There is a lot of confusion and misguided posts on here so let’s set everything straight and establish some logic and reasoning:
1. Inefficient: If a player has MINIMAL success in college but is able to excel in the pros…I think it is fair to say that the coaches in college were unable to maximize his ability during his tenure.
Example: Sam Shields
Players that don’t fit here are players who are injured for the majority of college or suspended during their tenure or transfer out of the program. I would also say that players like Jimmy Graham shouldn’t fit in this category unless the player was ready to go and able to do more.
2. Efficient: If a player has a TON of success in college but is unable to excel in the pros…I think it is fair to say that the coaches in college were able to maximize his ability during his tenure.
Example: Ken Dorsey
Players who are inefficient could potential mean that they received poor coaching and development during that time. The logic being the NFL is more competitive and has better players, if the NFL can make more out of them then they probably could have been used better during their college tenure.
Players who are efficient could potential mean that the coaches maximized the player's ability during their college tenure.
Please note: Excel doesn’t mean pro-bowl or all-pro. It just means that the player is able to have some degree of success. I would say if a player does NOTHING during college but is able to stick around 3-4 years on an NFL roster (i.e. Spencer Adkins), I would say that counts as excelling.