Reloading vs. Talent Depletion due to the NFL Draft

by BirdGT on Nov 10, 2010 8:00 AM EST in Enhance Your Experience

Since the 2002 college football season (Chan Gailey Era Commencement), there have been nine NFL Drafts. In those nine NFL Drafts, 25 different colleges have had multiple draft picks taken in the first round. 8 SEC schools, 7 ACC schools, 4 Big 12 schools, 3 Big 10 schools, 2 Pac 10 schools, and 1 Big East school. Despite its Pac 10 allegiance, Southern Cal has had the most NFL Drafts since 2003 with multiple draft picks in the first round (4 Drafts). Several schools have had three drafts with multiple first rounders. The highest number of first rounders in a single Draft during that span was 6 players by Miami in 2004.

The NFL Draft is often seen as a sign of a program's ascension into the ranks of college football elite. What a lot of people don't realize is that the NFL Draft often removes irreplaceable talent from college campuses (e.g. Calvin Johnson) and recruiting often never makes up for the departures (ala Miami). By fielding 2 or more NFL first rounders, college football teams have averaged 10 wins or more in the regular season since the 2002 regular season. Forty three different college teams have seen multiple players taken in the first round since that 2003 Draft. Out of those 43 teams, only 14 maintained or improved upon their winning percentage the year after (32% success rate after losing multiple 1st rounders).

I wanted to show all of the data that I pulled up because there is a lot of it and hopefully you'll see a few mistakes I made so I can correct them. Winning percentages for the college team seasons are under each year. Yellow blocks represent regular seasons that fed the NFL Draft 2 or more 1st rounders. Purple blocks mean that teams have been able to average on par or better following a mass exodus to the NFL's 1st round.

Even if Georgia Tech wins out and goes 9 and 12, we'll still be 9% short of last year's winning percentage. Perhaps we understated our 2009 season's talent vacuum. Any thoughts?

Tweet Comment 7 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Awesome idea.

Florida ‘01 and ’09, Michigan ’01, Penn St. ’03, Miami ’04, VT ’04, Auburn ’05, UGA ’05, USC ’05, Michigan ’05, FSU ’06, Texas ’07, Miami ’07, LSU ’07, UGA ’09, tOSU ’09, Oklahoma ’09, all sent multiple first-rounders. I might’ve missed a couple — just flipped through and eyeballed it.

I am proud to be a Kennesaw State Fighting Owl. -- Vince Dooley

SB Nation Atlanta · Twitter

by Jason Kirk on Nov 10, 2010 8:37 AM EST reply actions

OU last year

is an exception because their first rounders didn’t actually play.

I write stuff From the Rumble Seat.

by BirdGT on Nov 12, 2010 11:13 AM EST up reply actions

As always it is hard to argue with a scientist

so I won’t. The only thing that makes Tech seem like an anomaly this season is the fact that if I rank this year’s team position-by-position with last year’s team I do not see that big a fall off in terms of talent. I know, I know, it is hard to argue with losing players to the NFL draft, especially first rounders, and it would seem that Tech’s record this year proves the point, but is it really that clear cut with Tech this year?

For instance, it is hard for me to imagine that if Anthony Allen were playing in the NFL right now he would be doing more poorly than Jonathan Dwyer is doing. The only thing that I can think of that accounts for how poorly Tech is playing this year is a lack of leadership on the team or some incomprehensible fall off in desire.

I’m just fumbling for answers obviously. You have given a cogent scientific explanation that I should just except but for some reason it leaves me unsatisfied. This team should have played better this year than it did. In the Virginia Tech game I think we glimpsed the potential this team had. Where that went, besides the draft, I don’t know.

by Atlanta's original team on Nov 10, 2010 9:14 AM EST reply actions

Talent is still key in college football

Look at the successful Georgia Tech teams over the past decade: all had a lot of NFL talent. To be really successful, you have to have that guy (or guys) who matches up in your favor against anyone on the other team.

Just looking at the two seasons that Tech won the division: Calvin Johnson was elite, and then Derrick Morgan and BeBe Thomas were elite. No one could match up with those guys, and when it came down to crunch time, you could always expect them to win their battles.

When you have okay talent and little experience (as this year’s team does), you can win the games you’re supposed to (and maybe some you aren’t). But the close ones, when you don’t have THE MAN…those get away from you.

by acedarney on Nov 11, 2010 8:30 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs

I thought some more about your comments

and I guess another way to put it is that good players pick the team up when they need it and everyone else around them plays better as a result. This year we had plenty of talent but just depending on Nesbitt to pick them team up was too much to ask for. As a result players that could shine have not done anything extraordinary this year. Whether it was Tarrant, Allen, Jones or any number of players, they could shine as long as other players did some heavy lifting like last year but they could not in and of themselves turn a game around this year -not without a few “pro” studs around.

So Heather Dinich was right along this year in her preseason estimation of Tech.

by Atlanta's original team on Nov 12, 2010 4:58 PM EST up reply actions

O.K., you guys sort through the statistics and let me know

I have a memory of teams that played well or even won national championships that had view pro prospects. As a child I remember the 1966 (I think, but here we go with the memory thing) Notre Dame National Championship team that, even though they had some players drafted, had none make it in the pros.

Here is what I do know. If you look at the teams that are the best pipelines for the pros there are some things that jump out. For instance, UGA is the eighth leading team in the nation over the past three decades in sending players to the pros. Yet how many championships have they won? By contrast Alabama and LSU finish way down the list in sending players to the pros and yet they consistently fielded better teams than Georgia.

Much further down the list than even Alabama and LSU are Oklahoma, Texas and Nebraska.

Way up at the top of the list are teams like UCLA, PIttsburg and Miami.

No one can deny that talent is important. My question is why is it some team chemistry seems to jell some years and other years a team with comparable talent can fall apart? Or why is it that some teams with very few pro prospects can beat the crap out of a team that has three or four solid pro prospects?

When you guys figure this out let me know.

by Atlanta's original team on Nov 12, 2010 11:41 AM EST reply actions

Two other teams that make the top ten for pro prospects

I didn’t leave them out for any particular reason but one cannot forget FSU and Tennessee. Though their on field displays do not always measure up these two teams are juggernauts when it comes to producing pro players.

by Atlanta's original team on Nov 12, 2010 11:57 AM EST up reply actions