I don't think it has anything to do with who the better player is and has everything to do with who he thinks will be chosen first based on paid organizational and agent leaks, it's the same thing Kiper does every year This topic might as well be titled "Mayock hears from unnamed source that Tampa is drafting Mariota"
Hurry sundown... Draft Countdown Clock https://countingdownto.com/countdown/nfl-draft-30-april-2015-countdown-clock-0
I do not trust his judgement one bit. As another poster said, he also preferred Gabbert over Cam Newton / Andy Dalton. Mayock tends to be very off when it comes to QBs I believe. So I take anything he says with a grain of salt.
Player development and schemes play a huge role on whether a player is successful or not. Teams with revolving doors in their coaching staff and philosophy (offensive or defensive) play a far greater component than the talent of the player. The Jets are on their 4th offensive scheme in 5 seasons.
The following article breaks down Mayock's draft record in terms of supposed "hits" and "misses". Interesting read. http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/4/2/5570846/nfl-draft-rankings-mike-mayock-2014 Being the Sanchez apologist that I am, I found the excerpt below funny. "The 2009 NFL Draft saw some pretty darn good players enter the fold, but the top of Mayock's list, at least on offense, is off to a pretty terrible start. At some point, Mayock joined the crowd of people that believed Mark Sanchez out of USC was the top quarterback entering the NFL. Now, Mayock is hardly the only person who had that stance, but given the way Sanchez's career has gone thus far, we have a pretty solid indication that things on these lists can stink in hindsight. At the time, Matthew Stafford was generally considered the consensus top quarterback, but he did not inspire a whole lot of confidence. Still, the Detroit Lions went with [Stafford] and things worked out well for them." So in the mind of this columnist and many others, the team that's yielded nothing more than a sub 500 record, 2 playoff appearances and zero playoff wins in 6 seasons from their pick got more out of their investment than the one that yielded an above 500 record, 2 playoff appearances and 4 wins in less time.
umm no... one team got a very good young QB and a franchise cornerstone at the position while the other team traded up for a QB they eventually had to cut and is now a backup. I'd say the columnist and everyone with common sense knows what they are talking about there
Agreed. Mark was never in the same class as Stafford going back to college. Mayock is a moron for making that switch. The straw that broke the camel's back was his assessment of Blaine Gabbert though. I do not trust that man's judgement.
i'll bet that player is Andrus Peat. i don't think it's a matter of rising up draft boards tho.....i think sometimes word is slow to get out on some of the best kept secrets whom teams have liked all along. also, i agree with Mayock on Mariota, and am not surprised he's questioning Winston. i remember when Cam was coming out he was impressed, but also lukewarm on his endorsements. i suspected it was something about his attitude or cockiness that he found off putting, but didn't want to slam the kid by outright saying that. with Winston, i sense the same hesitation from Mayock. Winston has a similar attitude, plus very bad off the field entitlement type issues, as well as a concerning INT habit. major flags. he's also no where near as physically gifted as Cam. seems like a very risky #1 overall prospect to me. i would draft Mariota over Winston any day..
+1000 I'm not so sure guys "rise" and "fall". Any predraft ranking is a conglomeration of bullshit complied by guys who have little to no inside information on what teams truly think about a player. It's just a ranking made in a vacuum based on a players relative skillset as compared to another player's skillset. It's funny that 6 month before the draft, someone will say Team X has player Y at the top of their board. It's horseshit. _
I would have drafted Stafford ahead of Sanchez as he was the better prospect and proved to be the better player. I know the name "Sanchez" makes even the best posters lose their minds, but if you stopped and read what I wrote you'd realize I was questioning who got a better return on their investment looking back. If you told me before the draft that Stafford would put up gaudy numbers but his teams would have no playoff wins but Sanchez would be the worst QB to ever play the game but a couple of his teams would make it to 2 AFCGs, I'd draft Sanchez as I'm that desperate to watch this team have success.
Ok well if I got a million dollars for chopping my toe off I would do it but it doesn't work that way.
I never claimed to have common sense. Why do you think I post on this board; I'm trying get some from all the sensible posters that post on here?
are you forgetting that Detroit was 0-16! the year before Stafford's arrival? as rock bottom as rock bottom gets... That they were 10 years removed from a playoff appearance? of course it was going to take awhile to get better and Stafford part of the solution I'd say they got a way better return on their investment. especially since they are still getting a return on it and we had to eventually tear everything apart, a main reason being was the contract to a QB that didn't pan out!
I've seen others make reference to the bold before. Is this really true? Was Sanchez's contract the root or "main" cause for the downfall of 09-10 team?
I understand that. I'd rather have had Stafford. With him, the Jets might have gone to a couple of SBs. Then again, if the Jets had gotten Stafford, we might still be stuck with Rex. Never mind. LOL
