247 did a five-year study on player development from the 2011 to 2015 class. Not sure what to do with the results, but they should provoke some discussion.
This was the criteria:
It's a measure that takes into account the total number of Top247 prospects a program signed along with where/if those players were drafted (3 points for 1st rounders, 2 points for 2nd-3rd, 1 for 4th-7th), dividing the total number of prospects by the point total to create the rating. This removes any advantage created by a program’s ability to recruit an overwhelming number of Top247 players. It also rewards programs that produce more first- and second-day picks, removing a "quantity over quality" argument. We also limited this list to teams that recruited at least 10 Top247 players from 2011 to 2015.
To more accurately represent how a program develops players, 247Sports removed four categories of prospects from the data:
- Players who were dismissed.
- Players who didn’t qualify.
- Players who medically retired.
- Players who transferred after two or fewer seasons on campus. If a player stayed three years and transferred, they count against a team’s 'not drafted' tab. If a player transferred and was drafted elsewhere, they count for the team to which they transferred.
Miami finished 11th. Here is the list:
1. Alabama
2. Ohio State
3. Clemson
4. Florida
5. LSU
6. Oklahoma
7. Ole Miss
8. FSU
9. Stanford
10. Notre Dame
11. Miami
12. Georgia
13. USC
14. UCLA
15. Penn State
16. Washington
17. Auburn
18. Texas A&M
19. Virginia Tech
20. Michigan
Texas was 30th.
Miami put 54% of its 247 prospects in the NFL, which ranked
5th behind Ohio State (64%), Alabama (59%), Clemson (55%) and Florida (54%). The reason it wasn't ranked in the Top 5 overall was the absence of premium, first round types. Note that Miami was tied for 12th in overall Top 247 Players signed.
That tells me Miami has two issues: (1) not winning enough to attract the no-brainer, first round players; and (2) too many guys are leaving early and going 2-3 rounds too late.