Our Commits: No other offers... no problem?

Donate To GopherHole
H

Handsome Pete

Wartime Hero Fool
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
1,530
Reaction score
0
Points
36
I was discussing our current commit list with a friend of mine who is a major Iowa Hawkeyes fan. He argued coaching, not offers, creates productive players and if Kill can do that we should be fine. As evidence, he offered the following list of Iowa Hawkeyes who went into the NFL (their "other offers" in parentheses):

1) Robert Gallery (none- walk on)
2) Dallas Clark (none- walk on)
3) Kevin Kasper (none- walk on)
4) Chad Greenway (South Dakota)
5) Bob Sanders (Ohio)
6) Karl Klug (no other offers)
7) Tyler Sash (Iowa State)
8) Ricky Stanzi (Miami-OH, Purdue)
9) Amari Spievey (Rutgers)
10) Pat Angerer (No. Illinois, Iowa St., Indiana)
11) Julian Vandervelde (Ball St., Cent. Mich., Toledo, Stanford)
12) Bradley Fletcher (no other offers)
13) Mitch King (Iowa St.)
14) Matt Kroul (no other offers)
15) Marcus Paschal (Georgia Southern, Hofstra, Troy)
16) Jovon Johnson (no other offers)

I must admit I was floored by this.

EDIT- thanks for the edit Go4.
 

how can you put this list together and not include chad greenway. the guy had iowa and south dakota as his offers and is now one of the best young lbs in the nfl for our vikes.

hope this helps.
 

The main problem is that people are trying to apply a simple answer to a complex problem. On the whole, on average, you are better off with a commit sheet full of higher-ranked players with more offers. There's really no way to argue with this. But, in individual cases, there is no guarantee that a player with a mile-long offer list will be any good, just as there is no guarantee that a walk-on with no offers is destined to ride the pine and never contribute. The sample size of thousands of players at hundreds of schools over time will correlate with the perception, but a sample size of one school, let alone one recruiting class at that school, is too small to draw meaningful conclusions.

The fact that we are getting commits from no-offer or lower-level-offer players in June and July makes me a lot less concerned than if it were January or February. The types of players who commit then (with the exception of absolute studs who are deciding between several helmet schools) are leftovers who are just happy to get an offer. If they are being offered in the summer before their senior year, clearly Kill and staff like them regardless of their offer list. Whether they are quality players remains to be seen.

There's also another factor I've been thinking about for a while. I think Kill underestimated just how easily you can get commits from players just by being a BCS school, even if you are "just Minnesota". He certainly couldn't do that at NIU or SIU. I'm not saying that he doesn't like these players or that they aren't worthwhile, but it is almost a certainty that he could've gone to battle with other BCS schools in certain cases and still gotten players like Davis, Ekpe, etc. had he waited and offered in Sept. and Oct. if the "better" players fell through. As I've stated before, I think he will move toward such a strategy over time, but right now, it appears that he's happy to get players he likes and really use them to, at worst, fill out the depth chart. Once he's satisfied with that, he can go to battle for some real difference-makers.
 

Very interesting.

** Disclaimer - I see the world through Maroon and Gold glasses - life is more fun this way **

I'm actually pretty excited with our incoming class. There are some athletic guys that look like they just need some solid coaching and technique to greatly improve. Will they all pan out? Of course not. But there is a lot of upside to these guys. As pointed out by others, its fairly early in the recruiting process, so some of these guys would likely pick up more offers if they hadn't committed early.

Personally, I can see coach Kill tweaking his recruiting philosophy over the next few years. Right now, he talks about our lack of depth and lack of speed. He seems intent on balancing out our roster and adding depth/speed right away. As our depth issues become less prominent, I can see coach holding out for guys that are more 'ready' and may not need as much coaching. But his staff will always be quick to pull the trigger on a guy they feel fits the system, highly recruited or not. I'm fine with that! I see this class as a depth class so coach Kill can start practicing and playing the way he wants to with some pretty quality recruits sprinkled in for now. Only time will tell...
 

Football rich Florida.

in this case the possibility of having 5 kids from Miami Central. It is a no brainer. The football in Florida is like hockey in Minnesota. a 2** kid in Florida would be a 5***** star kid in Minnesota. There is no way you can evaluate every kid in Florida to the degree you can evaluate the couple of dozen D1 prospects in Minnesota. we have a top 20 in the State. In Dade county alone they have a top 300.
 


I'm going to give Kill the benefit of the doubt for the time being, he's spotting players who fit his system and he's pulling the trigger on them. What good is a 4 star player if he doesn't fit your system (Brewster is a prime example of this).
 

Recruiting players for football is like blindfolding yourself and pulling out a piece of candy from a box of chocolates. Ya just never know exactly what you're going to get. (Relate that comment to Forrest Gump.)
 

As Dpo said, it is a bit more complicated than simply looking at it as far as "offers are the most important thing" and "it doesn't make a difference at all".

Here is how I look at the situation:
(1) Generally, it is better to have more highley recruited players. Talent is evident and often more than 1 coach is going to be able to recognize if a kid has talent, so generally, the more talented kids will be much better recruited. So generally, it is better to be able to nab kids with a lot of offers (because they are often better players).
(2) You can't really look at a commits offer list in July. A guy like Nicholson will absolutely have more offers. They might not come if he simply tells every coach who calls, i'm 100% committed to MN (like Tommy Olson). But some players ability don't get measured well by offer sheets, especially this early.
(3) The position that we are in, we need to factor in potential attrition factors more than the last regime (or most regimes). Beside the coordinator issues, the thing that did Brewster in was our mass exodus of players, not only the ones he recruited but in every upperclass he coached. You can't win without a solid group of players who go through the program 4-5 years.
(4) Until proven otherwise, i'm going to give Coach Kill the benefit of the doubt. I only say this because I feel he has earned it by winning everywhere he has gone. This class needs to be JRs before I will start bashing it. If three years from now this class looks empty, Kill deserves criticism for his recruiting techniques. If the class looks good, he deserves credit. When I say I am giving him the benefit of the doubt, I don't say that as a homer. I try to give every new regime/coach/GM (in other sports) the benefit of the doubt, especially when they have a pedigree of winning. So for now, on some of these prospects, I am going to assume that they see something they really like and i'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt that their ability to judge talent is spot on (until i'm proven otherwise).
 

You also need to consider that all the players listed above were steroid users. Those drugs can go a long way in player development.
 



Bob_Loblaw said:
As Dpo said, it is a bit more complicated than simply looking at it as far as "offers are the most important thing" and "it doesn't make a difference at all".

Here is how I look at the situation:
(1) Generally, it is better to have more highley recruited players. Talent is evident and often more than 1 coach is going to be able to recognize if a kid has talent, so generally, the more talented kids will be much better recruited. So generally, it is better to be able to nab kids with a lot of offers (because they are often better players).
(2) You can't really look at a commits offer list in July. A guy like Nicholson will absolutely have more offers. They might not come if he simply tells every coach who calls, i'm 100% committed to MN (like Tommy Olson). But some players ability don't get measured well by offer sheets, especially this early.
(3) The position that we are in, we need to factor in potential attrition factors more than the last regime (or most regimes). Beside the coordinator issues, the thing that did Brewster in was our mass exodus of players, not only the ones he recruited but in every upperclass he coached. You can't win without a solid group of players who go through the program 4-5 years.
(4) Until proven otherwise, i'm going to give Coach Kill the benefit of the doubt. I only say this because I feel he has earned it by winning everywhere he has gone. This class needs to be JRs before I will start bashing it. If three years from now this class looks empty, Kill deserves criticism for his recruiting techniques. If the class looks good, he deserves credit. When I say I am giving him the benefit of the doubt, I don't say that as a homer. I try to give every new regime/coach/GM (in other sports) the benefit of the doubt, especially when they have a pedigree of winning. So for now, on some of these prospects, I am going to assume that they see something they really like and i'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt that their ability to judge talent is spot on (until i'm proven otherwise).
Click to expand...

I agree with pretty much everything said here with (2) really standing out. There are probably 100 to 200 kids nationally who have a full slate of big-time offers right now. A lot of offers are coming from either word-of-mouth or camp performances and it can be a kind of "first in" process.

The bottom line is Kill and his coaches look like they are going to offer kids that they like immediately instead of getting into a waiting game and having to tussle with other programs down the road (which, in truth, they still might need to do). Another factor that could be playing into Kill's approach thus far is that he's a first-year coach and he probably wants to wrap up as much recruiting as he can (while getting players who fit his system, of course) so he can devote more time to the current team once the season starts.

This looks like a solid set of kids, but as bob_loblaw has pointed out, we aren't going to know that for a couple of years and the key is going to be keeping classes together and getting on a five year cycle of recruiting and development.
 

I remember last year when the first and second all Big Ten teams were announced, someone here made a list showing how many stars each had when being recruited and it was pretty eye opening. Not sure if anyone has that to post again but I remember there were a LOT of 2 star type players.
 

As Dp said it's not a simple answer.
Yes many AMAZING college players are not offered, walk on, develop from nothing etc, others are well known in middle school by college coaches and are pegged 5 star #1 prospects etc.

Here's what I see/think, may be wrong, but it makes sense to me.
Kill is recruiting for athleticism and character, he expects to be able to develop these guys, he doesn't expect them to play early, if they do great, but he's taking high character guys who will work hard, stick around for 4-5 years, AND have good potential to develop into great football players.
He doesn't want flash in the pans, he doesn't want to deal with character issues constantly, he doesn't want dropouts and then have to replace them with JUCOs later. Redshirt them and teach them to play, then as RSSO they'll be ready and possibly really good.

I do think he has supreme confidence in his staff, Klein, and himself to teach athletes who may not be finished products, how to play. That's what he offers, a stable and experienced staff, and a stable and experienced system his staff knows back and front.

As a result, he's not battling with the big boys for alot of players... yet.
top SEC/ACC/BIG12 schools etc may very well know about Ekpe, Twitty, Hinds, Nicholson, Ballestros, etc, and they may come after them late with offers to fill up a class. Kill lost Estime like this, I think he's hoping to develop relationships with these players early so that when other BCS schools come sniffing around, he'll have players locked up in a stronger way.

I also think he'll adjust his recruiting strategy as he develops the program, if the wins come bigger prospects will listen and he'll probably be willing to battle for them a bit more.

The big question is how many current players does he really expect to leave, 3 DT's makes me wonder if some of the younger DLinemen may not fit the scheme/may leave.
If he really expects 9-10 guys to quit after the 2 a days/ fall season, we may be more razor thin than we thought we'd be.

It's a very interesting thing to watch though, the contrast in recruiting styles between him and Brewster.
 

I'll trust Kill's judgement of the players he is recruiting until I'm shown otherwise. I agree that a player with no other offers in July is a different matter than one who has no other offers in February. If Kill thinks that a player is a good match for his team, there's no reason to wait for other schools to make an offer just so the list shows the player had other BCS offers.
 



Ole said:
As Dp said it's not a simple answer.
Yes many AMAZING college players are not offered, walk on, develop from nothing etc, others are well known in middle school by college coaches and are pegged 5 star #1 prospects etc.

Here's what I see/think, may be wrong, but it makes sense to me.
Kill is recruiting for athleticism and character, he expects to be able to develop these guys, he doesn't expect them to play early, if they do great, but he's taking high character guys who will work hard, stick around for 4-5 years, AND have good potential to develop into great football players.
He doesn't want flash in the pans, he doesn't want to deal with character issues constantly, he doesn't want dropouts and then have to replace them with JUCOs later. Redshirt them and teach them to play, then as RSSO they'll be ready and possibly really good.

I do think he has supreme confidence in his staff, Klein, and himself to teach athletes who may not be finished products, how to play. That's what he offers, a stable and experienced staff, and a stable and experienced system his staff knows back and front.

Agreed

The big question is how many current players does he really expect to leave, 3 DT's makes me wonder if some of the younger DLinemen may not fit the scheme/may leave.
If he really expects 9-10 guys to quit after the 2 a days/ fall season, we may be more razor thin than we thought we'd be.

It also makes me wonder about the LB core as well...

It's a very interesting thing to watch though, the contrast in recruiting styles between him and Brewster.
Click to expand...

Read a while back Tyreece Jiles is interested in MN. Hopefully he comes along with Pirsig, Johnson, Davidson and a few others...
 

dpodoll68 said:
The main problem is that people are trying to apply a simple answer to a complex problem. On the whole, on average, you are better off with a commit sheet full of higher-ranked players with more offers. There's really no way to argue with this. But, in individual cases, there is no guarantee that a player with a mile-long offer list will be any good, just as there is no guarantee that a walk-on with no offers is destined to ride the pine and never contribute. The sample size of thousands of players at hundreds of schools over time will correlate with the perception, but a sample size of one school, let alone one recruiting class at that school, is too small to draw meaningful conclusions.

The fact that we are getting commits from no-offer or lower-level-offer players in June and July makes me a lot less concerned than if it were January or February. The types of players who commit then (with the exception of absolute studs who are deciding between several helmet schools) are leftovers who are just happy to get an offer. If they are being offered in the summer before their senior year, clearly Kill and staff like them regardless of their offer list. Whether they are quality players remains to be seen.

There's also another factor I've been thinking about for a while. I think Kill underestimated just how easily you can get commits from players just by being a BCS school, even if you are "just Minnesota". He certainly couldn't do that at NIU or SIU. I'm not saying that he doesn't like these players or that they aren't worthwhile, but it is almost a certainty that he could've gone to battle with other BCS schools in certain cases and still gotten players like Davis, Ekpe, etc. had he waited and offered in Sept. and Oct. if the "better" players fell through. As I've stated before, I think he will move toward such a strategy over time, but right now, it appears that he's happy to get players he likes and really use them to, at worst, fill out the depth chart. Once he's satisfied with that, he can go to battle for some real difference-makers.
Click to expand...

I have yet to see any analysis that strictly correlates winning with the number of other offers a team's recruits have.

I have seen analysis that establishes a correlation with a high number of 5* players and winning. But there is no such analysis that I'm aware of that establishes a general correlation between the total number of stars on the commit list and winning. That relationship is assumed by you and the rest of the stars cultists based only on the previous analysis - which only looks at players on the very top of the rankings, ie the players that take zero skill to rate as top prospects.
 

BisonGopher said:
I have yet to see any analysis that strictly correlates winning with the number of other offers a team's recruits have.

I have seen analysis that establishes a correlation with a high number of 5* players and winning. But there is no such analysis that I'm aware of that establishes a general correlation between the total number of stars on the commit list and winning. That relationship is assumed by you and the rest of the stars cultists based only on the previous analysis - which only looks at players on the very top of the rankings, ie the players that take zero skill to rate as top prospects.
Click to expand...

First off, dp is far from a star cultist. Second, the analysis I recall seeing extends down to at least the 3 star level. It's not a hard concept. Look at the schools winning the most. Look at their recruiting classes. There are exceptions to this of course, but the clear correlation is that better rated recruiting classes over a longer period equates to success more easily.

That's why dp notes that it is complicated. There is no right or wrong way. Just a way that is right more of the time. That way is not Kill's way. I'm cool with that because while I think it is possible to pull pretty darn good classes at Minnesota you can't expect to leading the nation every year.
 

BisonGopher said:
I have yet to see any analysis that strictly correlates winning with the number of other offers a team's recruits have.
Click to expand...

dpodoll68 said:
you are better off with a commit sheet full of higher-ranked players with more offers
Click to expand...

Please try, oh, I don't know, reading. K thanks. Or is your ability to read right up there with your ability to understand math?

BisonGopher said:
stars cultists
Click to expand...

What the hell does that even mean? Cultist? If understanding math and knowing how it works makes me a cult member, then guilty as charged.

BisonGopher said:
based only on the previous analysis - which only looks at players on the very top of the rankings, ie the players that take zero skill to rate as top prospects
Click to expand...

False. You couldn't be more wrong. I provided 5 years of data including all players ranked by Rivals, from the highest 5-star to the lowest 2-star. You are wrong. Try harder.

EDIT: You are clearly referencing someone else's analysis, and not mine, as mine was based on individual success. But you're still a dumbass.
 


Funny how the biggest morons on this site both have Bison in their name.
 

So hard to tell at this point.

Some can say Kill is just trying to get guys he can get and that could be true. He could be getting some guys flying under the radar to a degree. The thing is recruiting is like coaching we all have an opinnion but in the end if the team wins games that is what is important. We can give a long list of very good players from Iowa who were not recruited by many who had terrific years. We could give a long list of great players who were well thought of that failed as well. In the end its all a guessing game. If the coach can teach the game and get the players to buy into what he wants them to do they will improve and the team can hopefully have success. Its just like coaching we may or may not like the coach but in the end if he wins and improves the team he will have success as well.

The thing is with Kill we have nothing to do go on at this point. We have to see what he can do over the next 3 to 5 years to see if he can do the same thing with the Gophers as he did at his other stops at lower levels of college football. If he has success on the field we will see the same thing in recruiting.

Am I impressed with what he has done to this point? Not at all. Lets see him win some games. We just had a coach who was a good recruiter who wasnt head coaching material. Lets see if Kill is Big Ten headcoaching material before we get to high on the bandwagon or to low for that matter. I always look forward to Gopher football no matter who the coach is I just hope that we can see some better football.
 

I like what Kill is doing

For this situation I think Kill is taking the right steps. To me he is going out and offering every kid that he feels could play for him and contribute. He is then telling them that the offers are first come, first served. This is a great way to build a solid foundation. These kids see this and want to be part of it. Kill has said repeatedly that we need to get kids that want to be Gophers.

Would your rather have the hope of the 4* guy in February that you had to twist an arm and make promises to or the 2* kid that you told, we'd love to have you part of MN's team, this offer is first come first served.?
 

If Kill keeps Mcdonald and lands Pirsig he will have a better home grown class than Brewster averaged. With the strong in state base the class looks a little stronger than it would. I think it will end up being as good as any of Brewsters. You still need a few high stars just for the potential. Look at Gray and even playing out of position he was recruited for, you can really see the difference talent provides.
 

WolfontheProwl said:
The thing is with Kill we have nothing to do go on at this point. We have to see what he can do over the next 3 to 5 years to see if he can do the same thing with the Gophers as he did at his other stops at lower levels of college football. If he has success on the field we will see the same thing in recruiting.
Click to expand...

All I know is that at NIU he was bottom third his first year in rated recuiting in the MAC, 2nd year middle third and 3rd year top third.

Winning helped, but there was more to it.
 

BisonGopher said:
I have yet to see any analysis that strictly correlates winning with the number of other offers a team's recruits have.

I have seen analysis that establishes a correlation with a high number of 5* players and winning. But there is no such analysis that I'm aware of that establishes a general correlation between the total number of stars on the commit list and winning. That relationship is assumed by you and the rest of the stars cultists based only on the previous analysis - which only looks at players on the very top of the rankings, ie the players that take zero skill to rate as top prospects.
Click to expand...

Seriously?

Do you not think those same 4star and 5star players are receiving a lot of offers? I know from a lot of your weird stances that you refuse to simply google your questions (you were concerned about freshman starting school in the summer, it took about 30 people to break it down into simple math to show you that teams with higher ranked players do better, etc).

The relationship isn't assumed, it's OBVIOUS.
Auburn:
Cam Newton: Best player in the country, countless offers
Mike Dyer: Bama, FL, Notre Dame, OK, OK St., Oregon, Nebraska
Terrell Zachery (WR): Alabama, Georgia, Lousiville
Ontario McCaleb (RB): Clemson, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia
Darvin Adams (WR): North Carolina, Mississippi, Georgia Tech, Tennessee
Emory Blake: BC, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Oregon, Texas Tech

I'm sick of googling them, but this holds true with their entire team.....

So now you will make some remark about it not being true in the Big 10 or something dumb...
(1) It's obviously true with tOSU, so we'll look at Wisconsin

Tolzien: Kentucky, every MAC school
Clay: Nebraska, Ohio St., Iowa
J. White: BC, Clemson, Iowa, Michigan St., NC State, MN, Indiana
Ball: Nebraska, Missouri, Stanford, Indiana, Iowa St., Kansas
Nick Toon: None...but he wasn't going anywhere (think Tommy Olson).
Kyle Jefferson: BC, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan St., Purdue
Lance Kendricks: Arkansas, LSU, South Carolina, UCLA
Gabe Carimi: He is like Toon as well. Highley rated local kid who committed early and didn't even take anymore visits.
Moffitt: BC, Michigan St., Rutgers
Peter Konz: Duke, Illinois, Iowa, MN
Zeitler: Michigan, MN, Purdue

Watt: MN, but no other good offers...
Nzegwu:Illinois, Indiana
Butrym: Duke, MN, Oregon
Kohout: 4 star kid from Madison, no other offers, but he obviously would have had more offers. He's like Carimi and Toon.
David Gilbert: Kentucky, UConn, Purdue, south Carolina, Vanderbilt
Mike Taylor: MN, Iowa, Air Force
Culmer St. Jean: MN, Indiana, West Virginia
Blake Sorenson: Iowa St, MN, Northwestern
Devin Smith: Baylor, Iowa, OK St.
Fenelus: No other BCS offers
Jay Valai: MN, Iowa
Aaron Henry: Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Carolina, Wake Forest


So every key player/starter had multiple BCS offers except:
Nick Toon
Carimi
Kohout
-to any partial observer, those guys would obviously have had offers elsewhere but they were always going to WI. Toon and Kohout were 4 star guys and Carimi was a high 3 star guy.
&
Fenelus: He is a guy that didn't have much with offers and wasn;t an obvious Badger...
 



MaxyJR1 said:
Would your rather have the hope of the 4* guy in February that you had to twist an arm and make promises to or the 2* kid that you told, we'd love to have you part of MN's team, this offer is first come first served.?
Click to expand...

The 4* guy.
 

Kill has done fine.

I am not saying what he has done to this point has been good or bad. The U of M is also not NIU nor is it the MAC. It is the BIG Ten at a school that hasnt one in decades. I think most would agree that Kill does come into a situation where he has some pretty good athletes that need a good coach to get them over the hump. What he did at NIU was impressive but more will he asked of him at the U where he is recruiting against Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Michigan not Miami of Ohio. I truelly feel that if Kill cant take the squad we have right now and win 5 games next year he isnt our coach of the future he will just be another Mason at best. If Kill is the coach he is supposed to be with our current talent and our 3 poor non-conference opponents 5 wins shouldnt be unrealistic it should be the baseline for his first year. Now I realise things dont always go smoothly in a coaches first year but he is supposed to be a great coach. I want to see him coach up the football team the guys he has now not just the ones he brings in. If he does that we will win some games which will help his recruiting next year.

Brewster could recruit in star players he just didnt coach them up.

Mason struggled to recruit great prospects but he got out a lot with what he did.

Kill must be the middle guy he needs to recruit good talent and then coach it up. If he and his staff can do that we Gopher fans will be happy. If not we will be talking about the new Gopher Coach in a few years.
 

1) Robert Gallery (none- walk on) Second overall pick. 20.5 sacks allowed over 4 seasons. Considered a bust pick.

2) Dallas Clark (none- walk on) 24th overall pick. 4th highest productivity in a game by a tightend, and holds Colts record for yards in a season. Designated franchise player.

3) Kevin Kasper (none- walk on) 6th round draftee. Bounced around the league.

4) Chad Greenway (South Dakota) 17th overall pick. Designated franchise player. 115 tackles in 2008.

5) Bob Sanders (Ohio) Drafted 44th overall. AP NFL Defensive Player of the Year.

6) Karl Klug (no other offers) Drafted in 2011.

7) Tyler Sash (Iowa State) Drafted in the 6th round in 2011.

8) Ricky Stanzi (Miami-OH, Purdue) 135th pick in 2011.

9) Amari Spievey (Rutgers) 66th overall pick in 2010.

10) Pat Angerer (No. Illinois, Iowa St., Indiana) 63rd overall pick. Had a fair season in 2010 with 36 tackles and 2 sacks as a backup.

11) Julian Vandervelde (Ball St., Cent. Mich., Toledo, Stanford) Drafted in the 5th round in 2011.

12) Bradley Fletcher (no other offers) 3rd round pick, 88 tackles and 4 ints in 2 years.

13) Mitch King (Iowa St.) Not Drafted. Signed to practice squad.

14) Matt Kroul (no other offers) Not Drafted. Signed to practice squad.

16) Jovon Johnson (no other offers) Not Drafted. Signed by team. Released same year.

3 guys were not drafted on this list. Others have yet to play a game in the NFL. Gallery was considered an NFL bust as he is credited with giving up 20.5 sacks in 4 years. Not sure if this list proved anything.
 

Mustang Mountain Man said:
1) Robert Gallery (none- walk on) Second overall pick. 20.5 sacks allowed over 4 seasons. Considered a bust pick.

2) Dallas Clark (none- walk on) 24th overall pick. 4th highest productivity in a game by a tightend, and holds Colts record for yards in a season. Designated franchise player.

3) Kevin Kasper (none- walk on) 6th round draftee. Bounced around the league.

4) Chad Greenway (South Dakota) 17th overall pick. Designated franchise player. 115 tackles in 2008.

5) Bob Sanders (Ohio) Drafted 44th overall. AP NFL Defensive Player of the Year.

6) Karl Klug (no other offers) Drafted in 2011.

7) Tyler Sash (Iowa State) Drafted in the 6th round in 2011.

8) Ricky Stanzi (Miami-OH, Purdue) 135th pick in 2011.

9) Amari Spievey (Rutgers) 66th overall pick in 2010.

10) Pat Angerer (No. Illinois, Iowa St., Indiana) 63rd overall pick. Had a fair season in 2010 with 36 tackles and 2 sacks as a backup.

11) Julian Vandervelde (Ball St., Cent. Mich., Toledo, Stanford) Drafted in the 5th round in 2011.

12) Bradley Fletcher (no other offers) 3rd round pick, 88 tackles and 4 ints in 2 years.

13) Mitch King (Iowa St.) Not Drafted. Signed to practice squad.

14) Matt Kroul (no other offers) Not Drafted. Signed to practice squad.

16) Jovon Johnson (no other offers) Not Drafted. Signed by team. Released same year.

3 guys were not drafted on this list. Others have yet to play a game in the NFL. Gallery was considered an NFL bust as he is credited with giving up 20.5 sacks in 4 years. Not sure if this list proved anything.
Click to expand...

It did not.
Great college players don't need NFL accolades, their accomplishments can stand on their own. This is a college board discussing college players/recruits.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom