Signed with Detroit.

It's called coincidence. If you go the Kevin Bacon route, anyone can eventually be the top dog.

Do present your case that the MAC is loaded with talent and a totally solid conference, then.

Some people look at facts and try to draw conclusions from them. Others start with conclusions, and then search for selective facts that might support their conclusions.

I read the other days that 29% of nfl rosters are undrafed free agents. The browns brought in about 30 last year and kept quite a few. A lot of MAC guys will make practice squads and some will make it as free agents. Decent corners always have a good chance of sticking around.

Then, please make the case, based mostly in facts, that the MAC is a good conference, stuffs the NFL draft, and supplies plenty of players to the NFL, with many of those players being notable.

In a given year aren't there close to 1300 roster spots in the NFL? (Also, consider that a team may shuffle its roster such that a 40 man roster could state well over 40 people on it over the course of a season.)

I'm willing...so make the case.




Or is this more of 'we believe it, so it's so'?

Monroe, a 40 man roster is baseball. But hey never let facts get in your way.

An NFL roster is 53, with 46 dressing each week, and a club can keep an additional 10 on the practice squad. Maybe you should keep to designing dog toys.

Looking at draft numbers is misleading unto itself, and as any accountant or market researcher can attest, numbers can be made to prove different views. But let's look at some numbers anyway. The Power Conferences had 183 draft picks this year. That is down from 200 last year. They had 172 in 2014. But the P5 are dominated by a few schools. For example, the Big 10 had 47 picks this year, but 47% came from 3 schools. The SEC had 54 draftees this year, 47% came from 4 schools. So are picks reflecting of their conference or specific "engine" schools? The ACC went from 47 last year to 27 this year. However, Louisville went from 11 picks to 1 and FSU went from 11 to 2 (both turned their lineups over to younger players this past year).

Over the same period, the MAC had 8 picks in 2014, 4 in 2015, 6 this year. The leading non P5 conferences over the same period had a total of 49 picks in 2014, 34 in 2015, and 38 this year. Does that mean these conferences had better players this year than last, but not nearly as many good players as 2014? Or is it a reflection of the P5 being down in 2014?

Again, numbers are what they are and can be presented to make almost any argument. Some will yak, yak, yak about how after 11 years, yak, we should have multiple picks a year (Purdue, Iowa, Oregon State, would agree). Others will yip, yip, yip about how we went from 4 picks last year to 6 this year, so we are 50% stronger as a conference.

Just thought I would share numbers - that mean very little.

That's not quite right.

First, you picked only a two year period. So you yourself placed a limit that yields data that can vary greatly for being such a brief sample.

Even so, the point still appears from this brief sample that the MAC is a minor conference.

I know it takes time to put together this type of analysis but also the number/round of each pick should be included. I'll bet the MAC has very few picks in the first, say, three rounds.

L.C.--Your assessment seems solid. But it's opinion, not facts. Don't take that as a kick at you. I'm merely pointing out that, while I value what you wrote, it doesn't meet the fact-based standard that gets us away from 'I believe in our coaches so that settles it' type of locked-in-place opinion.


I have to think that there are only a few players of the caliber which the NFL will seriously consider who quit the game because of concussion concerns. Yes, there are surely a few. But I don't think that the number is significant.

I think we would all agree that the Mac is a minor conference, and even among the G5 that they rank below the AAC and the MWC. A better question is how they rank compared to the Sunbelt and CUSA. To me they are comparable to CUSA and better than the Sunbelt.

Monroe, I'm well aware that what I gave was just opinion. Normally I would have supported it with facts but I don't have time to do that at the moment.