[msqueri]

Interesting. I only note that this does not take into account player development. Freshman John Lynch was not in the same universe as senior John Lynch, yet they receive the same scoring weight.

-m.

I see Richard Sherman as the same way. He was an inconsistent wide receiver and then a raw cornerback before finally becoming a solid cornerback in 2010. I remember him getting torched at times in 2009 before he became a shutdown type in 2010.

This methodology is going to understate the contributions of players who were productive in college but whose skills did not translate to the NFL. Todd Husak, Troy Walters, DeRonnie Pitts, Toby Gerhart, Kevin Hogan, Bryce Love, and Quenton Meeks are a few players who come to my mind. The 1999 Pac-10 team is near the bottom of the list. While it is clear the 1999 team benefited from the rest of the conference being weak, it had enough players who were good enough in college for the team to finish #28 in the Sagarin ratings.

Still, it's interesting to see what teams were loaded with NFL talent and which ones were not. I'll go to my grave thinking we would have beaten Auburn for the national title if a few plays had gone differently in Autzen...

Sherman was an incredible WR held back by his team and coaches. He had 29 percent of the receiving yards his true freshman year. Dominant.

The NFL gives us great insights on who actually is most talented. Gerhart was not as talented as McCaffrey and Nelson. Husak and Hogan were not as talented as Elway and Luck.

The fact is context and supporting cast have a lot to do with how players do. This works at all levels, including the NFL, but that's the best indication of how good somebody is. I love what Gerhart did at Stanford but many of our fans humongously overrate him. Getting to be surrounded by Roman, DeCastro, Martin, Luck, Sherman, Baldwin, and Fleener is something very few college running backs ever (and zero in the history of Stanford football) got to benefit from. I found it hilarious when Stanford fans would compare Mark Ingram's supporting cast at Alabama to Gerhart's as if Gerhart's weren't vastly superior. Look at what Roman, DeCastro, Luck et al did in the NFL.

[msqueri]

Interesting. I only note that this does not take into account player development. Freshman John Lynch was not in the same universe as senior John Lynch, yet they receive the same scoring weight.

-m.

I see Richard Sherman as the same way. He was an inconsistent wide receiver and then a raw cornerback before finally becoming a solid cornerback in 2010. I remember him getting torched at times in 2009 before he became a shutdown type in 2010.

This methodology is going to understate the contributions of players who were productive in college but whose skills did not translate to the NFL. Todd Husak, Troy Walters, DeRonnie Pitts, Toby Gerhart, Kevin Hogan, Bryce Love, and Quenton Meeks are a few players who come to my mind. The 1999 Pac-10 team is near the bottom of the list. While it is clear the 1999 team benefited from the rest of the conference being weak, it had enough players who were good enough in college for the team to finish #28 in the Sagarin ratings.

Still, it's interesting to see what teams were loaded with NFL talent and which ones were not. I'll go to my grave thinking we would have beaten Auburn for the national title if a few plays had gone differently in Autzen...

Sherman was an incredible WR held back by his team and coaches. He had 29 percent of the receiving yards his true freshman year. Dominant.

The NFL gives us great insights on who actually is most talented. Gerhart was not as talented as McCaffrey and Nelson. Husak and Hogan were not as talented as Elway and Luck.

The fact is context and supporting cast have a lot to do with how players do. This works at all levels, including the NFL, but that's the best indication of how good somebody is. I love what Gerhart did at Stanford but many of our fans humongously overrate him. Getting to be surrounded by Roman, DeCastro, Martin, Luck, Sherman, Baldwin, and Fleener is something very few college running backs ever (and zero in the history of Stanford football) got to benefit from. I found it hilarious when Stanford fans would compare Mark Ingram's supporting cast at Alabama to Gerhart's as if Gerhart's weren't vastly superior. Look at what Roman, DeCastro, Luck et al did in the NFL.