Lake Travis
#157 in the country for NFL draft picks, of 1,411 high schools that have produced one — and #21 in Texas.
What it produces
Every college signee since 2010 by position group, and how many of them were drafted.
Did its recruits beat their ratings?
Every recruit's odds of being drafted, from his composite rating and position group, fit within his own signing class — added up, that is what Lake Travis's classes were “supposed” to produce.
In line with what their ratings predicted.
2 picks against 1.9. A gap that size or bigger turns up 60% of the time at a school this size by chance alone.
And chance gets 170 attempts: about 9 of the schools here clear that bar on luck. Corrected for that, no high school in this data separates from its recruits' ratings.
Class by class
Whether the pipeline is opening or closing — the one question a February class ranking cannot answer, because nobody goes back to it.
Show every class as a table ▾Hide the table ▴
Notable alumni
Every Lake Travis signee
All 47 players Lake Travis has sent to a college football program since 2010 — what they were rated, where they signed, and what happened next. The table above is the honour roll; this is the whole list.
47 of 47 signees since 2010. “Too recent to say” is the 2021 class and later — they have not had a draft to be in yet, which is not the same as not making it.
“College contributor” is measured from offence-skill usage and, from 2021, defensive production — so a lineman who started four years shows as neither. NFL draft covers every position. A player is listed under the college he SIGNED with, which is not always the one he was drafted from.
Where its players go
The colleges that land the most of Lake Travis's talent, and how those recruits fared — a revealed pipeline (where they signed, not offers).
| School | Signed | Avg ★ | Contributors | Draftees |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Rice | 5 | 2.5 | 0 | 0 |
 Ohio State | 3 | 4.3 | 1 | 1 |
| Columbia | 3 | — | 0 | 0 |
 TCU | 3 | 4.0 | 0 | 0 |
 Texas | 3 | 3.3 | 1 | 0 |
 Northwestern | 2 | 3.0 | 0 | 0 |
 USC | 2 | 3.0 | 1 | 0 |
 UTSA | 2 | 3.0 | 0 | 0 |
Current commits
“Projects to fit” is the “should go” beside the “did go”: among the programs at his level, the ones whose record best matches his profile — development at his position, territory, roster need. Descriptive fit, not a prediction of where he signs.
Other Texas pipelines
The schools this one is measured against — same state, nearest record.
Every Texas high school →Descriptive hindsight, not a forecast. Draft outcomes cover all positions (2010–2020 signing classes — each has the full five drafts behind it); the college-contributor count covers offense-skill positions (2010–21), where we have production data. A school's own history is not an input to any projection on this site: across 5,852 programs, where a recruit went to high school adds nothing to what his rating already says. How this is measured.