THis is a good article that discusses the bust ratio on top talent, it's pretty crazy some of the numbers it points out:
"Southern Cal signed an overwhelming number of top 100 players from 2006-09, but produced only four first- or second-round NFL picks while having 22 busts. Alabama produced six first- or second-round NFL picks from 100 signees over that four-year span and had eight busts."
http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20130205/PC20/130209650/1038/inexa...
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
IMO this doesn't prove anything about the probability of a highly ranked player being able to out-perform a lower ranked player.
Are some highly ranked players not going to pan out? Yes. Of course. That's life. Injury, family issues, attitude problems, academic issues, all these things and more can prevent an individual from reaching their top potential. However, statistics show that highly ranked players are, on average, far more likely to succeed at College Football then their lower ranked counter-parts.
The later recruits in USC's 06-09 run didn't blossom because Lane Kiffin blows.
I don't particularly care where a player is drafted, I just care what they do in college. Look at Tyrod - he was a 6th round pick, but he was one of the best qbs we ever had here. So using that to evaluate a player's college success is pretty flimsy.
What is interesting is the disparity between the two schools - one has 22 busts, the other only 8. I'm not entirely sure how bust is defined here, but clearly Bama utilized its talent better.
I agree
I haven't had a second to read the article, but do they go a step further and analyze how many of those top draft picks actually panned out in the NFL? God knows how many guys (especially from marquee college programs) get drafted considerably higher than they probably should based purely on measurables, performance at the Underwear Olympics, and the dreaded "potential" tag.