• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

NFL Players by Conference/School/State

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
If Purdue or Wisconsin were from the south, someone might talk about these numbers outside of a quiet news day in the spring.

Looks like 3 B10 3 SEC in top-10, with a 2-1 edge in the honorable mentions.
LSU (46): Nine first-round picks with several of the potential superstars (JaMarcus Russell, Devery Henderson, LaRon Landry) still finding their way in the NFL. A few years from now this could be a top five NFL producer.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye86;1702082; said:
Rittenburg weighs in:
Click to expand...

I saw that and think this is another lazy attempt by ESPN at research. It allows schools that had 1 or 2 HOF'ers (and thusly many points for multiple pro bowls etc.) and little else to surpass a school that puts a lot more solid contributers into the league. I think putting more guys that stick into the league has a lot more to do with what is going on at the school rather than a couple HOF'ers who obviously would have made it there regardless of the college they attended.
 
Upvote 0
matttank;1702120; said:
I saw that and think this is another lazy attempt by ESPN at research. It allows schools that had 1 or 2 HOF'ers (and thusly many points for multiple pro bowls etc.) and little else to surpass a school that puts a lot more solid contributers into the league. I think putting more guys that stick into the league has a lot more to do with what is going on at the school rather than a couple HOF'ers who obviously would have made it there regardless of the college they attended.
Click to expand...


Matttank - I'll - I'll play devils advocate and challange that point.

Does the system reward players who were 5th or 6th round picks and work their way up by playing special teams, then spelling starters when they need a rest then finally making the most of their opportunity?

Because there is ALOT of NFL players who make it that way and I don't think it has anything to do w/what school they're from.

Just asking, I'm curious.
 
Upvote 0
BigWoof31;1702141; said:
Matttank - I'll - I'll play devils advocate and challange that point.

Does the system reward players who were 5th or 6th round picks and work their way up by playing special teams, then spelling starters when they need a rest then finally making the most of their opportunity?

Because there is ALOT of NFL players who make it that way and I don't think it has anything to do w/what school they're from.

Just asking, I'm curious.
Click to expand...

Woof- After reading through again, a pro bowl appearance was the lowest honor a player could have received to get a point in the system. So their system wouldn't take into account those players at all, and that in part is my problem with the system they used.

There are a lot of guys (especially at the O-Line positions) that will start for quite a few years that are virtually unaccounted for in their system. I mean, it's possible for a school to put out 5 2x pro bowlers (10 pts) and have less points than a school that put out 1 5x pro bowler/5 time all-pro team/HOFer (11 pts) . I don't think the school that had the one HOF player is better at putting out pro players than the team with 5 guys who made a pro bowl.

Good point about the guys who stick in the league through their own determination being similar to the HOF'ers in terms of the impact their school had on their success in the league. I'm just saying that taking into account all of the players from a school that stuck rather than just allowing an excellent player or two from a school to skew the rankings.

On a side note, USC pretty much blows everyone else completely away no matter how you measure it.
 
Upvote 0
Miami (FL) should win this. Hell they had 10 pro bowlers this year. Michigan came in second with 6 invitations.

Ohio St and USC are the best at getting them to the NFL level. It seems Miami has the best quality when it comes to producing elite NFL talent.
 
Upvote 0
An interesting note

The Wolverines accounted for 19 Pro Bowl selections between 2000 and '09, second behind Miami.

I think Michigan and Ohio State should get to the final 4 losing to USC and Miami. Miami takes it in the final. That's my opinion
 
Upvote 0
Best and Worst Programs and Conferences at Developing NFL Talent

This is a fantastic article that breaks down teams and conferences and how they develop NFL talent in regards to their recruiting rankings.

The draft is done, and the new draftees are looking forward to fame, fortune... and a lockout. While the immediate NFL future is uncertain, college football moves on. Every year brings a new crop of recruits, many of whom hope to follow this weekends draftees into the NFL. Looking back can often bring useful lessons, and each draft class offers such an opportunity. How did the draftees get to that point? What elevated them above all the others hoping for a chance at the NFL?
Now maybe the answer is easy. We know there are three must-have ingredients: God-given talent, the commitment to get better, and the right training. But how important are each of these factors? In particular, how important is that third factor? What effect do different college programs have on their players chances at the NFL? We know that some programs produce more draft picks than others. Why, however, is a tricker question. Are those schools just bringing in more talent at the recruiting stage? Or are some doing a better job of developing their recruits into NFL-ready athletes?

Good recruiting data across college football goes back to 2002. And we have draft information for every year. So, by matching between those two data sets, we can answer the questions above. We can identify the programs that do the best (and worst) job developing their players (at least over the past decade). Better yet, we can use this data to tell a prospective recruit exactly how much their NFL chances are affected by their choice of school. Whether this information is on the top of the recruiting packets or hidden from sight will depend on the school, but these are numbers every recruit should know before signing on that dotted line.

So come with me on a journey through the player development process in college football. We?ll find out who?s doing it right, and who?s doing it wrong. We?ll see how different conferences lead to different outcomes, and the impact play-style has on player development. There might even be a Rich Rodriguez cameo.
Click to expand...


Really interesting to say the least. Oh and, :osu:.
 
Upvote 0
The article had a breakout by conference.

The Big Ten is the premier player development conference

The differences in player development between some teams is clear, but how about the conferences? This is especially interesting in light of the growing recruiting advantage that southern teams have enjoyed over northern teams in recent years. The Big Ten has been indicted as less talented based on those trends, but also sometimes suggested to do a superior job in developing the talent it does attract. What do the numbers say?

Rank Conference Recruits Drafted BCS Expectation Development Ratio
1....Big Ten...........172......... 150.4..........114%
2....Pac 12............166..........152.0..........109%
3....Big East...........94...........87.8..........107%
4....ACC.............. 183..........177.2..........103%
5....SEC...............216..........223.8..........96%
6....Big 12............157..........189.7...........82%
7....Non-BCS...........121..........295.4...........40%

The Big Ten is indeed the elite player development conference. Recruits that go to the Big Ten add 15% to their NFL chances. The SEC and the ACC did have more draft picks than the Big Ten over the time period in question (the additional team helps), but that was because they started with with more talented recruits (and simply more recruits). The moment players step on campus, the Big Ten starts closing the talent gap through its superior player development. And as a side note, the SECs development profile suffers by its addiction to oversigning. While few doubt that oversigning is advantageous for the programs that do it, the players are the ones that pay the price in the form of a lowered chance of turning their talent into an NFL career.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
While that's all well and good for the pros, we're talking college football here. It's far better to have college-level talent in college. It's a different game here and you have different needs.

Give me a solid team of college players and I'll win a ton of games and a few championships here and there. Give me some individual stars with NFL-caliber skills and I'll give you a highlight reel.... and not much else.
 
Upvote 0
knapplc;1916453; said:
Give me a solid team of college players and I'll win a ton of games and a few championships here and there. Give me some individual stars with NFL-caliber skills and I'll give you a highlight reel.... and not much else.
Click to expand...


The counter argument to that is - good luck recruiting the former without the later.
Most top tier programs use their players that went pro as recruiting tools and they absolutely should. I'm certain that most college locker rooms have some type of "Wall of Fame" where you can see former players hoisting SuperBowl trophies, winning MVP awards...etc
 
Upvote 0
BigWoof31;1916457; said:
The counter argument to that is - good luck recruiting the former without the later.
Most top tier programs use their players that went pro as recruiting tools and they absolutely should. I'm certain that most college locker rooms have some type of "Wall of Fame" where you can see former players hoisting SuperBowl trophies, winning MVP awards...etc
Click to expand...

Sure, and so does Nebraska (my team, which you already knew), but that being the case you're more likely to recruit those highlight-reel guys rather than championship teams.

It's not enough to have a few superstars here and there. That works in the NFL, but not in college. In college ball the best teams win games, not just teams with the best players. You see many times where teams with great players win, but that's due to the team, not the individual.

I'm not knocking recruiting guys who go on to NFL glory - don't get me wrong. I'm just saying that's not a barometer of college success.

Which would you rather have, two first-rounders every year or a couple of MNC's per decade? Me, I'll take the MNC's any day and twice on Saturdays.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top