Author Topic: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development  (Read 3416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline W.Churchill

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« 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]


(Want to get rid of the ad? Register now for free!)

Offline WillieWatanabe

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 19319
  • We'll always have Salt Lake
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2011, 05:36:16 PM »
seems about right.
Sometimes I think of the Book of Job and how God likes to really eff with people.
- chunkles

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 51769
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #2 on: May 01, 2011, 05:43:22 PM »
Still mad we worked them at Arrowhead in '00.

Offline jtksu

  • definitely not a racist piece of shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3673
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #3 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:

Offline sunny_cat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 14367
  • eff off
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #4 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

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #5 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????
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline Deez Nutz

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1192
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #6 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.

Offline fatty fat fat

  • Katpak'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ***
  • Posts: 3020
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #7 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.

Offline pike

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5138
  • BIG GREEN EGG!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #8 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

Offline Deez Nutz

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1192
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #9 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:

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 51769
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #10 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.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85526
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #11 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.

Offline wes mantooth

  • freak and stud
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4137
  • #LIFE is good
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #12 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:

Offline jtksu

  • definitely not a racist piece of shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3673
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #13 on: May 02, 2011, 09:43:05 PM »
I'm just glad McGraw was born a future NFLer.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37188
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #14 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.

Offline jtksu

  • definitely not a racist piece of shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3673
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #15 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.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85526
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #16 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

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37188
    • View Profile
Re: KU and KSU are both cacty at player development
« Reply #17 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.