Most NFL Players on Active Rosters By College.

#1
McDad

McDad

I can't brain today; I has the dumb.
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
60,226
Likes
128,718
#1
I think k this gives additional perspective about how we are currently performing relative to other teams.
We are way down the list but have a strong record relative to NFL talent. Have beat several teams above us too.

 
#6
#6
I know the Pruitt years hurt us. not a lot there. sadly most of those are probably Butch players. he had so much talent, but did nothing with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#7
#7
Breaking down what each school has in the league by position

Tennessee: 26
DL: 5 (Barnett, Butler, Norman Lott, Taylor, Tuttle)
LB: 2 (Pearce & Young)
DB: 4 (Hadden, Jackson, McCollough, Taylor)
Special Teams: 1 (Cox)
QB: 2 (Dobbs, Milton)
WR: 5 (Hyatt, Jennings, Palmer, Thorton, Tillman)
RB: 4 (Jones, Kamara, Sampson, Wright)
TE: 0
OL: 3 (Mays, Smith, Wright)

Alabama: 62
DL: 11
LB: 8
DB: 13
Special Teams: 2
QB: 5
WR: 8
RB: 5
TE: 0
OL: 8

Georgia: 57
DL: 12
LB: 7
DB: 8
Special Teams: 2
QB: 2
WR: 4
RB: 7 (Herschell Walker is listed as a FB for Dallas)
TE: 5
OL: 11

Ohio State: 57
DL: 12
LB: 9
DB: 9
Special Teams: 1
QB: 2
WR: 8
RB: 2 (both are rookies)
TE: 3
OL: 7
 
  • Like
Reactions: Godfatha and McDad
#9
#9
South Carolina is not a good program historically, but honestly they should be better than they've been over the last decade if they've currently got 25 guys in the NFL. That's the same as other programs that have underachieved over the same timeframe (us, USC, A&M). They've only finished the season in the top 25 twice in the last 10 years. I guess Muschamp was more the underachiever there, rather than Beamer.

Say what you want to about Beamer, and I don't like the guy at all, but he's had two 8-win regular seasons there in 4 years, and went to (and won) a bowl game in another year. That is not an easy job (especially when the SEC had divisions) but he's done well there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#10
#10
A basis from which a lot of teams could argue that they are overachieving at the college level given their ultimate talent levels, versus teams that could say that they are underachieving at the college level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#11
#11
LouderVol said:
Breaking down what each school has in the league by position

Tennessee: 26
DL: 5 (Barnett, Butler, Norman Lott, Taylor, Tuttle)
LB: 2 (Pearce & Young)
DB: 4 (Hadden, Jackson, McCollough, Taylor)
Special Teams: 1 (Cox)
QB: 2 (Dobbs, Milton)
WR: 5 (Hyatt, Jennings, Palmer, Thorton, Tillman)
RB: 4 (Jones, Kamara, Sampson, Wright)
TE: 0
OL: 3 (Mays, Smith, Wright)

Alabama: 62
DL: 11
LB: 8
DB: 13
Special Teams: 2
QB: 5
WR: 8
RB: 5
TE: 0
OL: 8

Georgia: 57
DL: 12
LB: 7
DB: 8
Special Teams: 2
QB: 2
WR: 4
RB: 7 (Herschell Walker is listed as a FB for Dallas)
TE: 5
OL: 11

Ohio State: 57
DL: 12
LB: 9
DB: 9
Special Teams: 1
QB: 2
WR: 8
RB: 2 (both are rookies)
TE: 3
OL: 7
Click to expand...
Well hopefully the TE at 0 stat will be changing in the future!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#12
#12
05_never_again said:
South Carolina is not a good program historically, but honestly they should be better than they've been over the last decade if they've currently got 25 guys in the NFL. That's the same as other programs that have underachieved over the same timeframe (us, USC, A&M). They've only finished the season in the top 25 twice in the last 10 years. I guess Muschamp was more the underachiever there, rather than Beamer.

Say what you want to about Beamer, and I don't like the guy at all, but he's had two 8-win regular seasons there in 4 years, and went to (and won) a bowl game in another year. That is not an easy job (especially when the SEC had divisions) but he's done well there.
Click to expand...
They were dark horse candidate for playoff last year, too.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top