Best and Worst Colleges for Converting Elite Recruits

[NickVT10]

https://blogs.emory.edu/sportsmarke...nverting-elite-recruits-into-nfl-draft-picks/

It says how they came up with the formula at the bottom. Kind of interesting.

 

[BigRedMoe]

K-State gets elite recruits? :dizzy:

 

[USCDoom]

Damn 8 of 12 Pac schools up there. And since Utah and Colorado are really new. Only really Oregon and USC are not on that list, in either column.

 

[USCDoom]

BTW - When the HELL did Washington State ever get an Elite Recruit?

 

[LawDawg]

Nothing personal, but horrible post or at least bad thread title. Converting them to what? From being elite recruits to being on the team? Being stars on the team? As it turns out, the list shows the conversion of elite recruits to the NFL draft picks:

As a follow-up to our previous post, we would like to provide a more complete view of the best and worst colleges based on converting elite recruits into NFL Draft picks (number of draft picks divided by the number of four and five star recruits). This study considers the last six NFL drafts, and examines the top sixty schools in terms of relevant recruiting cycles over the past twelve years. We exclude schools that have not produced a single draft pick in the 2007-2012 period or that have less than four elite recruits over the relevant recruiting cycles.

 

[SwampHumpy]

LOL @ the “converters” on the left side of the chart. I’m assuming we are talking football here, and if so I don’t think you could put together much of an all-star team from that bunch.

 

[Camfantasy]

LOL @ the “converters” on the left side of the chart. I’m assuming we are talking football here, and if so I don’t think you could put together much of an all-star team from that bunch.

 

[Brasky]

Define "Elite"

Kentucky at the top. That's how you know it's garbage.

 

[ckhokie]

Define "Elite"

4 or 5* recruits. It's in the link.

 

[Smart]

This would be a worthy experiment if recruiting rankings were truly unbiased. The problem is that they aren't. A 4 star recruit who signs at Wisconsin would be a 5 star recruit if he signed at USC or Alabama. Even a lot of our 3 stars would have been 4 stars had they gone to other schools. Hence, the sample is flawed because recruiting rankings are rigged.

 

[bone3421]

and also.....how can texas be ranked so low and yet have so many players drafted over the last 12 years

jammer,benson,huff,blalock,roy williams,aaron williams,griffin bros,finley,charles,dj,thomas,orakapo....etc i am sure i am missing a bunch

seems like a very flawed list

 

[WhiteMamba]

 

[trojanfan12]

and also.....how can texas be ranked so low and yet have so many players drafted over the last 12 years

jammer,benson,huff,blalock,roy williams,aaron williams,griffin bros,finley,charles,dj,thomas,orakapo....etc i am sure i am missing a bunch

seems like a very flawed list

It may have something to do with how many 4 and 5 star recruits a team gets. The more of them you get, the more likely you will have some that don't make it to the NFL, especially if they play a position where there may be another 4 or 5 star recruit or 2.

Example, I believe USC has two or three 4 or 5 star recruits at quarterback. Chances are that 1 of them will never even play at USC, much less get drafted into the NFL.

Meanwhile, another school may only have 1 at the same position and that one gets drafted.

 

[geneh_33]

and also.....how can texas be ranked so low and yet have so many players drafted over the last 12 years

jammer,benson,huff,blalock,roy williams,aaron williams,griffin bros,finley,charles,dj,thomas,orakapo....etc i am sure i am missing a bunch

seems like a very flawed list

It's a bum list. The SEC and ACC lead the college world in NFL draftees. That list is way off.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Actually it is a proven fact tOhio St has most players drafted. I just assume they are elite, hence going to tOSU and all.



^^^

 

[Shanemansj13]

LOL@ scUM, Florida, Miami, Florida St, ND, Oklahoma and Texas at the bottom....is this accurate??

 

[Smart]

and also.....how can texas be ranked so low and yet have so many players drafted over the last 12 years

jammer,benson,huff,blalock,roy williams,aaron williams,griffin bros,finley,charles,dj,thomas,orakapo....etc i am sure i am missing a bunch

seems like a very flawed list

Read the criteria again (hint: they are not talking about the last 12 years for the NFL Draft).

It always amazes me when people want to call out professionals yet can't handle basic reading comprehension.

 

[bone3421]

Read the criteria again (hint: they are not talking about the last 12 years for the NFL Draft).

It always amazes me when people want to call out professionals yet can't handle basic reading comprehension.

so me saying the list is flawed and you saying the list is flawed somehow makes me stupid.....why would they go over 12 years of recruiting and 6 years of drafts
This study considers the last six NFL drafts, and examines the top sixty schools in terms of relevant recruiting cycles over the past twelve years.

sorry you have to nitpick others while we let your crap about stars being different slide along thanks

guess we shouldnt post thoughts and ramblings unless we let smart know what we are thinking at all times

 

[bone3421]

This would be a worthy experiment if recruiting rankings were truly unbiased. The problem is that they aren't. A 4 star recruit who signs at Wisconsin would be a 5 star recruit if he signed at USC or Alabama. Even a lot of our 3 stars would have been 4 stars had they gone to other schools. Hence, the sample is flawed because recruiting rankings are rigged.

and also.....how can texas be ranked so low and yet have so many players drafted over the last 12 years

jammer,benson,huff,blalock,roy williams,aaron williams,griffin bros,finley,charles,dj,thomas,orakapo....etc i am sure i am missing a bunch

seems like a very flawed list

so we both agree about the quality of the list but for different reasons....12 years recruiting,yet they dont count the players drafted for those 12 years

 

[bigred472]

It may have something to do with how many 4 and 5 star recruits a team gets. The more of them you get, the more likely you will have some that don't make it to the NFL, especially if they play a position where there may be another 4 or 5 star recruit or 2.

Example, I believe USC has two or three 4 or 5 star recruits at quarterback. Chances are that 1 of them will never even play at USC, much less get drafted into the NFL.

Meanwhile, another school may only have 1 at the same position and that one gets drafted.

And I don't believe it's all about "going to the NFL". A school can make players great with good coaching, but if you don't have great game plans come game day, what difference does it make? IMO, it's not about wins/losses and your five star recruits, it's about how you teach the recruits to be the best.

I think part of these rankings are based upon how the coaching goes long term. Look at Florida & LSU in their bowl games----mega talent--- shitty coaching. And that is what I believe came into play with these rankings.