an advantage, these coaches would be encouraging these kids to go on missions and come back to their school so that they could benefit from the advantage. But that NEVER happens. Instead the elite programs will not hold a scholarship for you unless you are a 4 star athlete or better. If the "More mature is better" argument truly were an advantage, these kids would leave as two and three star athletes, and come back and play like 4 star athletes. But that just doesn't happen. Even when you look at BYU's athletes, the best athletes to come out of BYU are nearly all non-missionary athletes. Think Steve Young, Ty Detmer, Robbie Bosco, Jim McMahon, Marc Wilson, Jason Buck for starters. How about more recently Kyle Van Noy & Ziggy Ansah. Looking at last years stars on BYU's team, the best players were Taysom Hill, Jamall Williams, Jordan Leslie, Cody Hoffman, Alani Fua, Robertson Daniel, Zack Stout, Mitch Matthews, and Bronson Kaufusi. Of these, only Taysom Hill and Mitch Matthews served missions that I know of.
Exceptions include Dennis Pitta, Austin Collie, John Denney, Spencer Hadley, Dallas Reynolds, Daniel Sorensen, and Uani Unga. There is no question that you can serve a mission and still come back and be a great player, but the break from college football certainly inhibits a player much more often than it helps a player. If that were not true, every coach in America would be trying to send their players on missions or peace corps.
I am amused at how so many opposing coaches talk up how much of an advantage BYU has because of the returned missionaries. Yet many of these same coaches have withdrawn offers from players once they realized they were determined to serve a mission. Would they have done this if serving a mission were truly an advantage? Actions speak louder than words!! I don't understand why is this even a debate???
Richard Budge - 9 years ago
Missions cur several ways--some positive, some negative. Positive: Young men know how BYU treats RMs. and may sign with BYU due to more certainty. RMs are more mature and generally mean less trouble off the field. To some degree, eligibility timing may be skewed to assure a more balanced depth chart. RMs will have a tendency to want to return to a BYU-type environment.
Negatives: The really good players may be enticed to another program because they are not now tied to their LOI. Mission planning is far more difficult for coaches to handle for scholarship purposes. Guys come home soft, less motivated, wanting to get married, etc. Missions often have an effect on an athlete's attractiveness in the pro's due to older age.
Overall: It is a slight advantage for the school and a slight disadvantage for the RM...careerwise.
A disadvantage big time. How many championships does BYU have with all there returned missionaries?? How many BCS bowls have they been at?? Saying returned missionaries is an advantage you would think that having 80% would help you win over teams with 0....
A 6'5" O-lineman at 22 or at 24 is the same. Consider this. The older guy hasn't played a single minute more either in practice or a game. He's been away from the game for two years, remember. Maturity? Where? The "structure" of the game requires certain discipline and compliance that both players must adhere to.The older guy isn't getting to bed any earlier or lifting more weights than the younger. The practice structure makes all players equal. So, you have the 22 year old that is 6'5" and 310 lbs and so is the 24 year old. Both have played and practiced exactly the same amount of time. Where's the advantage.
It is definitely a disadvantage, and the coaches agree. To find the answer, is all you need to do is watch how the out of state coaches handle kids that want to go on a mission. They avoid the kids that want to go on missions unless they are good enough that they are willing to deal with the mission. If it truly was an advantage, these coaches would be encouraging these kids to go on missions and come back to their school so that they could benefit from the advantage. But that NEVER happens. Instead the elite programs will not hold a scholarship for you unless you are a 4 star athlete or better. If the "More mature is better" argument truly were an advantage, these kids would leave as two and three star athletes, and come back and play like 4 star athletes. But that just doesn't happen. Even when you look at BYU's athletes, the best athletes to come out of BYU are nearly all non-missionary athletes. Think Steve Young, Ty Detmer, Robbie Bosco, Jim McMahon, Marc Wilson, Jason Buck for starters. How about more recently Kyle Van Noy & Ziggy Ansah. Looking at last years stars on BYU's team, the best players were Taysom Hill, Jamall Williams, Jordan Leslie, Cody Hoffman, Alani Fua, Robertson Daniel, Zack Stout, Mitch Matthews, and Bronson Kaufusi. Of these, only Taysom Hill and Mitch Matthews served missions that I know of.
Exceptions include Dennis Pitta, Austin Collie, John Denney, Spencer Hadley, Dallas Reynolds, Daniel Sorensen, and Uani Unga. There is no question that you can serve a mission and still come back and be a great player, but the break from college football certainly inhibits a player much more often than it helps a player. If that were not true, every coach in America would be trying to send their players on missions or peace corps.
I am amused at how so many opposing coaches talk up how much of an advantage BYU has because of the returned missionaries. Yet many of these same coaches have withdrawn offers from players once they realized they were determined to serve a mission. Would they have done this if serving a mission were truly an advantage? Actions speak louder than words!! I don't understand why is this even a debate???
Missions cur several ways--some positive, some negative. Positive: Young men know how BYU treats RMs. and may sign with BYU due to more certainty. RMs are more mature and generally mean less trouble off the field. To some degree, eligibility timing may be skewed to assure a more balanced depth chart. RMs will have a tendency to want to return to a BYU-type environment.
Negatives: The really good players may be enticed to another program because they are not now tied to their LOI. Mission planning is far more difficult for coaches to handle for scholarship purposes. Guys come home soft, less motivated, wanting to get married, etc. Missions often have an effect on an athlete's attractiveness in the pro's due to older age.
Overall: It is a slight advantage for the school and a slight disadvantage for the RM...careerwise.