219:, after bringing the chains in for a measurement. The minute he kicks a ball in the NFL, CFL, or even UFL, he meets point 1 of WP:ATH—and then notability is clear-cut. Even now, it's arguable that he meets point 2: what higher level of amateur football is there than the Football Bowl Subdivision? The stronger case for keeping the article, though, is that the references section shows that he meets
493:
rule for players who have reached the highest level of a sport. Brantly's status as a consensus All-Big 12 award winner and a second-team All-American go a long way to showing notability. More importantly, college football players qualify under the general notability standard if they have been the
399:
and certainly a significant college record holder, even if he doesn't ever play pro. I could even justify all FIRST team consensus All-Americans meeting WP:GNG for pretty much that reason alone. But not run-of-the-mill, or even really good, college players. As for your analogies, they are straw men.
336:
late and cut/waived at a later point in the pre-season than this guy, but would fail your analysis because they never got a solo article written up in the pre-season press. Had he been picked-up by Green Bay, the article never would have been written; had he gone to
Wisconsin or been from Madison,
559:
Graham Harrel has never played a down in the CFL yet. Brantley is a 3 time ray guy nominee, which to me seems he's notable under WP:GNG. If a guy is a three time
Heisman candidate, he definately would be notable. The Ray Guy award is the Heisman for punters. The fact that he went undrafted really
523:
516:
305:
story not been there, I would not have felt as strongly about keeping the article. Even though
Houston is only about 100 miles from College Station, it's a major newspaper in a major metropolitan area. I agree that not every FBS player is notable; however, not every FBS player gets as many
296:
My "after bringing the chains in for a measurement" is meant to say that, while my opinion is stronger than a "weak keep," it was only after a lot of consideration. WP:ATHLETE is a specific-case notability measure; arguably, it's secondary to WP:GNG, which is a subsection of
494:
subject of significant, non-trivial coverage in the mainstream media. A search of the
Newsbank database shows that Brantly has been the subject of such media coverage focused on him (i.e., not passing references in game coverage). Examples include:
331:
about an in-state, undrafted free agent (from a nearby town who played for a nearby college) trying out for the local NFL team should be enough to indicate notability (remember, notability is permanent). I wonder how many players have been
262:, if somebody only possibly notable because they are an athlete can get in with local news coverage of their athletic pursuits, then many, many high school atheletes and almost every college athelete would get in Knowledge, rendering
310:
and deciding whether the article fulfills them. I agree that this case is borderline—I've admitted that I wrestled with the decision a while. I don't fault you for nominating it for deletion, but I don't agree with the deletion.
579:
these are some serious awards and coverage, albiet a lot is "second team" or "honorable mention" -- but still, that is some widespread coverage of independent sources. It would be enough if he played tiddlywinks, so why not
162:
258:. According to the article, though, he has not ever kicked a ball in the the NFL, CFL, or even UFL. He might be notable someday, but he might not; he is not now. And as for
156:
337:
the article never would have been written, either. If he were really so notable, he would have at least played a down. I wonder what other editors' takes will be. . .
589:
370:. I think the either a.) is an avid deletionist or b.) does not have a grasp on notability requirements for athletes. If they fail WP: athlete, WP: GNG still apply.
569:
421:
379:
435:
476:
117:
450:
362:
All the major college awards he won make him notable. You're theory that they are not notable if they never played professionally does not work. are you saying
346:
322:
287:
238:
549:
404:. Are you really comparing Justin Brantly to Jason White? And Graham Harrell played in the pros (though in Canada, which still meets the first requirement of
461:
210:
122:
266:
meaningless. You cannot compare Div I college football to the
Olympics, can you? Do you really think that any college player in an
505:
Small-town guy making big-time kicks A&M's
Brantly fourth nationally in yards per punt, Houston Chronicle, November 26, 2008,
400:
Having started in the BCS Championship game and being a consensus All-American in my mnd qualify as close enough to critria 2 of
227:. Accordingly, I'm willing to say he's "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." —
509:
223:. Even though a lot of the links are to aggiesports.com, there is at least one full-fledged story about him from the Houston
177:
395:
makes sense. I could envision a pop warner player who get non-trivial news coverage for some unique characteristic meeting
306:
column-inches about him as
Brantly did. Accordingly, it comes down to evaluating this specific case against the notability
144:
327:
You make fair points, but I still think logic dictates that the article should be deleted. I have trouble accepting that
59:
90:
85:
94:
363:
77:
17:
138:
603:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
99:
134:
111:
184:
604:
267:
36:
498:
328:
585:
560:
shouldn't factor in for kicker and punter articles, since even some HOF kickers went undrafted.
366:
is not notable then, because he has never played a game of professional football. Or how about
64:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
565:
417:
375:
342:
283:
206:
107:
150:
298:
8:
103:
81:
581:
537:
530:
486:
472:
446:
405:
401:
392:
263:
255:
194:
561:
413:
391:
My theory is not that one MUST play in the pros to be notable. But as a guideline,
371:
338:
318:
279:
234:
202:
170:
545:
499:
Brantly feeling right at home Ex-A&M punter impressing Texans during workouts
367:
73:
65:
55:
409:
396:
259:
220:
468:
442:
313:
275:
271:
229:
198:
541:
485:. As noted in prior college football discussions, the sole purpose of
412:
for the same reasons. They are both night and day from Justin
Brantly.
50:
597:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
270:
program is automatically notable? I think you are confusing
201:
criteria. He has not yet competed in a professional game.
512:, McClatchy-Tribune Regional News, September 27, 2008,
510:
Brantly following closely in what
Lechler accomplished
436:
list of
American football-related deletion discussions
169:
517:
Aggies punter aims to follow in steps of early mentor
197:, and nothing sugests he meets any other potential
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
607:). No further edits should be made to this page.
462:list of Athletes-related deletion discussions
183:
526:, San Antonio Express, November 24, 2005,
531:Brantly Named To Ray Guy Award Watch List
524:A&M punter enjoys Lechler comparisons
519:, San Antonio Express, October 7, 2008,
460:: This debate has been included in the
434:: This debate has been included in the
14:
501:, Houston Chronicle, June 5, 2009,
254:pro (barely) makes one notable per
23:
24:
619:
538:Brantly Earns All-American Honors
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
13:
1:
489:is to establish an automatic
408:. The both pass the general
7:
10:
624:
193:This player does not meet
590:21:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
570:22:17, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
550:06:44, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
477:01:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
451:01:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
422:01:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
380:00:14, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
347:22:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
323:22:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
288:21:54, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
239:21:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
211:21:08, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
60:14:17, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
600:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
540:, KBTX, Dec 10, 2008
533:, KBTX, Sep 17, 2008,
250:, I would agree that
329:a local news story
44:The result was
479:
465:
453:
439:
615:
602:
466:
456:
440:
430:
188:
187:
173:
125:
115:
97:
34:
623:
622:
618:
617:
616:
614:
613:
612:
611:
605:deletion review
598:
130:
121:
88:
72:
69:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
621:
610:
609:
593:
592:
573:
572:
553:
552:
480:
454:
427:
426:
425:
424:
383:
382:
368:Graham Harrell
356:
355:
354:
353:
352:
351:
350:
349:
291:
290:
242:
241:
191:
190:
127:
123:AfD statistics
74:Justin Brantly
68:
66:Justin Brantly
63:
42:
41:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
620:
608:
606:
601:
595:
594:
591:
587:
583:
582:Paul McDonald
578:
575:
574:
571:
567:
563:
558:
555:
554:
551:
547:
543:
539:
536:
532:
529:
525:
522:
518:
515:
511:
508:
504:
500:
497:
492:
488:
484:
481:
478:
474:
470:
463:
459:
455:
452:
448:
444:
437:
433:
429:
428:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
403:
398:
394:
390:
387:
386:
385:
384:
381:
377:
373:
369:
365:
361:
358:
357:
348:
344:
340:
335:
330:
326:
325:
324:
320:
316:
315:
309:
304:
300:
299:WP:Notability
295:
294:
293:
292:
289:
285:
281:
277:
273:
269:
265:
261:
257:
253:
249:
246:
245:
244:
243:
240:
236:
232:
231:
226:
222:
218:
215:
214:
213:
212:
208:
204:
200:
196:
186:
182:
179:
176:
172:
168:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
136:
133:
132:Find sources:
128:
124:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
62:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
599:
596:
576:
556:
534:
527:
520:
513:
506:
502:
495:
491:inclusionary
490:
482:
457:
431:
388:
359:
333:
312:
307:
302:
251:
247:
228:
224:
216:
192:
180:
174:
166:
159:
153:
147:
141:
131:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
580:football?--
414:PackerMania
364:Jason White
339:PackerMania
280:PackerMania
203:PackerMania
157:free images
487:WP:ATHLETE
406:WP:Athlete
402:WP:Athlete
393:WP:ATHLETE
308:guidelines
301:. Had the
264:WP:ATHLETE
256:WP:ATHLETE
199:notability
195:WP:ATHLETE
469:• Gene93k
443:• Gene93k
303:Chronicle
225:Chronicle
118:View log
557:Comment
389:Comment
334:drafted
252:playing
248:Comment
163:WP refs
151:scholar
91:protect
86:history
410:WP:GNG
397:WP:GNG
314:C.Fred
260:WP:GNG
230:C.Fred
221:WP:GNG
135:Google
95:delete
542:Cbl62
274:with
178:JSTOR
139:books
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
586:talk
577:Keep
566:talk
562:RF23
546:talk
483:Keep
473:talk
458:Note
447:talk
432:Note
418:talk
376:talk
372:RF23
360:Keep
343:talk
319:talk
284:talk
276:WP:N
272:WP:V
235:talk
217:Keep
207:talk
171:FENS
145:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
56:talk
51:Cirt
46:keep
535:(7)
528:(6)
521:(5)
514:(4)
507:(3)
503:(2)
496:(1)
467:--
441:--
268:FBS
185:TWL
120:•
116:– (
588:)
568:)
548:)
475:)
464:.
449:)
438:.
420:)
378:)
345:)
321:)
286:)
278:.
237:)
209:)
165:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
58:)
48:.
584:(
564:(
544:(
471:(
445:(
416:(
374:(
341:(
317:(
311:—
282:(
233:(
205:(
189:)
181:·
175:·
167:·
160:·
154:·
148:·
142:·
137:(
129:(
126:)
114:)
76:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.