-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
-
Thread of the Week
-
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
Oh no doubt about that. I absolutely value the fact that people like Brugler, Cosell, Jeremiah, etc. actually do the work and take their job seriously. And I also agree that others do very surface level stuff(more akin to what most of us here are doing here as a hoby. Except... they get paid for it). My angle is not exactly "everyone is the same", they are not. That's why I value extremely highly the work some do and not so much others. And I agree that just because a player doesn't hit, it doesn't mean the evaluation was faulty... or just because a player hits unexpectedly, I don't think the evaluation was necessarily faulty either. It's important to see the reasoning behind the projections and it is important to recognize the uncertainty in any projection really. IMO the uncertainty covers for a lot of shoddy "work" and rankings because a lot of talking heads can just parrot hits and omit misses. So they are not all the same, but their results might be very close to each other. Just like in the NFL - the difference between good and bad GMs in hit rate is in single digit number over the long term. You won't get one GM that hits 80% and another that hits 20%(Although... Grigson probably was close to that one). Part of it is because the ones that don't do the work, actually copy and plagiarize the work that the great ones do... example, they will take the Jeremiah and Brugler's big boards and will mash them together and just switch a few names around, or if they have a favorite they will bump him up while dropping a specific one they don't like, but in the grand scheme of things the results wouldn't be dramatically different. So the value for me is from the actual verifiable work those people do and the way they present information. WIth people like Brugler or Cosell you can actually tell that it's them that are doing the work. They give you detailed reports on why they think what they think about those prospects. And they are almost never extreme in their opinions - i.e. "this player is trash, he would never succeed in the league". You know they actually sit down and watch those guys play and actually do scouting reports from what they see on tape, rather than from what they've heard someone else say about those players. And with Brugler, even furthermore, you see a ton of background information about those players. He's pretty much doing what scouts for the teams are doing. He's digging about the childhood and adolescence of those players, he's digging up red flags, medical information(whatever is available), etc. And he's just one person. And he's doing it for 400+ players every year. You can only respect that. And I derive a ton of more value out of it than I do out of a random pundit's QB ranking for which I probably have watched more tape than he has. -
By MikeCurtis · Posted
Agreed By mid year, this offense might be special, I wonder if our defense can at least get to 15, in points allowed Having an offense that grinds it our, will help the defense stay fresh -
By RollerColt · Posted
You’re welcome! I agree, some really good information and worth a watch. -
Bortolini was very good at the Senior Bowl. Technically sound and quick. I would not be surprised at all if either him or Concalves starts right guard this year, and I like Fries, I'm one of the few on here who doesn't think he sucks. We may be so good running the ball this year Richardson won't have to throw much(20-25 times a game?) This offense is going to be fun to watch and we should win a lot of games as long as we aren't playing cb's 10 yards off the line and dropping linebackers 12 yards deep on 3rd and 3. Go Colts! -
-
-
Members
-
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.