NFL players by college

[DuffMan]

This was lifted from the scout site, a guy named sdbolt posted it. Pretty interesting stuff...

==============================================

I did this based on ESPN's current NFL rosters sorted by college. From what I can tell it appears to be up to date.

Most Current NFL Players by College

1. (42) Miami
1. (42) USC
1. (42) Texas
4. (39) LSU
5. (38) Georgia
6. (37) Tennessee
7. (36) Ohio St
8. (32) Florida
8. (32) California
10. (31) Iowa

Three things:

1. The talent level at Iowa is VASTLY underrated by the rest of the CFB world. You will pretty much never hear an analyst put Iowa at the same level as the teams currently ahead of them (or behind them) in terms of "talent". The national perception is still that our guys are simply a hard-working, overachieving bunch.

2. Given the fertile recruiting grounds that every other team on this list is waist deep in, our coaching staff is arguably the best in the nation at developing NFL talent. Our recruiting grounds and national appeal just doesn't match up to the rest.

3. Iowa does not appear poised to take a step backward in this department anytime soon. I think most would agree that there is a lot of NFL talent on this roster right now and many of our NFL players our highly productive and still fairly young.

Thoughts?

 

[yaman3]

You have underachieved the past 5-10 years. All of those teams except for Cal and Tennesee have been very close to National Titles or won them. you haven't underachieved as much as Cal, don't get me wrong there, they should have won multiple conference championships.

 

[Jeebus]

I'm thinking Iowa is going to overtake Tennessee and Georgia in short order.

I'm not surprised by this but I think people around the country would be. I think it is a heck of a recruiting tool.

 

[DuffMan]

You have underachieved the past 5-10 years. All of those teams except for Cal and Tennesee have been very close to National Titles or won them. you haven't underachieved as much as Cal, don't get me wrong there, they should have won multiple conference championships.

This is pretty ignorant stuff.

 

[Jeebus]

You have underachieved the past 5-10 years. All of those teams except for Cal and Tennesee have been very close to National Titles or won them. you haven't underachieved as much as Cal, don't get me wrong there, they should have won multiple conference championships.

Interesting take..and you might be right but I disagree just because this sport is so dependent on the quarterback. You could have a ton of NFL talent on your roster but if your QB is bad you are screwed.

 

[DuffMan]

Interesting take..and you might be right but I disagree just because this sport is so dependent on the quarterback. You could have a ton of NFL talent on your roster but if your QB is bad you are screwed.

I don't see anything interesting.

We've got multiple conference titles and have finished ranked in the top 10 in 4 out of the last 7 years.

 

[bradk6]

Not surprised in the least. The staff is already well known for preparing guys for the NFL and will continue to do so. While the Southeast, South and West will continue to get the five star recruits, Iowa will continue to get the hungry three and four star recruits. They will grow and mature them through an NFL style program, not a flavor of the month system alot of programs have success with but does not translate to the NFL. Look for the trend to continue and grow in Iowas favor.

 

[yaman3]

Interesting take..and you might be right but I disagree just because this sport is so dependent on the quarterback. You could have a ton of NFL talent on your roster but if your QB is bad you are screwed.

That's very true and Drew Tate did you few favors in that department. Also, how many of the guys in the NFL were in an offensive skill position? Clark, Moeaki, ?. So, you didn't have a great QB after Brad Banks and not too many recievers. The bulk of that NFL talent was defensive and Oline if my thinking is correct.

 

[yaman3]

I don't see anything interesting.

We've got multiple conference titles and have finished ranked in the top 10 in 4 out of the last 7 years.

How many conference titles in the last 10 years? Relative to those other schools, you are on a another level. I'm not saying Iowa is a long way off, but they have challeneged for 3-4 years at a time for their conference or even National titles.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

That's very true and Drew Tate did you few favors in that department. Also, how many of the guys in the NFL were in an offensive skill position? Clark, Moeaki, ?. So, you didn't have a great QB after Brad Banks and not too many recievers. The bulk of that NFL talent was defensive and Oline if my thinking is correct.

Clark, Moeaki, Scott Chandler, Brandon Meyers, Shonn Greene, Ladell Betts, Albert Young, Trey Stross

 

[DuffMan]

How many conference titles in the last 10 years? Relative to those other schools, you are on a another level. I'm not saying Iowa is a long way off, but they have challeneged for 3-4 years at a time for their conference or even National titles.

Again in the last 7 years we have won 2 titles and finished 2nd once. I don't think it's fair to say we have under achieved.

Let's get some perspective here. We are 10th on that list, and realistically our program has been better over the last 7 years than 2 of those teams (Cal and TN). Are we better than the rest? No, but then again they are ranked ahead of us. I'd imagine if you looked at the list from 10-20 we would be clearly superior to the teams ranked under us as well. Does that mean they "underachieved"? No, it just means we are better than they are.

Again I say your statment that we have underachieved is pretty ignorant. The last 7 years we are around 10th in the country in terms of wins, we are 10th in players active in the NFL, and we are a borderline top 10 program. That's pretty consistent.

 

[yaman3]

Clark, Moeaki, Scott Chandler, Brandon Meyers, Shonn Greene, Ladell Betts, Albert Young, Trey Stross

8/31 is about what I would have guessed and with the exception of Clark none have them have had huge success. I think Greene and Moeaki will, but they haven't yet.

 

[brett108]

8 is more than I would have guessed at skill positions, but Trey Stross won't last the year. I still believe he has not generated a single statistic at the pro level.

 

[yaman3]

Again in the last 7 years we have won 2 titles and finished 2nd once. I don't think it's fair to say we have under achieved.

Let's get some perspective here. We are 10th on that list, and realistically our program has been better over the last 7 years than 2 of those teams (Cal and TN). Are we better than the rest? No, but then again they are ranked ahead of us. I'd imagine if you looked at the list from 10-20 we would be clearly superior to the teams ranked under us as well. Does that mean they "underachieved"? No, it just means we are better than they are.

Again I say your statment that we have underachieved is pretty ignorant. The last 7 years we are around 10th in the country in terms of wins, we are 10th in players active in the NFL, and we are a borderline top 10 program. That's pretty consistent.

I didn't say it wasn't consistent. IMO, when there are only two teams on that list from you conference, being in the top 3 3 times isn't good enough. Also, were both of those conference titles shared? I didn't say Iowa is a terrible football program. It seems like if you throw any sort of reality around in here you are ignorant. I'm sorry, but a team in the top 10 in terms of NFL players should be in contention for National Titles more often. They haven't been and the difference has been an elite QB. Most of those teams have had elite QBs. Guess who hasn't. Iowa and Tennessee.

 

[albertyoungisgood]

Also, just because a player didn't make The League don't assume he wasn't a great college talent. Ed Hinkel and Clinton Solomon were great college players, very talented. There were also "might have beens" like Douglas.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

I didn't say it wasn't consistent. IMO, when there are only two teams on that list from you conference, being in the top 3 3 times isn't good enough. Also, were both of those conference titles shared? I didn't say Iowa is a terrible football program. It seems like if you throw any sort of reality around in here you are ignorant. I'm sorry, but a team in the top 10 in terms of NFL players should be in contention for National Titles more often. They haven't been and the difference has been an elite QB. Most of those teams have had elite QBs. Guess who hasn't. Iowa and Tennessee.

You need to look at how long the players have stayed in the NFL as well. The fact is Iowa has a pretty evenly distributed range while some schools have years where the produce a ton of NFL guys and then years where they produce hardly any. Look at Miami for instance, how many of those NFL guys were on the '01 squad compared to how many came in in the later part of the decade. Iowa has had a pretty solid talent level for about a decade now while other schools have short bursts of exceptional talent. If you look at NFL players by individual year, would Iowa be considered underachieving then?

 

[yaman3]

You need to look at how long the players have stayed in the NFL as well. The fact is Iowa has a pretty evenly distributed range while some schools have years where the produce a ton of NFL guys and then years where they produce hardly any. Look at Miami for instance, how many of those NFL guys were on the '01 squad compared to how many came in in the later part of the decade. Iowa has had a pretty solid talent level for about a decade now while other schools have short bursts of exceptional talent. If you look at NFL players by individual year, would Iowa be considered underachieving then?

Oh, certainly not, but that's not the point. I was talking from a college football point of view not about how those players did in the NFL. At the same time, though, wouldn't you say the Hawks have put more players in the NFL in the last 5 years compared to the first 5 of the decade? I don't know for sure but that would be my guess.

Also, I agree with the point that if a player does or doesn't make it in the NFL is not always related to college football success. There have been numerous guys that have either done more in the NFL than they should have based on College success or have done less. People like Troy Smith, Pat White, Troy Davis, and Brad Banks were great football players at the college level, however they didn't fit the NFL mold. Someone like Tom Brady seemed to fit his NFL system better than his college system. It happens and it is tough to predict who will or won't succeed based on college resume. It seems that skill position players are more that way than lineman or defensive players because a lot of the same things translate to the pro game.

 

[DuffMan]

Yaman,

What you said is we underachieved.

We are 10th ranked program in the country in terms of number of NFL players. We are the 11th ranked program in the country in terms of wins since 2002. That isn't underachieving. That is achieving at consistent level accross all boards. We finished the regular season at 11-1 in 2002. Last year we were undefeated late in the year when our QB went down. We haven't played for a NC but we have been ocassionally relevent in the NC picture, again something consistent with being somewhere around the 10th best program in the country.

 

[tweeterhawk]

You have underachieved the past 5-10 years. All of those teams except for Cal and Tennesee have been very close to National Titles or won them. you haven't underachieved as much as Cal, don't get me wrong there, they should have won multiple conference championships.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

Oh, certainly not, but that's not the point. I was talking from a college football point of view not about how those players did in the NFL. At the same time, though, wouldn't you say the Hawks have put more players in the NFL in the last 5 years compared to the first 5 of the decade? I don't know for sure but that would be my guess.

Also, I agree with the point that if a player does or doesn't make it in the NFL is not always related to college football success. There have been numerous guys that have either done more in the NFL than they should have based on College success or have done less. People like Troy Smith, Pat White, Troy Davis, and Brad Banks were great football players at the college level, however they didn't fit the NFL mold. Someone like Tom Brady seemed to fit his NFL system better than his college system. It happens and it is tough to predict who will or won't succeed based on college resume. It seems that skill position players are more that way than lineman or defensive players because a lot of the same things translate to the pro game.

No I wouldn't say that. Like I said it's been pretty evenly distributed throughout the decade. And you're second paragraph completely lost me because you are saying that Iowa underachieved based on the number of NFL players you have, then you go on to talk about how NFL success isn't related to college success and it's hard to predict who will or won't succeed based on their college resume. That seemed to be the exact opposite of the earlier argument you were making.