Blowing Up Cowherd's argument with data and facts

[Teldar]

So Cowherd's whole basis for his latest rant on why Iowa is no good and can't win the CFP is due to the fact that we have no 5 star rated recruits and only 8 four star recruits while other teams are loaded with these high potential players. The problem with his argument is he is asking the wrong question. The better question is "How many NFL players are on each teams' rosters?" Recruiting Stars are meaningless unless they turn into NFL caliber players.

It's impossible to assess at the moment how many NFL prospects are on each roster (Don't even say ask Mel Kiper). However, we can go back and look at history. Since 2003 (Kirk Ferentz' first set of recruits graduating class), here are the # of players drafted by the NFL of the teams currently in the top ten :

1 Clemson 45
2 Ohio State 71
3 Alabama 62
4 Notre Dame 52
5 Iowa 49
6 Okie State 21
7 Florida 60
8 Oklahoma 64
9 Michigan State 30
10 Baylor 23

This is why Cowherd's argument is just plain wrong, yet again. While it is true that a few of these schools have more drafted players than Iowa, it isn't obscene. And as a fact, Iowa has more NFL drafted players in that time then about half the top ten, including Clemson.

So the next time you're at a party and one of your uneducated SEC buddies start throwing Cowherd talking points your way, kill them with this data.