Anonymous Scouts Thoughts on Colts Drafted Players

[Bravo]

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2016/5/19/11692054/what-did-anonymous-scouts-say-about-the-players-the-colts-drafted-ryan-kelly-tj-green-leraven-clark

 

Interesting....

 

Some scouts seem to disagree with eachother! Lol

[ReMeDy]

Oh crap, they're on to me.

[Gavin]

“There’s a guy that’s overrated,” a third scout said. “I don’t know why he was at the combine. I definitely don’t like (University of) Texas football players. He’s weak, doesn’t get off blocks, not a glass-eater, not a pass rusher. I don’t know what anybody saw in this guy.”

 

 

One of two things going on here:

 

1.He is either letting his hate for Texas football override logic in that Ridgeway was a force at Texas OR

 

2.He is just a clown who don't have any clue to what he was watching when watching Ridgeway (Which to me calls into question his ability to scout D Linemen period)

 

 

I'd say the first one. I'd like to think a pro scout could see what I could see..... the obvious (Though we know they cant plenty of times) and that's that Ridgeway was pretty damn good in college who has an all around game as a D Lineman and a pass rush arsenal to match. Stamina is the question NOT talent

[2006Coltsbestever]

I honestly thought our Draft was a Very Good one, a safe one and one that will help protect Andrew. I would've given it an A had we Drafted a solid Pass Rusher. I still say it is a solid B.

[BOTT]

Blah blah blah

[Buddy Lee]

It was eye opening to me to learn that TJ Green played the full Clemson schedule (15 games I think) at safety and had only 1 pick and 3 passes broken up. Maybe PFF's analysis of him in coverage was right???

[crazycolt1]

Anonymous scouts? That covers what? We are all anonymous scouts. Without specific names the relativity of it don't hold water.

[Bravo]

5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Anonymous scouts? That covers what? We are all anonymous scouts. Without specific names the relativity of it don't hold water.

 

No... Just thought it was interesting. I would assume they are NFL scouts. Who knows! Lol

[jskinnz]

3 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Anonymous scouts? That covers what? We are all anonymous scouts. Without specific names the relativity of it don't hold water.

 

Would you have said he same thing if they threw all kinds of praise at the Colts' picks?

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, jskinnz said:

 

Would you have said he same thing if they threw all kinds of praise at the Colts' picks?

Yes. Anyone can be anonymous. Me and you are anonymous scouts if we claim to be.

[jskinnz]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

Yes. Anyone can be anonymous. Me and you are anonymous scouts if we claim to be.

 

So you think it is possible, maybe even likely, that the scouts referenced in the article are people posing as scouts and not really on NFL team's payroll?

[UKColt13]

Exactly why I loved the Morrison pick.

 

"All I know is what I see on tape," said one scout. "If the guard comes out on him he punches the guard right in the face and knocks him on the ground. Tough as nails. He'll show up at your football facility at 6 before the janitor gets there and will still be watching tape at 11 at night. He was described as a flower growing through concrete. He's rough around the edges. Kind of in your face. He calls out any teammate that's goofing off. He did some really stupid, immature things at Florida early. He's not a bad, malicious kid....He's going to be sitting there in the later part of the draft and someone's going to say, 'Screw it, take him.' Then two years from now you'll go, 'Holy (expletive), what a great pick.'"

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, jskinnz said:

 

So you think it is possible, maybe even likely, that the scouts referenced in the article are people posing as scouts and not really on NFL team's payroll?

Is that what I said?  If anyone uses the name anonymous for themselves, then they must feel they don't want their name associated with what was being reported. Besides there are conflicting opinions of whoever had opinions. Why must you take everything so literal?

[Coltfreak]

7 hours ago, Gavin said:

“There’s a guy that’s overrated,” a third scout said. “I don’t know why he was at the combine. I definitely don’t like (University of) Texas football players. He’s weak, doesn’t get off blocks, not a glass-eater, not a pass rusher. I don’t know what anybody saw in this guy.”

 

 

One of two things going on here:

 

1.He is either letting his hate for Texas football override logic in that Ridgeway was a force at Texas OR

 

2.He is just a clown who don't have any clue to what he was watching when watching Ridgeway (Which to me calls into question his ability to scout D Linemen period)

 

 

I'd say the first one. I'd like to think a pro scout could see what I could see..... the obvious (Though we know they cant plenty of times) and that's that Ridgeway was pretty damn good in college who has an all around game as a D Lineman and a pass rush arsenal to match. Stamina is the question NOT talent

Mike Mayock even said Ridgeway takes a lot of plays off   You call it stamina but it could be the "Cory Simon Syndrome" 

 

i I hope it was that he was just recovering from the injury 

[jskinnz]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

Is that what I said?  If anyone uses the name anonymous for themselves, then they must feel they don't want their name associated with what was being reported. Besides there are conflicting opinions of whoever had opinions. Why must you take everything so literal?

 

I would say you certainly inferred that.  

 

But to the point, that is not why they are anonymous.  Really not even close.

 

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, jskinnz said:

 

I would say you certainly inferred that.  

 

But to the point, that is not why they are anonymous.  Really not even close.

 

I did not infer anything. When someone says something under the guise of anonymous that cant be question of why they said something it means nothing. If you have a different opinion I have no problem with that. Why you feel the need to argue about something that means absolutely nothing baffles me.

[Valpo2004]

Interesting the most glowing reports besides on Ryan Kelly seem to be on Antonio Morrison.  

 

10 hours ago, Gavin said:

“There’s a guy that’s overrated,” a third scout said. “I don’t know why he was at the combine. I definitely don’t like (University of) Texas football players. He’s weak, doesn’t get off blocks, not a glass-eater, not a pass rusher. I don’t know what anybody saw in this guy.”

 

 

One of two things going on here:

 

1.He is either letting his hate for Texas football override logic in that Ridgeway was a force at Texas OR

 

2.He is just a clown who don't have any clue to what he was watching when watching Ridgeway (Which to me calls into question his ability to scout D Linemen period)

 

 

I'd say the first one. I'd like to think a pro scout could see what I could see..... the obvious (Though we know they cant plenty of times) and that's that Ridgeway was pretty damn good in college who has an all around game as a D Lineman and a pass rush arsenal to match. Stamina is the question NOT talent

 

Most of the other scouts where positive so this scout clearly has some weird ax to grind because he doesn't like players from Texas for some reason.

 

Pretty big jump from scouts saying he has 2nd round potential to "I don't even know why they invited him to the combine, I don't like Texas players, he sux."

 

[jskinnz]

37 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I did not infer anything. When someone says something under the guise of anonymous that cant be question of why they said something it means nothing. If you have a different opinion I have no problem with that. Why you feel the need to argue about something that means absolutely nothing baffles me.

 

Kettle meet pot...

[ColtsBlueFL]

Not every scout is a 'good' scout.  Some are head and shoulders above the rest; largely based upon longevity and track record.

[ColtsLegacy]

4 hours ago, jskinnz said:

 

So you think it is possible, maybe even likely, that the scouts referenced in the article are people posing as scouts and not really on NFL team's payroll?

 

3 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Is that what I said? If anyone uses the name anonymous for themselves, then they must feel they don't want their name associated with what was being reported. Besides there are conflicting opinions of whoever had opinions. Why must you take everything so literal?

 

Yes. You said anonymous scouts could be anyone. Twice. That's a clear implication.

 

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Yes. Anyone can be anonymous. Me and you are anonymous scouts if we claim to be.

 

9 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Anonymous scouts? That covers what? We are all anonymous scouts. Without specific names the relativity of it don't hold water.

 

And, as jskinnz said, their anonymity has nothing to do with wanting to protect themselves from their statements. There's a reason every single one of the scouts is anonymous. Pre-draft teams don't want to leak any info about who they like or don't, among other reasons. It's standard practice for scouts to be anonymous when making public comments about players.

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

 

Yes. You said anonymous scouts could be anyone. Twice. That's a clear implication.

 

 

 

And, as jskinnz said, their anonymity has nothing to do with wanting to protect themselves from their statements. There's a reason every single one of the scouts is anonymous. Pre-draft teams don't want to leak any info about who they like or don't, among other reasons. It's standard practice for scouts to be anonymous when making public comments about players.

If someone wants what they want as credible they will stand by it. Cant stand by what you say under the cloak of anonymous when you cant be questioned. It becomes second hand information at that point. I have a different point of view that's all. People look at things different, that's life.

[21isSuperman]

The more I read about Antonio Morrison, the more I like the pick.  He really reminds of me Brandon Spikes, but perhaps with a bit of a better attitude.  It'll be really interesting to see what Ted Mochacinno does with him

[Defjamz26]

8 hours ago, UKColt13 said:

Exactly why I loved the Morrison pick.

 

"All I know is what I see on tape," said one scout. "If the guard comes out on him he punches the guard right in the face and knocks him on the ground. Tough as nails. He'll show up at your football facility at 6 before the janitor gets there and will still be watching tape at 11 at night. He was described as a flower growing through concrete. He's rough around the edges. Kind of in your face. He calls out any teammate that's goofing off. He did some really stupid, immature things at Florida early. He's not a bad, malicious kid....He's going to be sitting there in the later part of the draft and someone's going to say, 'Screw it, take him.' Then two years from now you'll go, 'Holy (expletive), what a great pick.'"

Morrison was my second favorite pick in the draft. I love what he brings to the table as a LB. We need players with some "nasty" on our defense.

[ColtsLegacy]

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

If someone wants what they want as credible they will stand by it. Cant stand by what you say under the cloak of anonymous when you cant be questioned. It becomes second hand information at that point. I have a different point of view that's all. People look at things different, that's life.

 

 

As I said, it's a standard practice in the NFL. I can't recall any quoted scout giving his name pre-draft and that's not just a coincidence. One thing's for sure, these scouts aren't anonymous in their organizations. They not only have to stand by their views but they have to defend and explain them as well. If they don't perform they're out of a job. I'm sure public perception means nothing in comparison. 

[crazycolt1]

2 minutes ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

 

As I said, it's a standard practice in the NFL. I can't recall a scout not being anonymous pre-draft and that's not just a coincidence. One things for sure, these scouts aren't anonymous in their organizations. They not only have to stand by their views but they have to defend and explain them as well. If they don't perform they're out of a job. I'm sure public perception means nothing in comparison. 

 

That may be true but when you put yourself in the medias articles it's different than with your team. I am sure the teams want their scouts to be anonymous or face losing their jobs over releasing information that they feel privy to. All these reports from anonymous scouts are opinions. When opinions vary from scout to scout without being debated it terms their opinion mute. ( in my opinion)

[DougDew]

13 hours ago, Coltfreak said:

Mike Mayock even said Ridgeway takes a lot of plays off   You call it stamina but it could be the "Cory Simon Syndrome" 

 

i I hope it was that he was just recovering from the injury 

I believe Ridgeway was fighting a back injury during the past year.  Anybody who has ever experienced back issues knows that they can run the gas out of anybody real quick.  Makes it difficult to even workout and keep in shape.

[DougDew]

4 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

Morrison was my second favorite pick in the draft. I love what he brings to the table as a LB. We need players with some "nasty" on our defense.

There was a lot of criticism of the pick immediately after the draft.  What I saw on tape was a guy willing to crash into bigger Olineman and stand them up, sometimes even causing the RB to change direction. 

 

Maybe he doesn't have the best statistical athleticism, but he seems to bring tons of energy.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

Anonymous....means little or more likely no one worthy of their opinion?  

[NewColtsFan]

21 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Anonymous scouts? That covers what? We are all anonymous scouts. Without specific names the relativity of it don't hold water.

 

Seriously?       You really wrote that?       We are all anonymous scouts?      

 

No.   We're not.     None of us are pulling a paycheck from an NFL team.     None of us makes our living scouting.        Fans here are -- at best -- amateurs when it comes to scouting.    And I'm including me in that.     Amateurs.     

 

Who cares about names?    They do this for a living.    If you knew their names what would it tell you?     Do you know if Bob Smith of Dallas is a good scout or Joe Jones from Green Bay?     No.    You don't know what any NFL scout has done so you don't have a point of reference with or without names.     

 

Sorry,  but I don't understand this post at all..........

 

[NewColtsFan]

 

The most important thing to learn from stories like this is that scouts -- all scouts -- so most everything differently.

 

Two guys can be looking at the same tape and one guy loves it and the other guy likes it.    Scouts are trying to determine ceilings....    how good can a player be?      Floors....    what's the worst he can be?     Character...   is he good or bad in the locker-room?      Is he a leader or a follower?  

 

The fact that there are differing opinions on the same player doesn't diminish anything.    Only that scouts see the same thing differently....    and then the decision on a given player goes up from a scout,  to a cross checker, to a scouting supervisor, to a director of college scouting,  to the GM and the coaches,  including HC, coordinator and positions coaches.      There's a ton that goes into all this....       It's not just some fan watching video on his home computer....

 

[crazycolt1]

14 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Seriously?       You really wrote that?       We are all anonymous scouts?      

 

No.   We're not.     None of us are pulling a paycheck from an NFL team.     None of us makes our living scouting.        Fans here are -- at best -- amateurs when it comes to scouting.    And I'm including me in that.     Amateurs.     

 

Who cares about names?    They do this for a living.    If you knew their names what would it tell you?     Do you know if Bob Smith of Dallas is a good scout or Joe Jones from Green Bay?     No.    You don't know what any NFL scout has done so you don't have a point of reference with or without names.     

 

Sorry,  but I don't understand this post at all..........

 

Really? You do scouting every day. Matter of fact you do more scouting than most in this forum. That is exactly what you are doing when you watch a tape and then make comments about what you saw and then add your opinion. I say that not as disrespectful, just as fact. As far as the other stuff I already explained what my opinion was. If you don't agree with my opinion that is you choice.

[jskinnz]

22 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Really? You do scouting every day. Matter of fact you do more scouting than most in this forum. That is exactly what you are doing when you watch a tape and then make comments about what you saw and then add your opinion. I say that not as disrespectful, just as fact. As far as the other stuff I already explained what my opinion was. If you don't agree with my opinion that is you choice.

 

Watching youtube videos so you can do a mock draft or provide commentary on a forum = not a scout

 

Watching film, talking to coaches EARNING A PAYCHECK from an NFL team who values your opinion = scout

 

Is it that hard to understand the difference?

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Watching youtube videos so you can do a mock draft or provide commentary on a forum = not a scout

 

Watching film, talking to coaches EARNING A PAYCHECK from an NFL team who values your opinion = scout

 

Is it that hard to understand the difference?

I already said what I had to say. If you have a different opinion and or point of view that's your right and I have no problem with it. It's not my place to tell you how to feel about something and then argue about it because you think different than me.

[Gavin]

NCF is right of course. We are all amateur scouts at best and Skins is right in that we don't earn a paycheck. I say that as a person who does my research on players to the best I can and watch a lot of games on prospects but the fact is teams will obviously have more info than us....specifically injury related info. Does that mean amateurs (some) cant do scouting of games as well as plenty of actual scouts that get paid? No. Truth is plenty of people can do that if they apply themselves and do the proper research....The key in this is to read scouting reports and look for what they say on games and again research what some of those things mean if you don't know. Its almost all available if you put in the time in terms of what to look for.

 

But still other things are available to Scouts/GM's/Owners that is either not quickly known to the general public and sometimes not at all. Though I believe that I can hit at a 40 percent rate (3 out of 7 players in any draft with the normal 7 allotted picks) which I think is good for any draft for any team. 4 or more and you really nailed your draft when it comes to the film aspect. Its the unknown variables that would do me in

[Lawrence Owen]

i like reading the comment sections also......

In this one play Ridgeway has more broken tackles and Yards after contact than T-Rich had during his entire tenure with Indy...lol

 

&

 

My favorite plays from Ridgeway were him beating up on Nick Martin from ND

Who coincidentally is now projected to be the texans starting center. Interesting pick grigs

"Sixth man of the year"

-REMGRUNDY

 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Really? You do scouting every day. Matter of fact you do more scouting than most in this forum. That is exactly what you are doing when you watch a tape and then make comments about what you saw and then add your opinion. I say that not as disrespectful, just as fact. As far as the other stuff I already explained what my opinion was. If you don't agree with my opinion that is you choice.

 

And I clearly said....   my opinion is an amateurs.     All of our opinions are amateurs.

 

I'm not sure why you wouldn't accept that as fact.

 

Most people here -- me included -- don't even know what to look for watching tape.    It's more than watching a RB go into the EZ for a touchdown,  or watch a D-lineman sack a quarterback and decide if the player is good or not. 

 

From where I sit what I'm saying is as controversial as saying the sun rises in the east and sets in the west...   in short,  it's not only obvious,   but it's a fact.

 

I don't know what there is to disagree with.....     but maybe that's just me....

 

 

[UKColt13]

13 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

Morrison was my second favorite pick in the draft. I love what he brings to the table as a LB. We need players with some "nasty" on our defense.

 

He strikes me as "Baltimore-style" linebacker.

 

Might not be the most athletic, but brings physicality, intensity, brings that 'nasty' to the D and sets the tone. Looking forward to seeing him next to DQ.

[JPFolks]

On 5/20/2016 at 6:39 AM, jskinnz said:

 

So you think it is possible, maybe even likely, that the scouts referenced in the article are people posing as scouts and not really on NFL team's payroll?

I think it's more likely that the author made up all the quotes and attributed them to anonymous scouts, but that's jmo. Or perhaps had his buddies chip in.  It really all depends on the credibility of the article's author.  Does he have any?  I have no idea, he may as well be anonymous too.  But obviously the extreme differences are telling that his choices in anonymous scouts leave a bit of concern based on their opinions.  There's so many websites trying to get clicks by any means that I trust almost nothing that is anonymous on the web.  Sure, we're all more amenable to an opinion if it agrees with our own, but no one should take any of the good or bad very seriously because in reality, it's a crapshoot.  The only way to win that game is with more picks and therefore more likely chances to find good players.  50% of the first rounders will underwhelm.  That would suggest the art of scouting is pretty weak overall.  

 

By the way, any REAL scout who makes a blanket claim about all players from any particular school isn't a real scout even if they have a job as such.  The idea is to critique the player, not the program.  What an *.