3rd Round | Pick 89, Rams select: QB Sean Mannion

[FrantikRam]

I totally disagree with everything you just posted. First the coaches and scouts don't watch every snap a player has taken. How much time do you think they have?

And you call it a guess. Well it's great that you can assume that what draft fans do is guess. Many spend hours upon hours watching games that they record and games on YouTube to be sure to evaluate every pick possible. Picking lottery numbers is a guess. Because you have nothing to go by. I dont go down a list and say, he will be good, he will too, he won't, etc just on a whim, without knowing anything about players. I have formed opinions based in collected information. By your estimates the Coaches and scouts are just guessing too. If they collect information and I collect information then how is my prediction a guess and theirs is not? How can I be adament that Johnny Manzeil will not succeed and back it up with sound reasoning and some NFL team can get it wrong despite having so much more information?

Your assertion that every draft produces good players and bad players so it is certain that teams will have a high percentage of failure is true but I am talking about round1 and 2. If a team has the first pick in the draft that means they chose 1 player out of a couple hundred. They had several hundred possible players to choose from and months to figure out which is the best and it gets screwed up often. Teams get the top ten picks wrong often. All that extra information that they have and I don't, yet they can get it wrong and I can get it right. go figure.

Now how you presume to know that Jimmy Kennedy would be good if he was drafted by the Ravens is revealing. Jimmy Kennedy wouldn't have been good with any team. The fact that you believe that he could, sheds some light on things. He wasn't good with the Rams, he wasn't good on a very good Vikings defense, he wasn't even that good on PSUs defense. However you believing that Jimmy Kennedy would be good if the Ravens had drafted him, is indicative of why you wont ever accept that a fan can accurately predict a draft pick based on watching games, interviews, and reading about that player. Because you yourself have no understanding of the process or how to go about it. Until you try it with a real concerted effort and spend the time that many fans do, you really have no idea how accurate a fans picks are. It really is not that difficult to see which players are good. I am not sure why it is so difficult for you. The fact that you struggle with evaluations explains why you cannot accept that it is possible for others to accurately predict picks. I guess in that case there is nothing more to say that can convince you otherwise about that topic, other than that not understanding something doesn't mean it is wrong.

I did not say that Jimmy Kennedy WOULD have been good. I said he COULD have been good with another team. I used the Ravens as a random example. But we will never know. I used that as an example because there are so many factors that go in to a player's success, beyond his ability. Those are the factors that we as fans know very little about.

I got caught up in this conversation and lost sight of my original point. I don't scout college players beyond watching my favorite team play because I don't desire to take the time to do so.

But the funnier thing here is, that you clearly think you can scout players as well as an NFL team. That is laughable. I think every fan has had a Jimmy Kennedy. That doesn't mean you are capable of scouting like a coaching staff that is paid to do so. I don't understand why it isn't common sense that they have tools that we as fans do not. Fans will be right about players, and coaches will be wrong. Doesn't mean the fans know more.

Thanks for the personal attack though.

 

[FrantikRam]

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/3/6/5473554/2014-nfl-draft-scouting-process-big-board


I guess this would communicate my thoughts on the subject better than I can. Read how much work goes into it.

I appreciate the heck out of Jrry32 for all the work he does. I love reading his mock drafts.

But a former NFL scout - a guy more of an expert than any fan, unless that fan is a former scout himself - would have trouble doing this alone. Even focusing on one prospect, they have multiple people at different levels in the organization that cross check one another.

They are obviously going to be better at this because it's what they do - and the resources they have to accomplish it. Of course fans will still be "right" sometimes - often times you have a 50/50 shot, and there is no risk in a fan being wrong.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I did not say that Jimmy Kennedy WOULD have been good. I said he COULD have been good with another team. I used the Ravens as a random example. But we will never know. I used that as an example because there are so many factors that go in to a player's success, beyond his ability. Those are the factors that we as fans know very little about.

I got caught up in this conversation and lost sight of my original point. I don't scout college players beyond watching my favorite team play because I don't desire to take the time to do so.

But the funnier thing here is, that you clearly think you can scout players as well as an NFL team. That is laughable. I think every fan has had a Jimmy Kennedy. That doesn't mean you are capable of scouting like a coaching staff that is paid to do so. I don't understand why it isn't common sense that they have tools that we as fans do not. Fans will be right about players, and coaches will be wrong. Doesn't mean the fans know more.

Thanks for the personal attack though.

Not common sense. I have a very good track record with grading picks. I know that the NFL teams have more access to info than I do but that is not always a good thing. They had more access to info and it led Devanney to draft Jason Smith. Myself? I hit on as many picks as any NFL team does and I don't put near the work in that some other guys do. Like I said just watch the games. It isn't that hard and I think that many NFL teams gunk up the process because of all of their extra information.

There is enough info out there for fans to know what they need to know. Articles post inside stuff, scout reports, SPARQ scores etc. Twitter is amazing for this stuff. Teams overthink it and like Jrry said they also have too many cooks in the kitchen trying to influence who is chosen. Plus many coaches think they can coach anyone and they see measurables and start dreaming of all pro football players that really are not great football players, just great athletes. But all that aside the personal attack was not really meant that way. I really cannot understand how you can think it is so tough to make good picks when there is so much information and so many games to watch. So, I assumed that you just were not good at it. For people that have been doing this for years, they really don't think it is so tough to make good picks. The key for me is not to judge players that I haven't really watched. But back to personal attacks. I and many others on here spend, probably too much, time getting familiar with players and evaluating them and playing GM come draft time. For someone to come on this forum, which is intended for such things and is full of people that all do it, and disparage what we do and our opinions is insulting. It is like walking into a church and saying that religion is a joke and we shouldn't talk about being Christians because we didn't know Jesus. My opinion about prospects is backed up by months of research. Some here spend way more time doing it than I do. So for you to come on and try to make a joke out of it is a personal attack in itself.


Instead of arguing that someone doesn't know what they are talking about because they are not coaches, GMs and scouts. Argue your points on what you yourself know. It carries more weight. By your measure none of us are qualified to comment on football in any way. We are not coaches so how could we possibly be knowledgeable enough to know that Cook drops passes or that Tavon is not that good at running routes, or that Goldberg was not a good OT?

 

[shaunpinney]

The important thing to remember also, is that it depends what the HC has asked for - the best fit for the schemes you're going to play etc, whether you're going run first, smash mouth, straight down the middle or you want to do some dancing' round the edges, dink or deep passes etc.

I know I spent far too long researching players when we did our ROD mock the other week, way too long, but it was enjoyable, and you do get an insight into players and there are guys that you do hanker towards and I'm sure the pro-scouts do too... nobody's infallible

We do it because we love the sport and we'd all love to be in the shoes of a real GM / coach / pro scout.
Then again as an 8 year old boy I used to get my local newsagent to ship over US sports papers to my village so that I could read up on players and put together books and books on stats - I was that weird child that used to get a kick out of yards and completions...

Out of my mock this year the only guys that were picked by the Rams was Mannion and Brown, and Brown came about because I research him for my Titans in the mock, so I didn't do too badly in my mind

 

[RamFan503]

As I recall, that's not what the Giants did. They did what I was talking about that Stanford did NOT do. Their front four dominated that game so they didn't blitz the heck out of Brady. They sat back and let four or five rushers wreak havoc.

I'd have to rewatch that game but I believe they sent five on most plays as well as the occasional blitz. Given far less time, Brady was ineffective and their record setting passing attack squelched.

They saw a weakness in Mannion's game imo. Hell, you bring up Jameis, there were teams that blitzed the crap out of him too and got plenty of pressure...difference is that Jameis adjusted and forced them to stop by beating the blitz. The Notre Dame game comes to mind as an obvious example. Notre Dame blitzed heavily during the first half and FSU/Winston struggled. Winston came out in the second half and started beating their blitzes which forced them to back off and FSU had their way with them.

I don't know about had their way with them. A questionable call gave FSU the win in that game as I recall. Still - to compare the time Winston had vs what Mannion had in those respective games is laughable. And to compare FSU's O-line and receivers to OSU's is as well.

That's why Stanford did what they did. They saw a weakness in Mannion's game and they exploited it.

Stanford saw a weakness in OSU's game. It really wouldn't have mattered what QB was back there unless I suppose it was a real mobile QB. Would Johnny Manziel have faired better in that game? Probably. Is Mannion a better QB? IMO - yes.

First the coaches and scouts don't watch every snap a player has taken. How much time do you think they have?

Actually, I would guess that for the first pick or two, they have indeed watched practically every touch or snap the player has played. How much time do I think they have? At minimum 40 hours a week to do almost only that for a few weeks a year. Who couldn't watch every snap from every possible angle? Between the scouts and coaches, it would be foolish not to look for any flaw or tendency and the only way you are going to do that is by watching every play.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Actually, I would guess that for the first pick or two, they have indeed watched practically every touch or snap the player has played. How much time do I think they have? At minimum 40 hours a week to do almost only that for a few weeks a year. Who couldn't watch every snap from every possible angle? Between the scouts and coaches, it would be foolish not to look for any flaw or tendency and the only way you are going to do that is by watching every play.

I read that article posted. According to that they ask a scout about his final grade on a guy then watch about 3-5 games against the best competition that the prospect faced. Which makes a lot of sense since teams play very weak OOC games usually. But even in the first two rounds that is 64 players at 13 games a player x 3 years. That is 2496 games x without commercials but rewinding to see plays over maybe two hours a game. That is 4992 hours. That would take 208 weeks. I really think you are wrong on that one.

 

[FrantikRam]

Not common sense. I have a very good track record with grading picks. I know that the NFL teams have more access to info than I do but that is not always a good thing. They had more access to info and it led Devanney to draft Jason Smith. Myself? I hit on as many picks as any NFL team does and I don't put near the work in that some other guys do. Like I said just watch the games. It isn't that hard and I think that many NFL teams gunk up the process because of all of their extra information.

There is enough info out there for fans to know what they need to know. Articles post inside stuff, scout reports, SPARQ scores etc. Twitter is amazing for this stuff. Teams overthink it and like Jrry said they also have too many cooks in the kitchen trying to influence who is chosen. Plus many coaches think they can coach anyone and they see measurables and start dreaming of all pro football players that really are not great football players, just great athletes. But all that aside the personal attack was not really meant that way. I really cannot understand how you can think it is so tough to make good picks when there is so much information and so many games to watch. So, I assumed that you just were not good at it. For people that have been doing this for years, they really don't think it is so tough to make good picks. The key for me is not to judge players that I haven't really watched. But back to personal attacks. I and many others on here spend, probably too much, time getting familiar with players and evaluating them and playing GM come draft time. For someone to come on this forum, which is intended for such things and is full of people that all do it, and disparage what we do and our opinions is insulting. It is like walking into a church and saying that religion is a joke and we shouldn't talk about being Christians because we didn't know Jesus. My opinion about prospects is backed up by months of research. Some here spend way more time doing it than I do. So for you to come on and try to make a joke out of it is a personal attack in itself.


Instead of arguing that someone doesn't know what they are talking about because they are not coaches, GMs and scouts. Argue your points on what you yourself know. It carries more weight. By your measure none of us are qualified to comment on football in any way. We are not coaches so how could we possibly be knowledgeable enough to know that Cook drops passes or that Tavon is not that good at running routes, or that Goldberg was not a good OT?

Fair enough. I didn't mean to come off that way.

Apologies to any that were offended. The coach and GM don't deserved to be bashed until we see what comes of this draft.