Perception vs. Production: Rethinking California’s place in the NFL Draft pipeline

The state of California has long been viewed as a hotbed of football talent. As the nation’s most populous state and home to top high school programs, California churns out dozens of touted football recruits on an annual basis. However, the state’s NFL Draft output has dipped in recent years.

California was once considered part of the “Big Three” talent-producing states, along with Florida and Texas. Recent drafts have seen Georgia solidify its position in that top group. Georgia’s entrance, combined with California’s dipping numbers, has either created a new Big Four or bumped the Golden State out altogether, depending on your perspective.

The 2024 (18 draft picks) and 2025 (16 draft picks) NFL Drafts accounted for California’s lowest talent output in the last seven years. This downward move in talent output has led to a noticeable disconnect between the perception of the recruiting landscape in California and the actual high-end talent production we see on college football fields.

For this story, we analyzed every pick in the last five NFL Drafts who finished their high school career in the state of California, along with the Rivals Industry recruiting rankings from the corresponding recruiting cycles.

The data paints the picture of one of the most unique and challenging recruiting grounds in the nation and a state that has given college staffs and talent evaluators trouble for years.

California still produces talent — Just not where everyone’s looking

NFL talent from the state of California is widely dispersed over large metropolitan areas. Los Angeles, the Bay Area, and San Diego account for the majority of the state’s NFL Draft picks.

The talent tends to follow these population centers, but is spread out among high school programs. The group of 95 NFL Draft picks from California over the last five drafts comes from 77 different high schools. No high school program from California produced more than three draft picks over that period. Six schools yielded three draft picks: Corona Centennial, Long Beach Poly, Mater Dei, Oaks Christian (one walk-on), Rancho Cucamonga, and Servite. Aside from Rancho Cucamonga, these programs are known for generating touted prospects. A top total of just three draft picks is surprisingly low for a state with as many high school programs perceived to pump out top talent annually.

The dispersion of California NFL talent at the high school level contradicts conventional wisdom. More than any big state, the high school football environment in California is one of haves and have-nots. Since 2017, only two teams have won state titles in California’s open division – Mater Dei and St. John Bosco. Either Mater Dei or St. John Bosco has beaten De La Salle or San Mateo Junipero Serra in the state finals during those years by an average score of 48-15. Even among elite high school programs, these two SoCal powers are behemoths.

Despite the insane trophy case and win-loss records, these teams yield shockingly few NFL Draft picks relative to their output of highly-recruited blue-chip prospects (rated 4-stars or 5-stars). Seemingly random high school programs have produced just as many draft picks as these football factories over the last five years.

Mater Dei, St. John Bosco, and Servite are part of the Trinity League, considered the toughest high school football league in the nation. Programs in the six-team league of high-resource private schools regularly rank inside the top 50 high school football teams nationally. There are numerous blue-chip recruits from this league on an annual basis. Even with the elite competition and resources, the draft rates of blue-chip prospects from the Trinity League range from average to poor.

Examining the geographic and school data of California draft picks paints an interesting picture. While these high-resource private school programs that attract talent occupy most of the headlines, over two-thirds of recent draft picks from California come from public schools.

The wide distribution is also evident in the breakdown of home counties for SoCal draft picks. The draft rates of prospects from Los Angeles County (37%), Orange County (22.5%), San Diego County (14.5%), San Bernardino County (11.3%), Riverside County (9.7%), and Ventura County (4.8%) show a far more even spread than one might expect if going solely by the prominence of high school programs or the buzz around top recruits.

Underwhelming returns: The struggle of California’s 5-stars

The 2017 cycle saw all five Rivals Industry five-stars from California get drafted, including two first-rounders: Jaelan Phillips and Najee Harris. From the 2018 cycle on, just three of 13 draft-eligible former five-stars from California have been drafted to date: Amon-Ra St. Brown (2018), Kayvon Thibodeaux (2019), and Bryce Young (2020).

The group of undrafted former five-stars is comprised of JT Daniels (2018), Olaijah Griffin (2018), Isaac Taylor-Stuart (2018), Devon Williams (2018), Bru McCoy (2019), Kyle Ford (2019), and DJ Uiagalelei (2020). That does not include former five-star Eli Ricks (2020), who played his final season of high school football at IMG Academy after beginning at Mater Dei. Three draft-eligible former five-stars are still in college: Justin Flowe (Oregon, Arizona, UNLV, 2020), Korey Foreman (USC, Fresno State, 2021), and Domani Jackson (USC, Alabama, 2022). Of those three, Jackson is the only one who enters the season tracking as a draft pick. Assuming Jackson is picked next April, the five-star draft rate for California prospects since 2018 would be 31%, which is 34% lower than the average for all former five-stars.

The team behind the current rankings at Rivals has outperformed the industry when it comes to identifying five-star prospects from the state of California, accounting for 75% of the state’s first-round five-star outliers in the past three drafts. We were the only group to rank Brock Bowers and Xavier Worthy as five-star prospects out of high school. CJ Stroud was another five-star outlier turned first-rounder while we were at 247Sports.

Unlike most of the undrafted five-star recruits, Stroud, Bowers, and Worthy were not playing at top-tier high school programs in Southern California. Stroud had a meteoric rise beginning in the off-season before his senior year, going from a handful of Power 4 offers to being one of the nation’s more coveted quarterbacks after a great final season. Bowers hailed from Napa High, where he was a do-it-all playmaker and registered as the most athletic tight end in the 2021 cycle. Worthy was one of the fastest prospects in the cycle, doubling as a football and track star at Fresno Central East. We were also the only outlet to rank Bryce Young as the No. 1 overall prospect and had industry-high rankings on eventual first-round picks Jayden Daniels and Trent McDuffie.

The lone five-star outlier turned first-rounder miss during that range is Tetairoa McMillan. Despite being ranked as a top 75 prospect for the entirety of the cycle, McMillan outperformed every wide receiver ranked ahead of him (not counting Travis Hunter) at the college level. McMillan was one of the most productive receivers in the 2022 cycle, accounting for 1,302 receiving yards and 18 touchdowns while picking off eight passes as a safety. The ball production was elite. At the time, we had some questions about his top-end speed, as he never ran an official 40-yard dash in high school. The speed ended up not being be a big concern for NFL teams, even though McMillan ran an average 4.53 during the pre-draft process.

SoCal vs. NorCal: Talent volume and blue-chip efficiency

The split between Southern California and Northern California provides more insight into the state’s talent-producing and recruiting landscape. SoCal is home to the majority of the state’s recent talent output, accounting for 72.6% of draft picks over the last five years. NorCal generated 23.1%, while Central California accounts for 4.2%.

Those figures are not surprising as SoCal had four times the blue-chip prospects of NorCal in the 2017-2021 recruiting cycles. That said, blue-chip prospects from NorCal were drafted at a higher rate than their peers to the south.

While it doesn’t have the raw talent output of SoCal, NorCal (75% Bay Area, 21% Sacramento) punches above its weight relative to draft rate.

Even more interestingly, the position distribution between draft picks SoCal and NorCal reveals some clear trends. Here’s a breakdown of how the numbers compare.

For one, the SoCal draft picks skew very heavily towards wide receiver and cornerback, with both positions combining to account for 43% of the region’s draft picks. That number is almost hard to believe, given it comes from just two positions.

Additionally, the stereotype that SoCal struggles to produce draft talent on the line of scrimmage is backed up by the data. Just 24.8% of the SoCal draft picks come from the line of scrimmage (OT, IOL, DL, EDGE) compared to 47.1% for NorCal. Teams recruiting the state of California are equally as likely to find an NFL talent on the line of scrimmage in NorCal as SoCal, despite the vastly smaller number of blue-chip prospects in the north.

A blueprint for evaluating California: What the draft data tells us

The data presented above points to a challenging landscape for college programs that recruit the state of California. As the nation’s most populous state, California has the 19th most draft picks per capita. The actual NFL talent tends to be sprinkled across sprawling metropolitan areas. While high school powerhouses can create the illusion of concentrated talent, the draft talent tends to be widely dispersed at high schools across the massive state.

As a result of these challenging circumstances, some national programs that heavily recruit California have dramatically shifted their strategies back and forth in recent years. The vacillation is easily explained: the state of California is difficult to efficiently evaluate and is relatively weak on the line of scrimmage.

Using insights based on this study, here’s a rough roadmap for Power 4 programs to more efficiently evaluate the state of California.

1. Prioritize production and neutral evaluations for blue-chip prospects from power programs. The three former five-stars who ended up as first-rounders – Bryce Young, Kayvon Thibodeaux, and Amon-Ra St. Brown – were all hyper productive late in their high school careers. Young was the top quarterback in high school football, totaling for 4,885 yards and 68 touchdowns against six interceptions as a senior. Thibodeaux totaled 47 tackles for loss and 38 sacks in his final two years of high school football. St. Brown accounting for 2,549 receiving yards and 41 touchdowns in his last two seasons at Mater Dei. Though he wasn’t a five-star per the Rivals Industry, Jayden Daniels was far and away the most productive top quarterback in the 2019 cycle, totaling 6,051 yards and 76 touchdowns against four interceptions as a senior. Each of those prospects were standouts at neutral setting events.
2. Senior risers: Many recent first-rounders from the state of California took off as seniors.
   • Chris Olave was famously identified in the middle of his senior season by Ohio State when the Buckeyes were evaluating his high school quarterback, Jack Tuttle. Olave had missed his entire junior season due to transfer rules. He went on to have a huge senior season and went on to have a great career in Columbus before heading to the NFL.
   • CJ Stroud had a handful of Power 4 offers before a breakout MVP performance at the Elite 11 Finals before his senior season. He carried that momentum into the fall and ended up as one of the top quarterbacks in the cycle.
   • Trent McDuffie flew under the national radar after transferring from Servite to St. John Bosco as a senior. McDuffie had a sterling athletic profile and outplayed his more highly touted teammate Chris Steele on Friday nights and in the all-star setting.
   • Mason Graham entered his senior season as a Boise State commit. He quickly earned Power 4 offers as a senior and finished with 22 tackles for loss and 14 sacks.
3. Broaden the high school scope. With 95 draft picks coming from 77 different high schools, it’s essential to expand the range of programs you evaluate. Avoid over-extending at well-known powerhouses that are heavily trafficked by coaches from all over the nation, especially for prospects who aren’t no-brainer, elite recruits. California’s depth of talent often comes from off the beaten path.
4. Efficiently evaluate at college camps. Even though most rising seniors no longer participate, college camps offer the opportunity for controlled, neutral setting evaluations. They can help to contextualize a prospect’s physical tools and skills beyond the variability of their high school competition or circumstances. Given the expansive geography of the state, satellite camps could prove useful.
5. Emphasize regional positional trends
   • Focus on wide receivers and defensive backs in Southern California, where wide receiver and cornerback combine for 43% of the region’s draft picks.
   • Target line of scrimmage players in NorCal, which has a higher draft rate for offensive and defensive linemen.
   • Look to supplement LOS recruiting from neighboring western states.
6. Leverage the transfer portal for California natives. Nearly 30% of California’s recent draft picks didn’t sign with a Power 4 program out of high school – 5% higher than the national average over that period. The transfer portal has created a new pathway for under-recruited California prospects to work their way to the Power 4. Nearly half of the picks from California in the 2025 draft did not sign with a Power 4 program out of high school. That includes transfers like Josh Simmons (San Diego State, Ohio State transfer), Kyle Williams (UNLV, Washington State transfer), Nohl Williams (UNLV, Cal transfer), and Cam Skattebo (Sacramento State, Arizona State transfer). Given the dynamics of the state’s recruiting landscape, this trend may be just getting started.

Where the California draft picks signed out of high school

USC – 10

UCLA (2 walk-ons) – 8

Washington – 6

Utah (1 walk-on), San Diego State – 5

Boise State (1 walk-on), Cal, Notre Dame, Oregon – 4

Arizona State, Ohio State, Oregon State, Sacramento State, Stanford, Washington State – 3

Alabama, BYU (1 walk-on), Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, UNLV – 2

Colorado, Colorado State, Fresno State, Miami, Oklahoma, Ole Miss, San Jose State, Tennessee, Texas, UTEP, Wyoming – 1