Started By
Message
How Well Do CFB Teams Develop Talent Into NFL Draft Picks
Posted on 6/19/19 at 6:59 pm
Posted on 6/19/19 at 6:59 pm
Based on percentage of players drafted, against percentage of players that SHOULD be drafted, based upon online source prospect ratings (the fine print on the bottom of the graphic says they base these numbers on 247sports.com's composite ratings).
This raises the question of how much do those online sites disingenuously give prospects "bumps" to their ratings after they commit/sign with the "blue blood" programs, while often bumping down prospects who were in line to commit to those blue bloods, but then choose to commit/sign with lesser programs instead.
This practice can therefore inaccurately inflate prospect's ratings that sign with the big programs, thus setting up those programs to have lower % numbers here, for actually getting those kids drafted into the NFL.
Or is it just a case of the big programs stacking their roster depth with proespects that should be good enough to get into the NFL, but many of them don't because they are buried on depth charts, and don't get the development they would, had they chosen to go to other programs that would focus more on their development?
This post was edited on 6/19/19 at 7:01 pm
14
Posted on 6/19/19 at 7:07 pm to ConwayGamecock
I'd be really curious to see how Vandy stacks up on this. I know it says "top teams," and I'm not enough of a homer to even think to argue Vandy fits the bill. I just know we don't get a ton of highly touted prospects but usually have one or two guys drafted every year.
Posted on 6/19/19 at 7:16 pm to ConwayGamecock
I posted this almost a month ago.
Posted on 6/19/19 at 7:18 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
Probably why I checked first, but couldn't find another post about this....
Posted on 6/19/19 at 7:29 pm to ConwayGamecock
This is an interesting topic, but like your alluding to, each program has its own set of variables that makes this question a bit apples to oranges.
However, the outliers may prove to have a unique environment.
However, the outliers may prove to have a unique environment.
Posted on 6/19/19 at 7:29 pm to ConwayGamecock
quote:Don't worry, no one reads his threads.
Probably why I checked first, but couldn't find another post about this....
Great post
Posted on 6/19/19 at 7:30 pm to ConwayGamecock
Truly shocked that Wisconsin is not on the list.
Mad props to Washington.
Mad props to Washington.
Posted on 6/19/19 at 8:01 pm to ConwayGamecock
So if a bunch of "free agent" caliber players end up getting drafted in the 6th and 7th rounds, that's... good? I guess?
Posted on 6/19/19 at 8:19 pm to ConwayGamecock
I don’t agree with their method of determining the best “development”. I’d be more interested to see who took those high 3 and 4 star guys and turned them into top 3 round picks.
Posted on 6/19/19 at 10:14 pm to ConwayGamecock
Some intern slaved over this for website to meet summer click goal
Posted on 6/19/19 at 10:17 pm to ConwayGamecock
quote:
Probably why I checked first, but couldn't find another post about this....
You did fine. I failed to see it the last time.
Posted on 6/19/19 at 10:22 pm to ConwayGamecock
The fine print under this is hilarious.
Posted on 6/19/19 at 10:23 pm to ConwayGamecock
"Washington develops NFL talent at a rate of 104.3%"
What the hell does that mean?
What the hell does that mean?
Posted on 6/19/19 at 10:28 pm to skrayper
quote:
So if a bunch of "free agent" caliber players end up getting drafted in the 6th and 7th rounds, that's... good? I guess?
If those "bunch of free agent caliber players" - as you say - were players that were rated as prospects expected to be drafted, then yes. They ultimately got drafted.
Obviously the chart here, would indicate that those who are NOT drafted, were prospects who were rated to be drafted out of high school - regardless of round - but ended up not being drafted at all.
So, go ask that formerly high-rated prospect, who ended up NOT being drafted at all, if being a free agent caliber player who was drafted in the 6th and 7th round is good, and tell me what he says to you....
Posted on 6/19/19 at 10:31 pm to CrabInMyShoeMouth
quote:
"Washington develops NFL talent at a rate of 104.3%"
What the hell does that mean?
Obviously I would assume it means they develop players that were NOT originally thought of being NFL draft-caliber players, into being drafted. That they get more players in their program drafted into the NFL, than they bring in NFL draft-caliber prospects through the recruiting process, most years. But that's just a guess....
Posted on 6/19/19 at 10:58 pm to ConwayGamecock
The parameters are clear
Posted on 6/19/19 at 11:18 pm to ConwayGamecock
Interesting, but also seems to be a bit of cherry picking. It says 255th and above and it doesn't really take into account where they drafted.
At the same time though, it's hard to argue that Washington hasn't done well with what it's had and Texas has really shite the bed with recruits since 2010.
The middle however is a bit muddy because of the factors I mention above. Washington gets over 100% because it recruits a lot of 3 stars who just need to develop physically etc. And they are great at that, but you're basically playing with house money.
So if you are a 3 star recruit - Washington should be a top destination choice if offered. And if you are any star, you probably want to stay the frick away from Texas right now.
At the same time though, it's hard to argue that Washington hasn't done well with what it's had and Texas has really shite the bed with recruits since 2010.
The middle however is a bit muddy because of the factors I mention above. Washington gets over 100% because it recruits a lot of 3 stars who just need to develop physically etc. And they are great at that, but you're basically playing with house money.
So if you are a 3 star recruit - Washington should be a top destination choice if offered. And if you are any star, you probably want to stay the frick away from Texas right now.
Posted on 6/19/19 at 11:28 pm to 3down10
It's not just an indication of a school's ability to develop. I bet Texas is getting nailed because a bunch of those Texas kids are massively overrated coming out of high school.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 12:20 am to ConwayGamecock
I’ll bet Auburn’s numbers took a big hit after this last draft.
Posted on 6/20/19 at 12:55 am to DoreonthePlains
quote:
It's not just an indication of a school's ability to develop. I bet Texas is getting nailed because a bunch of those Texas kids are massively overrated coming out of high school.
After Texas lost the national championship in 2009 Mack Brown basically lost his head. He couldn't make up his mind what he wanted his team to be.
Over the next few years I think they switched things up multiple times, just basically wasting high quality talent they had recruited over the previous years. Meanwhile because it's Texas and Mack Brown they still pull in the talent.
Then you have Brown getting canned and they follow it up with Charlie Strong who recruits the final 2 years of it. And well, that didn't end well which happened during the time many of them stated to be eligible.
I'm sure what you mention has some effect. Those ratings are pretty much guesswork. But it's easy to see where Texas wasted a bunch of talent.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News