<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is NFL-Caliber Talent Enough?</title>
	<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/</link>
	<description>Tell The Whole Damn World, This Is Blog Territory!</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 02:23:27 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Tee Shirt Diesel</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-4257</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 04:14:04 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-4257</guid>
					<description>thanks.have a nice day.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>thanks.have a nice day.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Vibram Five Fingers</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-3438</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 20:35:07 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-3438</guid>
					<description>You, my friend, ROCK! I found exactly the info I already searched all over the place and simply could not find it. What an ideal website.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>You, my friend, ROCK! I found exactly the info I already searched all over the place and simply could not find it. What an ideal website.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Tory Burch Shoes</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2968</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 22:27:05 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2968</guid>
					<description>Tory Burch Shoes</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Tory Burch Shoes
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: bakugans</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2938</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2011 23:45:19 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2938</guid>
					<description>Thank you very much. I am wonderring if i can share your article in the bookmarks of society，Then more friends can talk about this problem.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Thank you very much. I am wonderring if i can share your article in the bookmarks of society，Then more friends can talk about this problem.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: auto key programmer</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2922</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Apr 2011 20:30:54 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2922</guid>
					<description>A wonderful article. In my life, I have never seen a man be so selfless in helping others around him to get along and get working. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>A wonderful article. In my life, I have never seen a man be so selfless in helping others around him to get along and get working.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Cheap Panerai Replica Watches</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2853</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 20:46:56 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2853</guid>
					<description>TY, wonderful job! This was the info I needed to know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>TY, wonderful job! This was the info I needed to know.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: electric winch</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2726</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Dec 2010 20:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2726</guid>
					<description>I am glad to talk with you and you give me great help! Thanks for that,I am wonderring if I can contact you via email when I meet problems. 
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I am glad to talk with you and you give me great help! Thanks for that,I am wonderring if I can contact you via email when I meet problems.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: ragnarok</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2416</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 14:00:15 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2416</guid>
					<description>SDGldnBear,

I'll be the first to admit that this sort of analysis has holes in it.  The biggest one, in my opinion, is that it in no way considers the depth of a college roster.  It cannot differentiate between a deep and talented roster with a few superstars at the top, and one that lucks into a few freak athletes on an otherwise forgettable roster, but it's pretty obvious that the former team should have a much better record than the latter.

Another problem that this system overlooks is injuries, especially just before the draft.  Does Dennis Dixon fall to the 5th round if he doesn't seriously mess up his knee?  I highly doubt it.  Yet during his (non-injured) time with the Ducks, Oregon got the use of a first-day NFL talent.

And, of course, I probably should have included undrafted free agents, at least those that eventually made an NFL roster.  Many of these guys go on to have productive careers in the pros (most famously, Kurt Warner), and including them probably would have given us a better indication of the depth of college rosters.

Now, to address your concerns...

You're right, there IS a difference between being drafted and actually producing in the NFL.  Perhaps I should award no points for a player who is drafted but never makes an NFL roster, or perhaps count him the same as an undrafted free agent.  Still, I think you'd have to concede that anyone who ever gets drafted or even signs a 10-day contract with an NFL club is an immensely talented football player, one who was almost certainly a major starter and producer on his college team.  In measuring the strength of a college roster, I think you'd be remiss to not at least consider these guys.

What I like about the NFL Draft as a measure of talent is that, more than anything else, it separates out a player from his coaching and his team's performance.  Less talented players can, through coaching and being put in the right situations, produce and become college stars.  Jason White, the Oklahoma quarterback, won a Heisman Trophy while being surrounded by NFL talent, yet went undrafted in 2004 and had difficulty even finding a team to give him a tryout.  Similarly, many college stars never have a significant pro career, either due to injury, poor work ethic, or simply being stuck behind even more talented players.  Nonetheless, the NFL Draft is by no means a perfect indicator of talent, and I can certainly see how a more thorough analysis would take all of these issues into consideration.

In summary, you're right, I am just measuring how well a team does in the draft.  I happen to think that, looking at the data I collected, it correlates pretty well with the overall talent level present on any particular team, but there are obviously exceptions.  A high draft score and a low win total are not necessarily indicative of underachievement; key injuries and just plain bad luck can, and certainly does, play a role.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>SDGldnBear,</p>
	<p>I&#8217;ll be the first to admit that this sort of analysis has holes in it.  The biggest one, in my opinion, is that it in no way considers the depth of a college roster.  It cannot differentiate between a deep and talented roster with a few superstars at the top, and one that lucks into a few freak athletes on an otherwise forgettable roster, but it&#8217;s pretty obvious that the former team should have a much better record than the latter.</p>
	<p>Another problem that this system overlooks is injuries, especially just before the draft.  Does Dennis Dixon fall to the 5th round if he doesn&#8217;t seriously mess up his knee?  I highly doubt it.  Yet during his (non-injured) time with the Ducks, Oregon got the use of a first-day NFL talent.</p>
	<p>And, of course, I probably should have included undrafted free agents, at least those that eventually made an NFL roster.  Many of these guys go on to have productive careers in the pros (most famously, Kurt Warner), and including them probably would have given us a better indication of the depth of college rosters.</p>
	<p>Now, to address your concerns&#8230;</p>
	<p>You&#8217;re right, there IS a difference between being drafted and actually producing in the NFL.  Perhaps I should award no points for a player who is drafted but never makes an NFL roster, or perhaps count him the same as an undrafted free agent.  Still, I think you&#8217;d have to concede that anyone who ever gets drafted or even signs a 10-day contract with an NFL club is an immensely talented football player, one who was almost certainly a major starter and producer on his college team.  In measuring the strength of a college roster, I think you&#8217;d be remiss to not at least consider these guys.</p>
	<p>What I like about the NFL Draft as a measure of talent is that, more than anything else, it separates out a player from his coaching and his team&#8217;s performance.  Less talented players can, through coaching and being put in the right situations, produce and become college stars.  Jason White, the Oklahoma quarterback, won a Heisman Trophy while being surrounded by NFL talent, yet went undrafted in 2004 and had difficulty even finding a team to give him a tryout.  Similarly, many college stars never have a significant pro career, either due to injury, poor work ethic, or simply being stuck behind even more talented players.  Nonetheless, the NFL Draft is by no means a perfect indicator of talent, and I can certainly see how a more thorough analysis would take all of these issues into consideration.</p>
	<p>In summary, you&#8217;re right, I am just measuring how well a team does in the draft.  I happen to think that, looking at the data I collected, it correlates pretty well with the overall talent level present on any particular team, but there are obviously exceptions.  A high draft score and a low win total are not necessarily indicative of underachievement; key injuries and just plain bad luck can, and certainly does, play a role.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: SDGldnBEar</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2413</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 09:20:53 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2413</guid>
					<description>Being drafted is not the same as actually playing the in the league and being any good.  Thus, simply looking at players drafted, even with your less points per round adjustment, is not a fair way to assess over- vs under-achieving.

You need to look at 

(1) number of first team all Pac 10 players, 
(2) number of players starting on NFL teams, and 
(3) number of players actively seeing non-special teams playing time (kickers and returners excluded).  

Otherwise you are just measuring a team by how its players do in the draft, rather than how they actually do in the NFL.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Being drafted is not the same as actually playing the in the league and being any good.  Thus, simply looking at players drafted, even with your less points per round adjustment, is not a fair way to assess over- vs under-achieving.</p>
	<p>You need to look at </p>
	<p>(1) number of first team all Pac 10 players,<br />
(2) number of players starting on NFL teams, and<br />
(3) number of players actively seeing non-special teams playing time (kickers and returners excluded).  </p>
	<p>Otherwise you are just measuring a team by how its players do in the draft, rather than how they actually do in the NFL.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: SoCal Oski</title>
		<link>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2409</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 15:07:01 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/05/03/is-nfl-caliber-talent-enough/#comment-2409</guid>
					<description>See, here's the thing.  NFL-calber talent is definitely critical.  But even more so is team chemistry, and using that talent properly.  Two cases in point respectively: the 2007 Cal team, and any of Karl Dorrell's teams.

With Cal, the lack of chemistry became evident by the Fucla game, and resulted in the subsequent collapse (topped off by the Big Game fiasco).  Whether the chemistry was from deflated expectations, &quot;superstar&quot; egos, or finger pointing regarding mistakes is immaterial.  What matters is even watching on TV one could see that the Cal team wasn't playing together.  Contrast this with the Furd team that had great chemistry and was starting to play well at the end of the season.  

With KD, he had this insane offensive dream, and tried to mold his players to it.  He never had the right QBs for it, and aside from that little bug Maurice Jones, none of his guys could fit.  Rather than adapt to his team, he tried to shove the square pegs in the round holes.  

What the hell was I trying to say here?  Whatever.  Nice of you to kick this blog into uber-geek mode.  I need a beer.

Go Bears!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>See, here&#8217;s the thing.  NFL-calber talent is definitely critical.  But even more so is team chemistry, and using that talent properly.  Two cases in point respectively: the 2007 Cal team, and any of Karl Dorrell&#8217;s teams.</p>
	<p>With Cal, the lack of chemistry became evident by the Fucla game, and resulted in the subsequent collapse (topped off by the Big Game fiasco).  Whether the chemistry was from deflated expectations, &#8220;superstar&#8221; egos, or finger pointing regarding mistakes is immaterial.  What matters is even watching on TV one could see that the Cal team wasn&#8217;t playing together.  Contrast this with the Furd team that had great chemistry and was starting to play well at the end of the season.  </p>
	<p>With KD, he had this insane offensive dream, and tried to mold his players to it.  He never had the right QBs for it, and aside from that little bug Maurice Jones, none of his guys could fit.  Rather than adapt to his team, he tried to shove the square pegs in the round holes.  </p>
	<p>What the hell was I trying to say here?  Whatever.  Nice of you to kick this blog into uber-geek mode.  I need a beer.</p>
	<p>Go Bears!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

