Online Now 3394

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 1967
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3423
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

What School Is Defensive Line U.?

  • http://247sports.com/Article/Florida-State-UNC-LSU-are-tops-on-the-defensive-line-121109

    We use 15 years of NFL draft data to find colleges who have developed defensive linemen. Florida State, LSU and North Carolina are among that group. How do they rank?

    SteveHelwagen

  • Well FSU went to sleep for 4-5 years and is now woken up so.....it's LSU and FSU

    fsufsu

  • It depends I guess

    If you are simply talking the draft, and not what players do when in the NFL

    Then its LSU and FSU as 1a and 1b

    signature image signature image signature image

    NoVaNoles

  • Helwagen is just a masochist...

    signature image signature image signature image

    RicoX19

  • So these studies are supposed to look at how well schools "develop" talent at various positions...

    I think part of what bothers me about the approach is that there's no discussion of where these prospects started (i.e. what they were rated coming out of high school). If you're going to talk about how well schools develop talent, shouldn't the starting point of a prospect be just as important as the ending point?

    If you've got a school who takes five 2* QB's and put them all in the first round of the draft, while another school takes five 5* QB's and they all get drafted in the first round, according to this analysis that means both schools are the same in terms of developing QB talent. Whereas it would be pretty clear to me which school is better at developing talent. The difference in rating coming out of high school vs. coming out of college is really what indicates development IMO. I think that has to be taken into account in this sort of discussion.

    Based on the way the analysis works, I'd definitely put UNC above FSU. Having 8 first round picks vs. 5 easily trumps having one more pick within the top three rounds.

    signature image

    psubills62

  • This is not my list. Just using parameter of top-3 round draft picks last 15 years. It's an objective not subjective list. I think it's interesting just crunching the numbers.

    SteveHelwagen

  • fsufsu said...

    Well FSU went to sleep for 4-5 years and is now woken up so.....it's LSU and FSU

    +1 for honesty

    signature image

    Oaktown in the building

    glenoaks ●

  • PSU ALL DAY !!!!!

    JayPSU

  • JayPSU said...

    PSU ALL DAY !!!!!

    No

    signature image signature image signature image

    NoVaNoles

  • SteveHelwagen said...

    This is not my list. Just using parameter of top-3 round draft picks last 15 years. It's an objective not subjective list. I think it's interesting just crunching the numbers.

    Whose list is it then?

    If the only purpose of these articles is to state who has the most top-3-round picks at various positions, then OK, you've done that. But when you start implying that this list (without considering any other factors) has certain meaning, then you need to account for other factors that affects what you claim this list means.

    And since you yourself said the last time "I think the point of the article is to illustrate which schools have in the recent past done a great job of grooming quarterbacks for the next level" - to me, that means who has developed QB's the best. And the starting point of prospects is an enormous factor when you're talking about developing players.

    If I put out a list of college QB's who had > 4000 passing yards in a year and claimed that this represented the best QB's in the nation, don't you think people might argue that passing yards don't necessarily determine who the best QB is? If you're going to use a list to claim something, you need to back up why that list is the determining (or only) factor in what you're claiming.

    signature image

    psubills62

  • psubills62 said...

    Whose list is it then?

    If the only purpose of these articles is to state who has the most top-3-round picks at various positions, then OK, you've done that. But when you start implying that this list (without considering any other factors) has certain meaning, then you need to account for other factors that affects what you claim this list means.

    And since you yourself said the last time "I think the point of the article is to illustrate which schools have in the recent past done a great job of grooming quarterbacks for the next level" - to me, that means who has developed QB's the best. And the starting point of prospects is an enormous factor when you're talking about developing players.

    If I put out a list of college QB's who had > 4000 passing yards in a year and claimed that this represented the best QB's in the nation, don't you think people might argue that passing yards don't necessarily determine who the best QB is? If you're going to use a list to claim something, you need to back up why that list is the determining (or only) factor in what you're claiming.

    Since Steve H is a devout Buckeye man I am pretty sure the fact that OSU came in #12 shows you that the list is just informational only
    If it was trying to prove who was the best then I am sure the reason to compile would have a different spin. Meaning something that would show the Buckeyes in a more formidable light.

    J12harris238145 ●

  • J12harris238145 said...

    Since Steve H is a devout Buckeye man I am pretty sure the fact that OSU came in #12 shows you that the list is just informational only If it was trying to prove who was the best then I am sure the reason to compile would have a different spin. Meaning something that would show the Buckeyes in a more formidable light.

    Where did I say Steve was putting spin on it? It's pretty obvious he's not.

    signature image

    psubills62

  • Agree with the poster about FSU being asleep. That will no longer be happening under Jimbo in regards to defense.

    Next year you have:
    Demonte McAllister
    Timmy Jernigan

    The following year:
    Mario Edwards Jr.
    Eddie Goldman

    LHSPanther

  • NoVaNoles said...

    It depends I guess

    If you are simply talking the draft, and not what players do when in the NFL

    Then its LSU and FSU as 1a and 1b

    How? LSU currently has 7 DL players on NFL rosters. Bama has 6. FSU has 5. And that's not counting Upshaw because he is a hybrid guy.

    I'd say LSU and Bama

    rwhite4ua

  • rwhite4ua said...

    How? LSU currently has 7 DL players on NFL rosters. Bama has 6. FSU has 5. And that's not counting Upshaw because he is a hybrid guy.

    I'd say LSU and Bama

    Well if you are just counting the past few years lol

    I was considering recent history dating back to the mid 80's

    And since then FSU pisses on Bama in terms of DL sent to the NFL

    Miami does too for that matter

    This post was edited by NoVaNoles on 3/14/2013 at 11:35 AM

    signature image signature image signature image

    NoVaNoles

  • JayPSU said...

    PSU ALL DAY !!!!!

    Jay Paterno? Is that you?

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Oh and Mac...the horse's name is Friday." - Jim Bowers

    ksredmill ●

  • Who are the best talent evaluators in the world? NFL coaches and scouts. We are looking at the great college players in their eyes. Use whatever formula you want. For this series, this is the criteria.

    SteveHelwagen

  • psubills62 said...

    So these studies are supposed to look at how well schools "develop" talent at various positions...

    I think part of what bothers me about the approach is that there's no discussion of where these prospects started (i.e. what they were rated coming out of high school). If you're going to talk about how well schools develop talent, shouldn't the starting point of a prospect be just as important as the ending point?

    If you've got a school who takes five 2* QB's and put them all in the first round of the draft, while another school takes five 5* QB's and they all get drafted in the first round, according to this analysis that means both schools are the same in terms of developing QB talent. Whereas it would be pretty clear to me which school is better at developing talent. The difference in rating coming out of high school vs. coming out of college is really what indicates development IMO. I think that has to be taken into account in this sort of discussion.

    Based on the way the analysis works, I'd definitely put UNC above FSU. Having 8 first round picks vs. 5 easily trumps having one more pick within the top three rounds.

    Developing isn't the end all-be all. It's also about identifying, evaluating, recruiting, use of the players in your scheme, ect.

    That's wonderful that team A developed two 2*s into first rounders, but the fact that team A found, recruited, signed, and developed 5 5*s puts them waaaaay ahead of team B in your example.

    Remember, they are asking who is "DL U" not who is the best developer of DL. It's about the whole spectrum and development is only 1 facet.

    TNoles813

  • TNoles813 said...

    Developing isn't the end all-be all. It's also about identifying, evaluating, recruiting, use of the players in your scheme, ect.

    That's wonderful that team A developed two 2*s into first rounders, but the fact that team A found, recruited, signed, and developed 5 5*s puts them waaaaay ahead of team B in your example.

    Remember, they are asking who is "DL U" not who is the best developer of DL. It's about the whole spectrum and development is only 1 facet.

    You completely missed Bills' point. Steve specifically said this was a list illustrating "which schools have in the recent past done a great job of grooming [the position] for the next level." Of the four factors you listed, only developing fits into "grooming." That was the point. I think it should count the full spectrum, but the original parameters didn't mention it, they only mentioned grooming kids for the next level. You could definitely argue some other things factor in, but, IMO, development is the vast majority of "grooming for the next level."

    signature image

    #DicedPineapples

    shavisimo2

  • TNoles813 said...

    Developing isn't the end all-be all. It's also about identifying, evaluating, recruiting, use of the players in your scheme, ect.

    That's wonderful that team A developed two 2*s into first rounders, but the fact that team A found, recruited, signed, and developed 5 5*s puts them waaaaay ahead of team B in your example.

    Remember, they are asking who is "DL U" not who is the best developer of DL. It's about the whole spectrum and development is only 1 facet.

    That's a slightly different, but very relevant discussion to my post.

    Steve specifically said that he believes this list represents the best programs for grooming ____ (position). That's what I'm addressing. The question of what exactly makes a "Position U" is not what I'm addressing.

    And in my "example," I said five 2* players, not two 2*. I fail to see how "developing" 5* players is such a big deal. Look at Clowney - who is really going take credit for developing him? Look at the USC QB's - they get drafted high because they had the same tools as they did in HS, which are tools that NFL likes. Was Leinart really "developed"? I wouldn't say so. 5* kids are supposed to be drafted in the first round, all a school has to do is not screw them up too much.

    I don't see recruiting (or "signing") as that much of a factor in the discussion, but I'm hardly surprised that an FSU fan thinks otherwise.

    signature image

    psubills62

  • NoVaNoles said...

    No

    PSU is for sure near the top. They have the numbers and the quality. No school has a better tandem than Tamba Hali and Cameron Wake.

    signature image signature image signature image

    MZizzle2 ●

  • MZizzle2 said...

    PSU is for sure near the top. They have the numbers and the quality. No school has a better tandem than Tamba Hali and Cameron Wake.

    Penn State did nothing for Cameron Wake

    z28 foody

  • You should use All-Pro selections as your criteria.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Face Stabber

  • Face Stabber said...

    You should use All-Pro selections as your criteria.

    There are a lot of variables you could use to make any argument you want. I like the criteria I am using, but will try and delve into what schools have produced All-Pro players in the ones still to come. That's a good barometer, too, and probably not hard to research, either.

    SteveHelwagen

  • Face Stabber said...

    You should use All-Pro selections as your criteria.

    i think the criteria was what SCHOOL is DL U. what a player does once they leave college is dependant on coaching and their drive. look at guys like tom brady. didnt go a ton in college and is an all pro. then youve got guys like tim tebow that were outstanding in college and suck in the pro game

    throwing pro bowl and all pro in there is pointless. how many guys that are all pros come from little piss-ant schools? look at demarcus ware. didnt play big time college ball and is a perenial all pro. jared allen fits in here as well

    college is the platform to get a guy to the pros. what happens when you get to the pro game is up to the player

    This post was edited by phillip740il on 3/14/2013 at 7:39 PM

    signature image

    phillip740il ●

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports