Comparing Conferences by Draft Picks
by ckmneon on May 2, 2010 4:44 PM EDT
Email
Print
Since it was brought up in the comments of my last post, I decided to compare leagues based on NFL draft picks. Data was available on NFL.com for the years 2008-2010 and not earlier, or I would have gone back a couple more years. I also subtracted a team from the top of each league (with the exception of the Big East) to compare leagues a bit more fairly (for example, USC had 28 picks over that span. Ohio State and Texas combined for 29.). Here's the data:
via i40.tinypic.com
I arbitrarily moved one team out of each league from the top. Oklahoma might have had more picks than Texas, I really don't know. I just subracted the picks of one team that was bound to be close to the top of the league in picks.
Every BCS league is within .91 draft picks per team of every other during that span. That's right, less than one draft pick per team. On teams with 85 scholarship players. I'm sorry if this bursts any "OMG the [Midwest / South / East Coast / West Coast / Plains / Southwest / Alaska / The Moon] has the best talent EVAR" bubbles out there, but it's true. That being said, I'm about to read way too much into these numbers.
Conclusions:
- Yup, the SEC is that good at producing NFL draft picks. The 2010 numbers were insane (4.08 picks per team) and greatly skewed all of the others (between the '08 and '09 drafts, the SEC averaged 2.96 picks per team), but the numbers still are what they are.
- The Pac-10 minus USC, ACC minus Va Tech, SEC minus LSU, and Big Ten minus Ohio State all average more picks than the Big 12 with Texas. Texas, leave your garbage league for the Big Ten, which is obviously a better fit both academically, athletically, and fiscally.
- In spite of the fact that the ACC is a league that has produced only 3 BCS participants in the past three years (2 of them being Va Tech) and one winner (Va Tech over Cinci, 2009 Orange Bowl), NFL scouts like the ACC just fine. The ACC minus Va Tech ranks 2nd in draft picks when the top team is removed.
- In the 2009 draft, the Big East averaged 3.38 picks per team, higher than any league averaged over the 3 year span (as a whole), yet over the 3 year span, the Big East finished 5th, with 2.67 picks per team. That's the danger of reading too much into any one year. SEC, I'm looking at you and your fancy 2010 draft class.
- Tales of the Big Ten's demise, lack of speed, lack of pro talent, and how high academic standards are killing the league have been greatly exaggerated.
- Texas, are you tired of keeping the Big 12 respectable? With you, the B12 finishes dead last amongst BCS leagues at producing draft picks. Without you, it's almost sad. Just think, Texas, the Big Ten is better without Ohio State than the Big 12 is with you. Leave your garbage league and join the Big Ten.
Aww, look at you. You created a Fanpost! Any content from a premium site that requires a subscription will be deleted once we catch wind of it. If you simply want to share a link, quote, or video, please consider using Fanshots instead. Thanks.
14 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
you mean . . . .
parity, right? There is parody alive in NCAAF, too, like Big 12 teams parodying real defenses with their porous displays.
Ohio State's offense is less "a offense", sorta a "mishmash", but more a "parody" of actual offenses?
"I want your money, but I don't want your two cents." - JVP
by ReadingRambler on May 2, 2010 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions
....most of the time.
"Is that right?" Joe answered. "That’s not a problem. But you’ve got a problem. You don’t relate to me. And that’s a big problem."
School is important
85 scholarship players per team equates to about 24 recruits per year per team (after attrition, redshirts, etc.), and there’s roughly 3 (and truly, less) draft picks per team per year.
Therefore, if you are a scholarship player at a BCS school, you have about a 1 in 8 chance of being drafted, let alone having a career where enough money is made to be set for life. School is important, gentlemen; school is important.
Reach out; touch faith.
by ckmneon on May 3, 2010 6:31 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs
You should run the numbers when you include the top teams
you’re not comparing conferences with this exercise, you’re comparing conferences without their best (or second best) team…which seems sort of weird/pointless. What is the PAC 10 w/o USC or the Big11 w/o OSU…they’re much, much different. If you want to compare conferences, you should use all teams, no matter how untidy that may make the results.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
sorry
I see that you did that, too.
It would be interesting to just look at the top 4 or 5 teams from each conference also…
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
I kind of like it without the top team
because, as he points out, the top team in each conference is such an outlier.
I know about your diabolical plan.
I'm not sure it shows that
This year from the B10, you’re removing OSU’s 4 drafted players, but not Iowa or Penn State’s 6. In the SEC, Bama had 7, Florida 9, and LSU 6.
Obviously, the number will vary year to year, and teams will move up or down based on their class that year. To arbitrarily take out a team that may not even have the most picks from their conference that year doesn’t make any sense.
In some cases, say USC, it might make a point that the rest of the conference is either weaker or not viewed as well by scouts. But I don’t think you can apply that across the board.
Personally, I think it would be interesting to see, year to year, which and how many teams average a low number of draft picks (2 or less?) and correlate that to their on the field success. Or, not that this data is easily mined, another idea would be looking back over a longer period of time to see how many total draftees played compared to success. For example, Penn State had 10 wins in 2009 (bowl excluded) and 6 players drafted. But some of the guys who played last year will be drafted this coming year and the year after that, so they would need to be counted to show a clearer picture of overall talent on a given team.
It never gets to be easy
by chitownhawkeye on May 3, 2010 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions
that's another reason why a 3 or 4 year rolling average might work better
and if you really want to get fancy, you could do it for every BCS team every year, and rank them, and then see where each conference is in the “rankings”
by The JuggerNitt on May 5, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
This is the primary reason I don't like the draft as an idicator of conference quality:
NFL scouts like the ACC just fine.
and it’s been this way for a while. But there are few people who watch a lot of CFB who think that league would even be top-3 at any point over the last decade. Are there lots of great players in that league? You bet, but great players alone don’t make great football teams; Oklahoma had 3 of the top four picks and 4 total in the first round and was pretty damn average last season. Boise State, to counter, had just one player drafted.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
Overall, I completely agree
What comparing draft picks per team does is show, on average, how deep the top of a randomly selected roster (in a particular league) is likely to be. As is obvious, after that top (players who will be drafted the following Spring) is removed, there are 81-83 other scholarship players who matter far more to the overall strength of the team.
I’m sorry if it comes off as a comparison of league strength; it really wasn’t intended to be, other than to demonstrate yet another facet of parity amongst the BCS leagues.
Reach out; touch faith.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE BLACK SHOE DIARIES STORE
