forums

Interesting stat regarding the NFL Combine

BostonCanes47 said:
Likewise bro, All love.
I think a lot of those guys were wanted by the majority of P5 schools. At the time were they questionable takes? Jeff James, Holley, Peyton, Adam elg, and maybe Hayes are the only guys I remember the board and P5 schools not being all over.

A lot of those guys still have time to turn it around. I think a lot of them have traits and talent, they just have awful mental makeup and lack maturity which is a reason why they didn’t pan out here

If you look at goldens classes he had at least 5-10 dudes per class who had no business of even camping at Miami and did not have other P5 offers.

Golden was much much much better at identifying body types which is why I think he had more guys hit the league, but Diaz was better at building classes with more depth and finding guys with better traits. A lot of them just never grew and ended up being tweeners, which could be because of their individual work ethic and the culture of the program.

I can remember it like yesterday the dudes who would commit or flip to Miami a week before national signing day who nobody knew who they were under Golden.

It was worded poorly by me, but my whole point in defending Diaz which is extremely difficult to do was in the context of Golden.

Great great analysis by you in this thread, it’s been interesting revisiting those eras and comparing them.
Click to expand...

It’s also very painful. Lol
 
Advertisement
Rellyrell said:
No D; NFL players ≠ success. Teams that have NFL players that are highly drafted (rounds 1-3) = success.

You cannot have a football team filled with a bunch of 5th rounders - UDFA & think that’s the ticket to being a successful football team.

Let’s back up my theory:

Since 2010:

Bama:
73 picks in the top 3 rounds (67% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 161-19 (.894)

OSU:
53 picks in the top 3 rounds (60% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 146-23 (.863)

Clemson:
33 picks in the top 3 rounds (49% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 148-31 (.826)

UGA:
38 picks in the top 3 rounds (46% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 137-39 (.778)

Miami:
19 picks in the top 3 rounds (31% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 95-68 (.582)

Now let’s flip the Time Machine, and see how these teams did from 2000-2009:

Bama:
16 picks in the top 3 rounds (46% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 79-48 (.622)

OSU:
33 picks in the top 3 rounds (48% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 102-26 (.796)

UGA:
28 picks in the top 3 rounds (51% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 98-31 (.759)

Clemson:
10 picks in the top 3 rounds (42% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 79-47 (.626)

Miami:
41 picks in the top 3 rounds (65% of all drafted players)
Record during this time: 102-33 (.755)

Notice how even when we had poor coaching from 2001-2009, we had the horses to make up for it. ****, some classify Butch as a poor coach, but I won’t get into that. Regardless, the fact that we’ve been producing marginal NFL players speaks to our mediocrity. You need at least 45% of ur draft eligible players to be Top 3 round quality. Just banging on the table saying we have NFL talent is not going to cut it.

The NFL has a 53 man roster w/ another 14 on the practice squad. The vast majority of the guys drafted from Miami since 2010 (69%) have been either out of the league w/in 3-4 yrs, push down to the practice squad level, or not made an NFL roster at all.
Click to expand...
Call me KDTray, because I didn't want to put in the work so I needed my teammates get me to a title after I got my 40 and 10.

You can check my math, but UNC has had 19 R1-R3 picks since 2010 for a 44% clip. Pitt, who we usually beat is at 27%, but has produced a first round QB and the greatest defensive tackle of all-time. Virginia, who we are usually in dog fights with, a 35% clip, albeit, fewer drafted players. Virginia Tech with a lot players, but 33% in R1-R3. Duke obviously has low numbers, but has produced a $31M QB. Georgia Tech is an obv cesspool.

It seems as though it should be no shock that Miami is also in a bunch of slop dog fights in the Coastal. I don't think having a few more Jon Garvins and Brandon Washingtons gives us a decided advantage over anyone in the Coastal, but some have been trying to convince us for years otherwise.
 
Rellyrell said:
Again, D; in all due respect u’re equating “NFL Talent” w/ on-field success. U’re also overrating us while devaluing our opponents. If the vast majority of our draft picks are roster numbers 49-53, then what is that equating to?

I’m going to break this down further so we all can see what’s our biggest issue in trying to compare

2005-Present (Total Draft Picks from the Coastal/team):
Miami: 84 (35 top 3 round picks)
VT: 62 (21 top 3 round picks)
UNC: 55 (23 top 3 round picks)
UVA: 48 (13 top 3 round picks)
GT: 31 (10 Top 3 round picks)
Pitt: 23 (6 top 3 round picks)*
Duke: 9 (2 top 3 round picks)
*Pitt joined the ACC in 2013*

Record vs. ACC Coastal from 2005-present:
Vs. Duke: 14-4
Vs. Pitt: 7-3
Vs. GT: 10-7
Vs. VT: 10-8
Vs. UVA: 9-9
Vs. UNC: 8-10

Total Record: 58-41

What tells me is this:

1. While Miami has had more draft picks than every Coastal team, the quality is not overwhelming compared to their biggest rivals .

2. Majority of our quality draft picks came in the earlier part of joining the ACC.

3. The opponents that boasted a double digit quality draftable players, we struggled mightily. Notice w/ Duke & Pitt, who only provided 8 total high end draft picks, we went 21-7 against them. However, when facing GT, UVA, VT, & UNC who produced a combined 67 high end draft picks, we went 37-34 against said opponents.

In essence, we haven’t put enough on the plate to separate ourselves from the rest of The Coastal. We’ve blended right in w/ the rest of these guys.

When you break down the difference in top 3 round draft picks produced by us vs. UNC, VT, UVA, & GT & spread that over a 19 yr period, you’ll see on the field, we haven’t separated ourselves. Hence, we’ll see some 9 win seasons here, 8 win seasons there, and a perennial of 7 win seasons.

The combine is telling us we ain’t the Miami of old, & the NFL draft boards r saying the same chit. We just ain’t grasping that concept b/c we’re desperately living in the past, trying to hold on to “NFLU.”
Click to expand...
Those stats make the point for me. Here is a simple way to look at it: we won the Coastal once in 16 years despite having 52% more Top 3 round picks than the next closest team and 35% more draft picks.

For comparison, Virginia Tech won it six times during that time span. Georgia Tech won it five times.

We witnessed one of the longest stretches of underachievement in recent history.
 
BoxingRobes said:
Call me KDTray, because I didn't want to put in the work so I needed my teammates get me to a title after I got my 40 and 10.

You can check my math, but UNC has had 19 R1-R3 picks since 2010 for a 44% clip. Pitt, who we usually beat is at 27%, but has produced a first round QB and the greatest defensive tackle of all-time. Virginia, who we are usually in dog fights with, a 35% clip, albeit, fewer drafted players. Virginia Tech with a lot players, but 33% in R1-R3. Duke obviously has low numbers, but has produced a $31M QB. Georgia Tech is an obv cesspool.

It seems as though it should be no shock that Miami is also in a bunch of slop dog fights in the Coastal. I don't think having a few more Jon Garvins and Brandon Washingtons gives us a decided advantage over anyone in the Coastal, but some have been trying to convince us for years otherwise.
Click to expand...
According to the stats that @Rellyrell posted, the gap between Miami and the rest of the Coastal was actually larger when it came to high-end picks than total drafted players.

How do you reconcile that with your quoted argument?
 
DMoney said:
According to the stats that @Rellyrell posted, the gap between Miami and the rest of the Coastal was actually larger when it came to high-end picks than total drafted players.

How do you reconcile that with your quoted argument?
Click to expand...
I reconcile it quite easily...including data points like Frank Gore, Antrel Rolle, and Rocky McIntosh is pointless to a discussion about Miami teams of any recent vintage. From 2005 to 2009, Miami produced a little under half of that high end picks total (16 total from those years).

Perhaps your take that Miami had underachieving talent had merit 15 years ago, but you failed to update your take around 2009. From that point forward, we've been achieving right around at standard. Our most embarrassing moments and the roster construction getting worse with each passing year is where you sprinkle in the coaching factor.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
BoxingRobes said:
I reconcile it quite easily...including data points like Frank Gore, Antrel Rolle, and Rocky McIntosh is pointless to a discussion about Miami teams of any recent vintage. From 2005 to 2009, Miami produced a little under half of that high end picks total (16 total from those years).

Perhaps your take that Miami had underachieving talent had merit 15 years ago, but you failed to update your take around 2009. From that point forward, we've been achieving right around at standard.
Click to expand...

And like CP3, I dished it back to u. That’s exactly the point. From 2004-09, we wrecked the NFL draft w/ quality picks. Absolutely we underachieved during that segment of our membership in the Coastal (2005), specifically from 2006-09. But from 2010-present, the rest of the conference have narrowed that gap in regards to quality picks, in particular UNC. So it’s no surprise that this is the only team we’re sub .500 against, but quality to quality they’ve matched us.

Miami-19
UNC-19
VT-12
UVA-6
GT-6
 
Rellyrell said:
And like CP3, I dished it back to u. That’s exactly the point. From 2004-09, we wrecked the NFL draft w/ quality picks. Absolutely we underachieved during that segment of our membership in the Coastal (2005), specifically from 2006-09. But from 2010-present, the rest of the conference have narrowed that gap in regards to quality picks, in particular UNC. So it’s no surprise that this is the only team we’re sub .500 against, but quality to quality they’ve matched us.

Miami-19
UNC-19
VT-12
UVA-6
GT-6
Click to expand...

There's 2 arguments as I see them - and both can be correct

@DMoney - 100% agree our overall NFL talent shows we should have a better record/win the Coastal more often. The numbers definitely show we underacheive

@Rellyrell @BoxingRobes @No_Fly_Zone - 100% agree that D$ in overvaluing our late round talent, and undervaluing the rest of the ACC's talent

FSU should be included in this discussion since we play them every year

@Rellyrell did great work on the numbers. These are the timeframes I look at to make comparisons marking when we fell off - they're all tied together

Recruiting: 2004 - Our 2004 class was ranked #3 and had 1 NFL Combine invite - Calais Campbell. This kicks off 20 years of underachieving recruiting classes. Our #9 2005 + #13 2006 classes were pretty bad too. But if you think we're bad - go back and look at FSU - #1 2004, #1 2005, #4 2006. Those FSU classes are as underachieving as it gets.

Team/Record: 2006 - we go 7-6 in 2006 and frustration starts kicking in. We still have top talents 1st RD Greg Olsen / Jon Beason / Brandon Merriweather - but the 04-06 hasn't restocked our talent at all. The bottom falls out in 2007 when we go 5-7.

NFL Draft: 2008 - These are our 2004 recruiting class thru today's guys. There's some bright spots like the 2011 & 2015 drafts, but generally pretty underwhelming from 2008 forward.

In Terms of Day 1 & 2 NFL Talent - our record looks about right. UNC actually looks more underachieving than Miami. VT & Pitt slightly overperform.

1678284349149.png


So even though we dominate Day 3 - It's not until we start separating with more 1st & 2nd Round Draft picks that we'll start to move the needle

1678285831731.png
 
Last edited:
bshaw28 said:
There's 2 arguments as I see them - and both can be correct

@DMoney - 100% agree our overall NFL talent shows we should have a better record/win the Coastal more often. The numbers definitely show we underacheive

@Rellyrell @BoxingRobes @No_Fly_Zone - 100% agree that D$ in overvaluing our late round talent, and undervaluing the rest of the ACC's talent

FSU should be included in this discussion since we play them every year

@Rellyrell did great work on the numbers. These are the timeframes I look at to make comparisons marking when we fell off - they're all tied together

Recruiting: 2004 - Our 2004 class was ranked #3 and had 1 NFL Combine invite - Calais Campbell. This kicks off 20 years of underachieving recruiting classes. Our #9 2005 + #13 2006 classes were pretty bad too. But if you think we're bad - go back and look at FSU - #1 2004, #1 2005, #4 2006. Those FSU classes are as underachieving as it gets.

Team/Record: 2006 - we go 7-6 in 2006 and frustration starts kicking in. We still have top talents 1st RD Greg Olsen / Jon Beason / Brandon Merriweather - but the 04-06 hasn't restocked our talent at all. The bottom falls out in 2007 when we go 5-7.

NFL Draft: 2008 - These are our 2004 recruiting class thru today guys. There's some bright spots like the 2011 & 2015 drafts, but generally pretty underwhelming from 2008 forward.

In Terms of Day 1 & 2 NFL Talent - our record looks about right. UNC actually looks more underachieving than Miami. VT & Pitt slightly overperform.

View attachment 232445
Click to expand...

Well done. I agree with your post, methodology, and ultimate conclusions.

I'll add that too often people think of talent advantage in binary. Alabama has more talent than Auburn, so Alabama beats Auburn. It doesn't work that way because there are a host of other factors that go into winning and losing. When the talent advantage isn't overwhelming, the less talented team can win on any given Saturday (if some things go their way).

That's been (at least one of) the team's problem. The last 12 years, even when we have a talent advantage over our opponents it is usually a marginal one. And when the talent advantage is marginal, you need everything else to go right for your team (or everything else to go wrong for your opponent). Coaching, player execution, taking advantage of momentum, lucky bounces with the football, breaks on some calls/penalties, etc... it all needs to click in your favor.

But, having a superior talent advantage mitigates mistakes. While a marginal talent advantage exacerbates them.
 
Advertisement
No_Fly_Zone said:
Well done. I agree with your post, methodology, and ultimate conclusions.

I'll add that too often people think of talent advantage in binary. Alabama has more talent than Auburn, so Alabama beats Auburn. It doesn't work that way because there are a host of other factors that go into winning and losing. When the talent advantage isn't overwhelming, the less talented team can win on any given Saturday (if some things go their way).

That's been (at least one of) the team's problem. The last 12 years, even when we have a talent advantage over our opponents it is usually a marginal one. And when the talent advantage is marginal, you need everything else to go right for your team (or everything else to go wrong for your opponent). Coaching, player execution, taking advantage of momentum, lucky bounces with the football, breaks on some calls/penalties, etc... it all needs to click in your favor.

But, having a superior talent advantage mitigates mistakes. While a marginal talent advantage exacerbates them.
Click to expand...
Having a superior talent advantage undoubtedly mitigates many mistakes but anything can happen on any given Saturday. Many variables - coaches, players, home/away, weather, etc.) - contribute to the advantages/disadvantages one particular team may have or not.
 
Rellyrell said:
And like CP3, I dished it back to u. That’s exactly the point. From 2004-09, we wrecked the NFL draft w/ quality picks. Absolutely we underachieved during that segment of our membership in the Coastal (2005), specifically from 2006-09. But from 2010-present, the rest of the conference have narrowed that gap in regards to quality picks, in particular UNC. So it’s no surprise that this is the only team we’re sub .500 against, but quality to quality they’ve matched us.

Miami-19
UNC-19
VT-12
UVA-6
GT-6
Click to expand...
You guys have now conceded the first five years of the argument. I'll also assume you won't argue in favor of Virginia Tech (63% of Miami's Top 3 round talent), UVA (31% ) or Georgia Tech (31%). Those teams accounted for six Coastal titles since 2010, by the way.

So let's focus on North Carolina. On the surface, they have the same number of Top 3 round picks as Miami since 2010. But, to borrow your word, the "quality" is far different.

Those 19 players started 586 NFL games. Miami's 19 players? 889 NFL starts. That's 51% more NFL starts. Miami also had 9 Pro Bowls, 5 Pro Bowlers and 3 All-Pros during this span. All of those numbers beat UNC.

And then if you get into the quantity, it becomes a bloodbath. Miami had 41 Day 3 picks over that time span- that's 64% more than UNC (25). And I'm not including Miami's undrafted free agents, who themselves started 200 games in the pros in that timeframe.

So, yes, even in your handpicked sample, Miami shreds UNC for quality and quantity of NFL players. There is no argument otherwise, although this is a fun exercise so give me what you got @Rellyrell @BoxingRobes @bshaw28 @No_Fly_Zone
 
Advertisement
DMoney said:
You guys have now conceded the first five years of the argument. I'll also assume you won't argue in favor of Virginia Tech (63% of Miami's Top 3 round talent), UVA (31% ) or Georgia Tech (31%). Those teams accounted for six Coastal titles since 2010, by the way.

So let's focus on North Carolina. On the surface, they have the same number of Top 3 round picks as Miami during that span. But, to borrow your word, the "quality" is far different.

Those 19 players started 586 NFL games. Miami's 19 players? 889 NFL starts. That's 51% more NFL starts. This includes 9 Pro Bowls, 5 Pro Bowlers and 3 All-Pros. All of those numbers beat UNC.

And then if you get into the quantity, it becomes a bloodbath. Miami had 41 Day 3 picks over that time span- that's 64% more than UNC (25). And I'm not including Miami's undrafted free agents, who themselves started 200 games in the pros in that timeframe.

So, yes, even in your handpicked sample, Miami shreds UNC for quality and quantity of NFL players. There is no argument otherwise, although this is a fun exercise so give me what you got @Rellyrell @BoxingRobes @bshaw28 @No_Fly_Zone
Click to expand...

I’m going to assume the greater majority of those 889 starts were players drafted from 2004-2009, correct?
 
Rellyrell said:
I’m going to assume the greater majority of those 889 starts were players drafted from 2004-2009, correct?
Click to expand...
Nope- only 2010 on. And only the 19 players identified in your post. This doesn't include Day 3 guys or UDFAs.

  • Jimmy Graham- 132
  • Orlando Franklin- 89
  • Brandon Harris- 0
  • Leonard Hankerson- 14
  • Demarcus Van Dyke- 4
  • Allen Bailey- 70
  • Olivier Vernon- 108
  • Sean Spence- 23
  • Brandon Linder- 88
  • Ereck Flowers- 101
  • Phillip Dorsett- 19
  • Denzel Perryman- 77
  • Clive Walford- 14
  • Duke Johnson- 21
  • Artie Burns- 21
  • David Njoku- 50
  • Chad Thomas- 8
  • Jaelan Phillips- 20
  • Gregory Rousseau- 30


889 starts
 
Advertisement
brock said:
Told y’all golden was a better talent evaluator than given credit for
Click to expand...

Night and day better than Diaz. We laughed at golden for his “size requirements” etc but this is exactly what UGA and BAMA does. Only difference is they get the size AND the speed.. cristobal gets this too.. no more tweeners filling out half our roster
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
Well done. I agree with your post, methodology, and ultimate conclusions.

I'll add that too often people think of talent advantage in binary. Alabama has more talent than Auburn, so Alabama beats Auburn. It doesn't work that way because there are a host of other factors that go into winning and losing. When the talent advantage isn't overwhelming, the less talented team can win on any given Saturday (if some things go their way).

That's been (at least one of) the team's problem. The last 12 years, even when we have a talent advantage over our opponents it is usually a marginal one. And when the talent advantage is marginal, you need everything else to go right for your team (or everything else to go wrong for your opponent). Coaching, player execution, taking advantage of momentum, lucky bounces with the football, breaks on some calls/penalties, etc... it all needs to click in your favor.

But, having a superior talent advantage mitigates mistakes. While a marginal talent advantage exacerbates them.
Click to expand...

Bingo! @DMoney these were the points I was making. No one is disputing we’ve had more talent than on paper than our opponents, that’s clear. But when we break down the difference between what we’ve produced vs. the common opponents we’ve struggled mightily with over a stretch of 19 yrs, we’re talking about have 1-2 better players on avg./yr at any time in a single game than our opponents.

Furthermore, let’s look at Jimmy Graham for a moment: Dude played one season & put up 213 yrds at Miami. Lol. Yes he was a 3rd round pick, but we’ll call that the Antonio Gates effect.

Frank Gore only played for really one season here which was his final yr.

Pat O’Donnell is surely included in those NFL starts, he was a specialist that was a transfer

AQM only played 1 1/2 seasons here due to suspensions

So we have 4 examples who have logged in a great majority of that NFL starting stat where at Miami, their impact was only for a season.

We can say the same thing about GR15, Colbert(son), JP15, & Osborn.

Furthermore, the engine of the FB team (QB) have been went to ****, too.

Since 2004, we’ve had 1 QB drafted!!! (Kaaya)
VT has had 3 QBs drafted
UNC has had 3 QBs drafted
Pitt has had 3 QBs drafted
Duke has had 2 QBs drafted
Only UVA & GT haven’t had a QB drafted

So having marginally better talent w/ no engine to run the car = marginal results. In fact, I would argue it’s that marginal talent, particularly on defense (41 players drafted compared to 35 players on offense {11 of which came by way of the OL}) that’s willed up to be a +.500 team in The Coastal.
 
Rellyrell said:
Pat O’Donnell is surely included in those NFL starts, he was a specialist that was a transfer
Click to expand...
Didn't include him or Bosher, even though they were both long-time starters. Same for Badgley in the UDFA numbers. And Frank Gore was not included on my numbers.
 
9oh4Cane said:
Night and day better than Diaz. We laughed at golden for his “size requirements” etc but this is exactly what UGA and BAMA does. Only difference is they get the size AND the speed.. cristobal gets this too.. no more tweeners filling out half our roster
Click to expand...
They were both awful. Golden was the less stinky and shiner **** than Lispy. But they all sucked.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top