16 Comments

  1. Visiting Tiger

    My theory is that is a further breakdown by position would tell us a lot, specifically when it comes to Wide Receivers.

    I tend to think a wildly disproportionate share of talent in Texas plays WR, even when their body types suggest their highest and best use would be elsewhere.

    This is further compounded by recruiting services tendencies to hand out 4 star rankings to WRs like candy – and completely out of proportion to how many actually get drafted.

    • ianaboyd

      But the problem doesn’t seem to be that the B12 isn’t producing NFL talent from their WR rankings or commensurate with the talent level. The problem seems to be that most of the league doesn’t have access to obvious NFL talent and the school that does can’t develop them.

  2. Visiting Tiger

    It would if a disproportionate share of the league’s blue chip recruits are WRs. Glut of talent a one position, to the detriment of spots like linebacker, DB, tight end, etc.

    • ianaboyd

      Why would that matter, tho in terms of numbers of NFL players? The league isn’t really struggling to match their number of blue chips with their number of draft picks save for at Texas.

      The B12 plays a ton of WRs so even if their blue chip recruits are disproportionately WR you’d still expect them to have a high hit rate on sending them on to the NFL.

      • Visiting Tiger

        Because the recruiting industry hands out blue chip WR rankings completely out of alignment with how much demand the NFL has for the position.

        Last 3 NFL Drafts: ~ 30 WRs drafted
        2018 247 Comp.~ 60 WRs 4 star or higher
        2017 247 Comp. ~ 50 WRs 4 star or higher
        2016 247 Comp. ~60 WRs 4 star or higher

        Haven’t done all the research yet (which is why it’s just a theory), but quantity of blue chip recruits vs. players drafted doesn’t seem so out-of-whack for say, offensive linemen.

        • ianaboyd

          Well let me know what you find but my look at the data suggests that Texas’ malaise and the low amount of talent in the B12’s recruiting ground are far and away the main reasons that the league hasn’t put many players in the NFL this decade.

        • System Poster

          I bet you would have the same sort of disproportionate numbers with running backs and quarterbacks. My theory is that those are the flashy positions that get college football fans excited so they tend to get overrated.

          For instance, for quarterbacks:

          2017: 24 bluechippers, 10 qb’s drafted
          2016: 21 bluechippers, 15 qb’s drafted
          2015: 23 bluechippers, 7 qb’s drafted

          • ianaboyd

            None of these numbers make me think that they’re getting overexcited. They seem pretty reasonable, if anything they could probably hand out the extra star MORE often, but then that would mean telling fans of a school like texas that it’s not actually always that big of a deal if they sign their first target at a spot or not.

          • System Poster

            Whether they’re overexcited or not, proportionally, the rate at which quarterbacks get drafted in relation to the number of blue chippers is lower than that of receivers, which would disprove the idea that receivers are overrated as a rule.

          • System Poster

            And actually, looking at running backs, there’s about a one to one match between number of running backs drafted and the number of blue chippers (not the exact same players though, obviously). Turns out the year I was looking at, 2015, just had an unusually large supply of blue chip running backs, 37 as opposed to the usual 20-24.

  3. System Poster

    I think this article hits the nail on the head. Not enough blue chip caliber programs in the conference, one of the two has been underperforming since 2009, and not enough of the upper-middle class/tier right below blue chip of programs that can recruit at a top 15+ level when things are going well, like an A&M, an Oregon, or a Penn State.

    Too many middle of the middle class teams like TCU, Baylor, TTU, OSU where even a good run of success only leads to, at best, top 15-25 recruiting classes.

  4. Will

    So what you’re saying is pound for pound, Holgo is the best developer of NFL talent in the conference.

  5. […] It isn’t the SEC, the passion level and interest isn’t there, the investment isn’t there, and the talent isn’t there. Something this decade has made pretty clear is that when Texas or Oklahoma aren’t good enough to snag the blue chip recruits within Texas, those players don’t then say “we’ll, maybe I’ll give TCU or Baylor a look.” I mean some of the wide receivers have, sure, or the occasional Andrew Billings or other 4-star dude, but the majority of them are instead looking out of state to go to LSU, Alabama, Notre Dame, Stanfor…. […]

  6. […] It isn’t the SEC, the passion level and interest isn’t there, the investment isn’t there, and the talent isn’t there. Something this decade has made pretty clear is that when Texas or Oklahoma aren’t good enough to snag the blue chip recruits within Texas, those players don’t then say “we’ll, maybe I’ll give TCU or Baylor a look.” I mean some of the wide receivers have, sure, or the occasional Andrew Billings or other 4-star dude, but the majority of them are instead looking out of state to go to LSU, Alabama, Notre Dame, Stanfor…. […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *