Consigliere
All-American
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 21,927
Honestly, people look at a draft differently when it comes to how much talent the school had.
Maybe if we agreed on some ground rules, rather than making a big hullabaloo, it would be easier to discuss. We will likely all agree that the coaching/training is better in the pros. So it is expected that the better coaching/training in the pros may have something to do with that improvement or a players’ ceiling being risen. In addition, perhaps performing enhancing drugs have something to do with this increase/decrease in ability. With that being said, I think there are a few rules we could likely agree on.
Rule 1: Inefficiency: the player who gets drafted or picked up as a free agent and that player goes on to play much better in the pros. Under the inefficiency rule, it is possible to believe that the player who performs better in the pros was not used properly in college or his talent was not maximized in college. This does not mean a player has to ball out of his mind in the pros to become an example of this rule. It could be a player that was hardly used in college but is able to stay in the pros for some time (i.e. Spencer Adkins). When players end up making a bigger impact in the pros, I tend to blame the college staff for not maximizing his abilities during his college tenure. Keep in mind, the competition/talent pool is better in the pros so if a pro team wants to keep you…the kid probably could have probably done more in college.
This inefficiency rule does NOT apply to players who were injured most of college, suspended a lot and/or thrown out of school.
Rule 2: Maximized Talent:the player who gets drafted and that player goes on to do much less in the pros. Under the maximized talent rule, it is possible to believe that the player was used to his best ability in college (i.e. the coaches maximized his talent in college). When a player goes on to fizzle out in the pros, I give the college staff a lot of credit for maximizing the player’s ability during his tenure. So basically when the competition/talent pool improves in the pros, the player doesn’t stand out anymore.
This maximized talent rule does not apply to players that get injured toward the end of their career in college or injured in the pros.
Rule 3: Try-Outs, UDFA and Actual Roster Spots: I am not a big believer in a try-out or UDFA meaning anything other than a chance to try-out. A lot of these kids are just given a chance; possibly because of a connection or possibly the NFL team wants to see them close up. Some of these kids never do much in college but earn a try-out for some reason. If the try-out/UDFA goes on to stay with a team for a number of years, than this will mean they probably fit into Rule 1. If nothing happens to the player, than he shouldn't fit into either rule.
Maybe if we agreed on some ground rules, rather than making a big hullabaloo, it would be easier to discuss. We will likely all agree that the coaching/training is better in the pros. So it is expected that the better coaching/training in the pros may have something to do with that improvement or a players’ ceiling being risen. In addition, perhaps performing enhancing drugs have something to do with this increase/decrease in ability. With that being said, I think there are a few rules we could likely agree on.
Rule 1: Inefficiency: the player who gets drafted or picked up as a free agent and that player goes on to play much better in the pros. Under the inefficiency rule, it is possible to believe that the player who performs better in the pros was not used properly in college or his talent was not maximized in college. This does not mean a player has to ball out of his mind in the pros to become an example of this rule. It could be a player that was hardly used in college but is able to stay in the pros for some time (i.e. Spencer Adkins). When players end up making a bigger impact in the pros, I tend to blame the college staff for not maximizing his abilities during his college tenure. Keep in mind, the competition/talent pool is better in the pros so if a pro team wants to keep you…the kid probably could have probably done more in college.
This inefficiency rule does NOT apply to players who were injured most of college, suspended a lot and/or thrown out of school.
Rule 2: Maximized Talent:the player who gets drafted and that player goes on to do much less in the pros. Under the maximized talent rule, it is possible to believe that the player was used to his best ability in college (i.e. the coaches maximized his talent in college). When a player goes on to fizzle out in the pros, I give the college staff a lot of credit for maximizing the player’s ability during his tenure. So basically when the competition/talent pool improves in the pros, the player doesn’t stand out anymore.
This maximized talent rule does not apply to players that get injured toward the end of their career in college or injured in the pros.
Rule 3: Try-Outs, UDFA and Actual Roster Spots: I am not a big believer in a try-out or UDFA meaning anything other than a chance to try-out. A lot of these kids are just given a chance; possibly because of a connection or possibly the NFL team wants to see them close up. Some of these kids never do much in college but earn a try-out for some reason. If the try-out/UDFA goes on to stay with a team for a number of years, than this will mean they probably fit into Rule 1. If nothing happens to the player, than he shouldn't fit into either rule.