Yeah, I'm with @Irish YJ on this one. In order to draw conclusions about the bust rates of the WR position and to make decisions about whether to draft one in the 1st round, you need to 1. get big enough sample for it to means something(eliminate noise) and 2. compare it to other positions because 50% bust rate(not a real number, just putting it here for demonstration purposes) means nothing if the bust rate for DL is 65(again not real number, just for demonstration purposes - I don't know what the real numbers are).
And even then like Irish mentioned, different draft classes have different strengths and at different stages of the draft... for example you can have a really strong DL draft in the 1st and have all of them go in the top 25 and a relatively weak WR class, but have a great WR drop to you to 26(lets say because of all the great DLs). So the question is do you draft the good WR or a sub-par DL? To me the answer is obvious... you draft the best value player... WR or not.
I'm not saying anything against it, i prefer to watch the draft and get the picks before they are announced so i can focus more on the commentary.
My displeasure comes from the whole "don't spoil it" community. To me, I was going to get that information later on, so why not get it now? It's not going to ruin anything for me, I'd still enjoy or dislike the event no matter what. It's all about getting that information. Some people want it ASAP and some people like waiting in suspense I guess.
I really don't get it from here on the fan forum. It's pretty simple. Don't visit the forum when the Colts are on the clock? It's like a whole 5 min total you would have to avoid the forum. If you're coming to the forum while the colts are on the clock then you want the pick spoiled IMHO.
I know that's a joke.
Just wanted to say, while I'm sure Brissett had positive things to say about McDaniels, I'm also pretty sure that Ballard offering McDaniels the job wasn't solely based on Brissett's recommendation. I'd say that represented less than 5% of the equation. Ballard did A LOT of work on McDaniels, but McDaniels proved to be untrustworthy. I'm glad it happened when it did, and not a month or a year later...
And it would be the same if Ballard asked Nelson his opinion of someone like Tillery. I wouldn't expect that Ballard would say 'Q likes him, that's good enough for me.'
I'd also like to add that 8 of the 14 receivers listed in the second half of round 1 (17-32) are labelled as misses, with 2 of them still unproven and 2 others being only somewhat hits, only Cooks and Hopkins have been clear hits. Higher first's have better odds, but after that it is a big issue finding a good player until rounds 2 and 3