...in this thread, I would like to have an intelligent discussion with fans who have done their homework on the prospects in the draft. I'm talking about the fans who have taken the time to research the prospects using credible sources online, draft publications, etc., drawing from the unbiased analysis of the professionals. Actual NFL scouts (and retired scouts) who share their knowledge and expertise in analyzing the NFL potential of this year's prospects. It's one thing to watch a few college games and come away impressed as a fan, but keep in mind that you are watching these players match up against inferior talent at the college level, sometimes playing in gimmicky college systems that don't exist in the NFL. So much of what we see as fans does not translate well to the NFL. That's why teams pay big bucks in their scouting departments for expert analysis. That's what I'd like to discuss here, the expert analysis of the various scouts who contribute to the credible websites and draft publications out there. If you add an opinion here, make sure it is based on evidence from credible sources, and not just on your personal opinion as a casual fan of the college game. Thanks!
I think this will be a good thread and I'll be dropping in to see how it develops, but I would point out that experts and professional scouts screw up royally as well.
What about if you're more than just a casual fan and you watch a LOT of college (and pro) football and you can form independent opinions on players from watching every game they've played, then have watched tape on said players and put those views in an historical context? Is that not allowed or should we just post articles that other people have written? Or if the articles as written are just wrong, are we allowed to disagree with said articles based upon an independently developed view? Here, I'll go first. All the positive articles about Garrett Grayson are wrong and all the negative articles about him are right. Is that allowed? _
I love articles. I just don't base my opinions on them. And then claim an expertise based on a selective reading of them. Edit: I don't use them to form the basis of my opinions on players. I use them to confirm something I suspect or reanalyze based upon something I saw differently. _
There ya go. That's a good approach. The other thing is, be careful who you listen too. That goes in football scouting too Every scouting report worth a damn has positive, negatives, and outlooks. Just 'cause you see somethin' in print somewhere doesn't make it fact or truth. It's funny how you don't see the positive stuff from the MM naysayers. The logic of comparing MM to Geno and Tebow of all players is mind blowing
The funny thing is, the OP has admitted he's never seen MM play. Every opinion he has of the player is based on the opinions of others. Science! Math! Theology! _
Wait, he's never seen him take a single snap? How is that even possible? Oregon games are everywhere... and he played in the National Championship Game... Edit: I quoted the wrong post. You know which one I was aiming for
His love for Jesus and Theology have nothing to do with his being so wrong about Mariota. Please refrain from including faith-related comments as part of your basis for criticizing Truth4U2. I don't agree with him at all regarding Mariota, and think he has some arrogance and hubris about him, but that has nothing to do with his faith, in fact, it's a contradiction.
My apologies but this stems from his inability to make observations independent from what he's read, from what he's been told to believe. And his inability to understand that some of us can develop our own opinions of a player without resorting to agenda driven articles, to talking points, to things we've been told to believe. Hand in hand as it were. _
This thread was directed at me so I'll follow suit. He's trolling full on. I don't need to play by anyone's rules that require you to eschew all independent thinking. If folks want to just post articles and go "yuh huh" that would make for a very boring thread. _
While this thread could be taken as trolling, I think it is mostly a tongue in cheek dig at some fans in the last thread we had on this topic.
A couple things I'd like to add: 1) This thread was meant to be more than just a counter to JStokes' aversion to articles, websites, and magazines. It was also meant to be a place where we could debate the prospects using references to support our positions, without fear of JStokes attacking us for doing so. (including the dreaded draft magazines he so despises! lol) 2) Despite what he said earlier, I do not claim any kind of authority or expertise myself from the evidence I cite, nor do I use said evidence as the exclusive basis for my opinions. What I do is use the research I've done on players, along with the limited number of college games I've watched and other factors like how the player presents himself, including interviews, etc, all together when forming my opinion. I always cite all sources, and make it clear when something I say is my opinion, what I am basing my opinions on, and when it is just a quote from some other source. Last I checked, that's how educated people come to informed opinions on any topic. Anyone who trusts only his/her own eyes and ears will necessarily have a very limited view on the subject and therefore their opinion will be inferior to those who do a little homework to support their opinions. ...and if anyone doesn't like this method of discussing the prospects, there are plenty of other threads here on the draft, you can simply ignore this one. This was not meant to be the "be all, end all" on the draft prospects, just a place where we are free to quote websites and draft mags in our analysis....FREEDOM BROTHER!
No problem. Thanks. You know that I agree with you regarding Mariota and with regards to his inability to think independently and make his own assessment. Unfortunately, some people (sheep really) are too lazy to make the effort or don't have the ability to think for themselves, and since Christians are human, we aren't immune to that. They want to be told what to believe.
i.e., no independent opinion of the player's abilities. You've never seen Mariota play so your opinion of him is baseless. There are 1000 articles on his greatness and 1000 articles on his ineptitude. You've chosen to accept the 1000 articles of his ineptitude to twist your judgment. That's why your whole crusade is fraudulent. You are ignorant on the subject, have chosen an agenda and put forth the articles that promote your baseless agenda and refuse to acknowledge articles that refute your agenda. Why not start a thread imploring the posting of only articles that denounce Mariota? Quickly, before the cock crows three times. _
