goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: W.Churchill on May 01, 2011, 05:23:51 PM

Title: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: W.Churchill on May 01, 2011, 05:23:51 PM
According to the linked article, KU and KSU rank 61 and 62 [out of 66 BCS schools] at developing players for the NFL.


[http://www.blackheartgoldpants.com/2011/4/30/2143688/the-best-and-worst-college-programs-and-conferences-at-developing]development article[/url]
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: WillieWatanabe on May 01, 2011, 05:36:16 PM
seems about right.
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 01, 2011, 05:43:22 PM
Still mad we worked them at Arrowhead in '00.
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: jtksu on May 01, 2011, 08:39:52 PM
Haven't we had at least one dude drafted for like 17 yrs straight or something?  And as far as development goes, a lot of those dudes weren't exactly AAs in high school.  :dunno:
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: sunny_cat on May 01, 2011, 08:48:51 PM
Haven't we had at least one dude drafted for like 17 yrs straight or something?  And as far as development goes, a lot of those dudes weren't exactly AAs in high school.  :dunno:
heard something like this as well
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 01, 2011, 09:18:06 PM
Haven't we had at least one dude drafted for like 17 yrs straight or something?  And as far as development goes, a lot of those dudes weren't exactly AAs in high school.  :dunno:
heard something like this as well

Are you questioning the credibility of "black heart gold pants"?!?!?!?

WTF is wrong with you????
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: Deez Nutz on May 01, 2011, 09:26:36 PM
Haven't we had at least one dude drafted for like 17 yrs straight or something?  And as far as development goes, a lot of those dudes weren't exactly AAs in high school.  :dunno:

It's now 18 years going back to the 1994 NFL draft.
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: fatty fat fat on May 01, 2011, 10:14:48 PM
Haven't we had at least one dude drafted for like 17 yrs straight or something?  And as far as development goes, a lot of those dudes weren't exactly AAs in high school.  :dunno:

It's now 18 years going back to the 1994 NFL draft.

it probably ends next year.
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: pike on May 01, 2011, 11:14:25 PM
Haven't we had at least one dude drafted for like 17 yrs straight or something?  And as far as development goes, a lot of those dudes weren't exactly AAs in high school.  :dunno:

It's now 18 years going back to the 1994 NFL draft.

it probably ends next year.

Meh, we've said that every year for the past 18 years
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: Deez Nutz on May 02, 2011, 08:25:54 AM
Haven't we had at least one dude drafted for like 17 yrs straight or something?  And as far as development goes, a lot of those dudes weren't exactly AAs in high school.  :dunno:

It's now 18 years going back to the 1994 NFL draft.

it probably ends next year.

Meh, we've said that every year for the past 18 years

Really?  You were thinking Terrence Newman would go undrafted in 2003 when he actually went #5 overall?  What a dumbass!!!   :lol:
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 02, 2011, 09:08:35 AM
Haven't we had at least one dude drafted for like 17 yrs straight or something?  And as far as development goes, a lot of those dudes weren't exactly AAs in high school.  :dunno:

It's now 18 years going back to the 1994 NFL draft.

it probably ends next year.

There is going to be a Brown brother NFL stampede next year.  Those guys are gone as soon as they have a even decent season.
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: steve dave on May 02, 2011, 08:27:59 PM
NFL players aren't developed.  They are born and recruited.  There's not a damn thing that any school does to a kid to make him an NFL talent.  And, we all know we recruit like crap most of the time.  Also, great article about how recruiting stars are ultimately all that matters.

Stars Matter

One of the great debates every recruiting season is over the importance of recruiting rankings. One one side are the recruitniks talking up the top names, and on the other side the "stars don't matter" crowd. And there's evidence both ways: schools with better recruiting classes do outperform their more recruit-challenged brethren, but certain schools consistently punch above their recruiting weight on the football field. So let's start by getting one thing straight, stars do matter, even if they aren't everything.

Recruiting Stars     
      Percent drafted     
    Average draft position   
??   4.9%             143   (5th rd)
???   8.1%             124   (late 4th)
????   16.7%             107   (early 4th)
?????   38.0%               81    (3rd rd)
 

The likelihood of being drafted increase substantially with a player's star-ranking. And when drafted, higher rated recruits are drafter earlier. For instance, a 4-star recruit is over three-times more likely than a two-star to get drafted, and will be picked over a round earlier than those two-stars that do get drafted.
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: wes mantooth on May 02, 2011, 09:01:46 PM
NFL players aren't developed.  They are born and recruited.  There's not a damn thing that any school does to a kid to make him an NFL talent.  And, we all know we recruit like cac most of the time.  Also, great article about how recruiting stars are ultimately all that matters.

Stars Matter

One of the great debates every recruiting season is over the importance of recruiting rankings. One one side are the recruitniks talking up the top names, and on the other side the "stars don't matter" crowd. And there's evidence both ways: schools with better recruiting classes do outperform their more recruit-challenged brethren, but certain schools consistently punch above their recruiting weight on the football field. So let's start by getting one thing straight, stars do matter, even if they aren't everything.

Recruiting Stars     
      Percent drafted     
    Average draft position   
??   4.9%             143   (5th rd)
???   8.1%             124   (late 4th)
????   16.7%             107   (early 4th)
?????   38.0%               81    (3rd rd)
 

The likelihood of being drafted increase substantially with a player's star-ranking. And when drafted, higher rated recruits are drafter earlier. For instance, a 4-star recruit is over three-times more likely than a two-star to get drafted, and will be picked over a round earlier than those two-stars that do get drafted.

Jordy --->  :lol:
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: jtksu on May 02, 2011, 09:43:05 PM
I'm just glad McGraw was born a future NFLer.
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 03, 2011, 02:10:30 PM
Do you guys remember when Taco Wallace got drafted? That was one of the biggest draft day surprises for me, along with Thomas Clayton.
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: jtksu on May 03, 2011, 02:32:53 PM
Dood, pretty sure Tommy Guns was a born a 5* recruit.  He was projected to go in the 3rd round shortly after the cord was cut.  Duh.
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: steve dave on May 03, 2011, 02:35:52 PM
Dood, pretty sure Tommy Guns was a born a 5* recruit.  He was projected to go in the 3rd round shortly after the cord was cut.  Duh.

he was a 4* recruit and Army All American

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/player-Thomas-Clayton-3029
Title: Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on May 03, 2011, 02:46:27 PM
Dood, pretty sure Tommy Guns was a born a 5* recruit.  He was projected to go in the 3rd round shortly after the cord was cut.  Duh.

he was a 4* recruit and Army All American

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/player-Thomas-Clayton-3029

Yeah, Hollywood just helps steve dave's case. The dude didn't even get to see the field his senior year and still got drafted on physical attributes alone.