bluebyyou

January 19th, 2015 at 1:57 PM ^

Here's the real data (since 2005):

http://247sports.com/Article/Since-2005-SEC-dominates-conferences-in-pr…

Sorry about the formatting.....

First rounders by conference
SEC - 88 

ACC - 56 

Big 12 - 47 

Big Ten - 44 

Pac-12 - 35 

Big East/AAC (The American) - 19 

Independents, MAC - 6 

C-USA, WAC - 5 

MWC - 4 

Sun Belt - 2 

CAA, OVC
Draft picks by conference
SEC - 430 

ACC - 356 

Big Ten - 314 

Pac-12 - 308 

Big 12 - 274 

Big East/AAC (The American) - 164 

MWC - 119 

C-USA - 92 

WAC - 83 

MAC - 75 

Independents - 45 

Sun Belt - 39 

SoCon - 25 

Big Sky - 23 

CAA - 21 

MEAC, MIAA, Southland - 15 

OVC - 13 

LSC, MVFC - 11 

Great West - 10 

Big South, Ivy - 9 

GLIAC, SWAC - 8 

A-10, PSAC - 7 

Gateway - 6 

NEC, SIAC - 4 

CIAA - 3 

GAC, GSC, OAC, Patriot, RMAC - 2 

CCIW, CWUAA, GNAC, MACJC, Mid-South, MSFA, NCIAC, NE-10, NSIC, NWC, OUA, PFL, Pioneer, RSEQ, SAC, WIAC - 1
Pro Bowlers by conference
SEC - 39 

Pac-12 - 32 

ACC, Big 12 - 23 

Big Ten - 18 

C-USA - 9 

Big East, MWC- 6 

WAC - 4 

Big Sky, MAC, MEAC - 3 

Big South, Independents, A-10, PSAC - 2 

Great West, Ivy, LSC, OVC, SAC, SIAC, SoCon, Sun Belt, SWAC, WI - 1
 

LSAClassOf2000

January 19th, 2015 at 3:12 PM ^

At least some that distribution can be found here, although you'd have to do some work to put it in a more useful form - DraftHistory

You can search by position, school, round and a few other parameters. It would be interesting to put together the Big Ten data for, say, the last 20 years by round, pick and position to see if it were possible to develop a way to weight draft success at the team and conference level.

michclub19

January 19th, 2015 at 2:05 PM ^

I wonder how they decided where to put players who participated at multiple schools?  They are giving the Big Ten Russell Wilson even though he played more seasons at NC State than Wisconsin.  Also, it gives the Big Ten Rutgers and Maryland even though none of those Super Bowl players played in the conference.  This also applies to the SEC with TA&M and Mizzou, etc

bronxblue

January 19th, 2015 at 4:36 PM ^

Yeah, it was a bit weird.

At least with Russell, he did seem to take a step up in play at Wisconsin and competed for a conference title, so at least you could argue that he had some connection to the conference.  But anybody from Rutgers in the Super Bowl might as well be an indenpendent as it pertains to the B1G.

Tuebor

January 19th, 2015 at 2:21 PM ^

Look at the NFL team map.  I count 15/32 teams that play in the B1G footprint or in the northeast (Included DC and Baltimore) which has similar weather patterns as the the B1G footprint.

 

By comparison the SEC footprint has 11/32 teams but 4 of them are from TX, MO which I don't consider the traditional SEC footprint.

bjk

January 19th, 2015 at 5:25 PM ^

is definitely the South.

I don't know if anyone remembers the CST vote totals dribbling in in the 2000 election; this was a dramatic portrayal of the contrasting regions of Florida.

West of the Apalachicola River is Florabama; East of the Apalachicola River and north of Tampa is Fleorgia.

BLHoke

January 19th, 2015 at 4:16 PM ^

I've always contended over the last 15 years or so that while the SEC generally had better raw talent from top to bottom on their rosters, which you can coast off of and be successful in college with alone if you're superior to everyone else you match up with physically... The critical thinking, decision making positions like QBs, OL, Defensive captains, LBs & Safeties seem to have better results from the players that come from Universities where school and scholastic performance is put at a premium.



Think about the best QBs in the league right now... Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Russell Wilson, all Big Ten guys... Aaron Rodgers, Andrew Luck from great schools in the Pac 12... Now the Mannings appear to be the exception in the SEC, while each has their own set of glaring shortcomings at QB, they are like yin and yang... Aside from them, I'd have to argue that Matthew Stafford is the next best QB from that conference, with maybe an argument for Cam, although I feel like he's still living off of his athletic advantages by and large... But after that, SEC QBs get very sketchy Jay Cutler, Tebow, a slew of other 1st round busts (hello Tim Couch, Jamarcus Russell, Heath Shuler, Rex Grossman, Jason Campbell.)... Denver let Jay Cutler go in favor of rolling the dice with Big Ten also ran Kyle Orton. I know Vanderbilt is actually a good school, still SEC though.



But also look at successful long term OL or LB that might not have been as affective or touted in college as they became in their NFL careers. It's just seems like the schools that recruit smart football players who go to and excel in the classroom, that once their players make it to the NFL, they have a higher aptitude to learn the game more in depth, recognizing and dissecting more complex concepts and plays as they develop, giving them a mental edge that more than makes up for their lack of athleticism compared to the world class athletes that can run faster and jump higher than anyone else or pick of the most weight the most time at the combine, but maybe can't walk and chew bubblegum at the same time.

BLHoke

January 19th, 2015 at 4:55 PM ^

Russ is absolutely Big Ten... I say that because while he had some success and exciting games at NC State, I think had he not had the year at Wisconsin where he ran a pro style offense, against stiffer competition at the time, and fell only a few plays from a NC getting more recognition and padding his football résumé, playing for and winning a conference championship, being one drop away from beating Oregon in the Rose Bowl (NC State doesn't play in those), setting an NCAA record for passing efficiency, winning Big Ten QB of the Year, and being selected 1st all Big Ten and 3rd team All American... That season gave him national recognition, and I believe the confidence to let baseball go in favor of football.