So who's contributed the most out of the rookie class this year??

[Trackmaster]

Umm... fans would be in the same place they were many years ago, when there wasn't mock drafts or "fresh hot sports takes" debating these concepts. What, was society dead back then? Of course not.

Most of the things we're now accustomed to haven't existed forever. Its like saying "well where would be without a Ravens message board". Well, most of us are old enough to have lived when there was no access to the internet to the common purpose, and thus no message board. You find something else to do with your time.

We don't really NEED any of this stuff. We WANT it, but its not like it impacts anything. Mel Kiper has never done anything that has altered who an NFL team selects on draft day. He's there for entertainment and for gossip.

I don't find any enjoyment whatsoever as a "fan" from the mock draft process. I largely ignore them, and I take more enjoyment in the actual draft itself more than the hype, discussion, etc. associated with it. The enjoyment of a football team for me is largely rooted in how they perform and how they construct their roster, not in the discussion that leads up to it. I've left boards before because I found the discussions boring. It didn't change me as a fan one bit. Now I'm on another, mostly because of an increase in free time and I'm getting paid to do it. That will change some day, and life will go on.

No, I disagree. The draft as an important event is a pretty recent thing. Mel Kiper actually was the one who popularized it in the 80's, with some help from ESPN. Over the years, its gotten bigger and bigger, with the explosion of the popularity of the NFL and the NCAA, as this bridges the gap between the two. This has spilled over into interest in the NBA draft, and very recently, the MLB draft. These all used to be very low-key events. In the MLB, it was all about fans moaning that the team doesn't have a "great farm system" or that they're not teaching the guys the "fill in the blank team way." They didn't realize that player selection was what made an organization great, not necessarily the development. And in the NFL, as I was saying before, it used to not be as popular as it is now. The draft and off-season talk has also gotten big because people can't get enough of the puny 17 week season that we have.

Scouting techniques have improved tremendously in all four major sports. And the sheet has been pulled, and people can see what goes on. As these sports are multi-billion dollar businesses, and fan support is largely driven by winning, and little else, the stakes are high enough that teams are paying big bucks to try out new philosophies, and get this thing down to a science. The days of some 70 year old scout who has been with the organization since he was a rookie wiggling his toe and thinking that he's found the next great one are over. Teams pour tons of money into analytics and smart guys to find the players who can deliver them championships.

But nobody is perfect, and especially in football compared to the other sports, there is the stubborn old ways that hold over. That's why I wouldn't be surprised in the least to see armchair fans who are sharp and innovative who could beat some of the old guard and best these techniques. People used to think that it was crazy to replace finance guys with engineers and tech guys, but now all of the funds use these guys, as you can't beat the market with gut reactions or analysis, but you need supercomputers that can snake trades before they happen.

Note: My edit was for the "super computers" sentence. I originally said "who" instead of "that." I didn't want people to be confused thinking I was referring to MIT grads as "super computers", as opposed to the literal machines that they're building that can crank out trades by the nanosecond.

[bravens23]

Mel Kiper has been doing draft analysis, predictions, etc since the mid-80's. That's a long time and if fans weren't interested in that, ESPN probably would have nixed it a long time ago. Mel Kiper, while more of an entertainer than anything, paved the way for Todd McShay, the NFL Draft Day production, and all of the other websites and domains that are dedicated to scouting and analysis of college players.



Well, a lot of folks do enjoy discussing the draft, debating mock drafts, creating their own mock drafts to share, and debating which college players would "be the best pick" for their respective favorite NFL team.

If you dont like them, that's cool. Don't poo-poo others because they do.

I poo-poo others when they pretend like a guy doing mock drafts on a TV platform somehow does it better than a paid GM who has won SBs (multiple). That's when I "poo-poo". The arrogance of some posters to think that because they predicted better players in like a 1-2 year sample that all of the sudden the GM is shit and they could do a better job is laughable. That's what I mock, and that's what I will continue to mock.

Every single poster on this message board, certainly including myself, would absolutely run an NFL team into the ground if they were in charge of personnel decisions, roster construction, etc. And guess what? That's why we don't do it, nobody calls us to do it, and nobody from the teams solicits our input into personnel decisions.

The sooner certain people start to embrace this concept, the better. A little perspective and self-reflection goes a long way.

[bravens23]

No, I disagree. The draft as an important event is a pretty recent thing. Mel Kiper actually was the one who popularized it in the 80's, with some help from ESPN. Over the years, its gotten bigger and bigger, with the explosion of the popularity of the NFL and the NCAA, as this bridges the gap between the two. This has spilled over into interest in the NBA draft, and very recently, the MLB draft. These all used to be very low-key events. In the MLB, it was all about fans moaning that the team doesn't have a "great farm system" or that they're not teaching the guys the "fill in the blank team way." They didn't realize that player selection was what made an organization great, not necessarily the development. And in the NFL, as I was saying before, it used to not be as popular as it is now. The draft and off-season talk has also gotten big because people can't get enough of the puny 17 week season that we have.

Scouting techniques have improved tremendously in all four major sports. And the sheet has been pulled, and people can see what goes on. As these sports are multi-billion dollar businesses, and fan support is largely driven by winning, and little else, the stakes are high enough that teams are paying big bucks to try out new philosophies, and get this thing down to a science. The days of some 70 year old scout who has been with the organization since he was a rookie wiggling his toe and thinking that he's found the next great one are over. Teams pour tons of money into analytics and smart guys to find the players who can deliver them championships.

But nobody is perfect, and especially in football compared to the other sports, there is the stubborn old ways that hold over. That's why I wouldn't be surprised in the least to see armchair fans who are sharp and innovative who could beat some of the old guard and best these techniques. People used to think that it was crazy to replace finance guys with engineers and tech guys, but now all of the funds use these guys, as you can't beat the market with gut reactions or analysis, but you need supercomputers that can snake trades before they happen.

Note: My edit was for the "super computers" sentence. I originally said "who" instead of "that." I didn't want people to be confused thinking I was referring to MIT grads as "super computers", as opposed to the literal machines that they're building that can crank out trades by the nanosecond.

That's not my point. I didn't say it wasn't popular. I'm merely saying that if the NFL, for whatever reason, all of the sudden decided that they were no longer going to do it on live on TV, and networks stopped covering it, people would move on. They'd be outraged for like a week, and then everybody would stop caring. The draft would still happen, and people would move on with their lives.

Sure, its great to have this level of coverage. But the coverage is a reflection of the demand from the consumer base. If that demand decreases significantly, so will the coverage.

Since so many fans think the NFL is in a massive decline (which its not), do you think that if it continued into a tailspin that the NFL draft would be as big as it is now? No, it won't. A lot of your "mock analysts" will be fired or reassigned elsewhere, because there's not enough demand for what they say to cover what they pay them and the work they put in.

These things are cyclical. Things can be popular for 10,20,30,40 years even. But then, they're not.

And its especially true for coverage like this, when said coverage doesn't really impact what's actually going to happen in the draft. Its just people talking. That's all it ever was. Right now, there's an incredible demand from consumers for people talking. ESPN's entire platform now is based on just people talking. Eventually, that won't be the preferred consumption of people anymore, and then the platform will change.

[WrongBaldy]

Yep. This is exactly why they drafted Humphrey. They wanted insurance for two things: 1) Jimmy getting hurt, which has become a high probability situation each year and 2) Brandon Carr sucks.

yup and with jimmy missing so many snaps bc of his achilles it ended up being a good pick

[sawraven1]

yup and with jimmy missing so many snaps bc of his achilles it ended up being a good pick

That logic sounds great

but rolling through the draft while there were clear glaring holes on the Oline, WR, Even TE no way no how should the 15th overall selection be for depth or 2-3 year down the road maybes and what if's.

Not for an 8-8 team

[bravens23]

That logic sounds great

but rolling through the draft while there were clear glaring holes on the Oline, WR, Even TE no way no how should the 15th overall selection be for depth or 2-3 year down the road maybes and what if's.

Not for an 8-8 team

But you're not using the 15th pick to fill a hole the next season. You're using it to get a great player who will be a great player for 5-10 years.

That's why teams that draft exclusively for "need" rarely have long term success in this league. Heck, they even showed you how they can fill "holes" on the Oline without using a 1st round pick on it.

Plus, as I suggested earlier, based on the history of our secondary, if Jimmy had gotten hurt and we didn't have a guy like Humphrey, I don't think it really matters whether we have a Howard or a Ju-Ju. All that shows me is a team with a better offense and a far worse secondary, which as the look of an 8-8 team to me.

[houstonravensfan]

You are correct, its not Humphreys fault. Its the fault of a GM who burned the 15th overall pick on a guy rated around the 40s at the time.

With Smith, Carr, Young, Webb returning, they had high praises for Canady, healthy now. And Undrafted Hill making a case to start.

Don't you think that the 15th overall pick a guy like Howard or one of the top rated Oline players from this year would look awhole lot better in the starting lineup then Marlon Humprhey being subbed in an out???

The 15th overall pick should be day 1 starter for a team as weak as ours

The bolded portion is exactly right on. We needed immediate help, if at all possible. And with the state of this team, we needed immediate help at more than one spot.

[QuothDaRaven]

I poo-poo others when they pretend like a guy doing mock drafts on a TV platform somehow does it better than a paid GM who has won SBs (multiple). That's when I "poo-poo". The arrogance of some posters to think that because they predicted better players in like a 1-2 year sample that all of the sudden the GM is shit and they could do a better job is laughable. That's what I mock, and that's what I will continue to mock.

Every single poster on this message board, certainly including myself, would absolutely run an NFL team into the ground if they were in charge of personnel decisions, roster construction, etc. And guess what? That's why we don't do it, nobody calls us to do it, and nobody from the teams solicits our input into personnel decisions.

The sooner certain people start to embrace this concept, the better. A little perspective and self-reflection goes a long way.

The draft is mosty a crapshoot, I think some of the more knowledgeable posters on our board could easily pick players with comparable or better results than our recent history.

Ozzie has won 2 SBs, but where’s the data to suggest he’s still on top of his game when it comes to drafting? This team is largely mired in mediocrity right now because of the lack of production from recent drafts and injuries.

Now roster construction is done via FA, drafting, and trades. Obviously the pros have way more insight into overall roster construction than we do.

But when it comes to picking players and the wealth of scouting information that’s readily available, I would be just fine putting my faith in BPR picking a WR for us. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk