about using one of those early picks on Neal aligned to it probably because it made all the sense in the world. He was a top rated tackle, strong pedigree, played at Alabama against top competition and big games and the NY Giants had a massive opening on the roster at the position.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
Or said differently, knowing there are no sure things Neal was still an extremely logical player for the team to draft.
RE: There are no sure things is plainly obvious. Posters adamant
about using one of those early picks on Neal aligned to it probably because it made all the sense in the world. He was a top rated tackle, strong pedigree, played at Alabama against top competition and big games and the NY Giants had a massive opening on the roster at the position.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
You clearly don’t understand Eric’s point. And I’m not sure why. He’s been very clear. I’m guessing it’s because you’re one of those posters he’s referring to. “They need OL so they absolutely HAVE to take OL with their first pick!”.
That's the thing. There are 32 teams out there who each spend tens of millions of dollars on professional scouts who do nothing all year long but make these decisions, and what is their batting average?
And yet someone posting on BBI on their iPhone while sitting on the john knows more?
forget the teams batting averages - what are the first round qb's batting average from the last 3 drafts?
lawrence
wilson
lance
fields
jones
pickett
young
stroud
richardson
5 out of 9 likely busts by next year, possibly on new teams.
1 out of 9 with stroud so far? maybe 2 if you like lawrence (which i do).
that is 9 top half of first round qbs in 3 years. 6 of them selected in the top 4 picks of their draft. and the hit rate is a lot lower almost any table game at a casino.
I thought sikkema's take on how McCarthy changes the entire draft
was fascinating. He clearly thinks Penix/Nix are not in the same class as JJ. And that until McCarthy is off the board all the dynamics will be about trading up to get him. No idea if accurate but like the fresh take.
RE: RE: There are no sure things is plainly obvious. Posters adamant
about using one of those early picks on Neal aligned to it probably because it made all the sense in the world. He was a top rated tackle, strong pedigree, played at Alabama against top competition and big games and the NY Giants had a massive opening on the roster at the position.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
Or said differently, knowing there are no sure things Neal was still an extremely logical player for the team to draft.
Logical? Sure in the sense that they needed an OL. The result? Not nearly what all of you that demanded they needed to take OL with that pick thought it would be. And that’s Eric’s point. Why are people going to be pissed off because they don’t take the player THEY want? The pick could suck. Or it could be great. None of us know.
My goodness what is with this obsessing over semantics
We all know what "rising up" means when it comes to outside discussions of draft boards/rankings.
We also all presumably understand that this a message board for football fans to fling around personal opinions
It's not clever or insightful to argue that, um, actually we don't know what the teams are thinking it's just analyst's perceptions that are changing.
Or to point out to others that their opinions are not objective truths, and then lambast them like that's what they were claiming. Do we really want every post to open with the disclaimer that the following is strictly an opinion of the poster in question?? No! So stop using that as some sort of clap back.
RE: RE: There are no sure things is plainly obvious. Posters adamant
about using one of those early picks on Neal aligned to it probably because it made all the sense in the world. He was a top rated tackle, strong pedigree, played at Alabama against top competition and big games and the NY Giants had a massive opening on the roster at the position.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
You clearly don’t understand Eric’s point. And I’m not sure why. He’s been very clear. I’m guessing it’s because you’re one of those posters he’s referring to. “They need OL so they absolutely HAVE to take OL with their first pick!”.
If this is just about posters making bad posts about how the draft works then so be it. Use up whatever energy you want with someone who didn't express the logic of a Neal pick well at the time. Hell, replace Neal with Lawrence Taylor in this discussion as it's all the same...no guarantees.
not us or the experts! BUT, Maye and McCarthy, seem to have a lot of traits that fit with NY. Really good chance one of the two will be there at 6. That's as much as ANYONE knows at this point.
RE: RE: RE: There are no sure things is plainly obvious. Posters adamant
about using one of those early picks on Neal aligned to it probably because it made all the sense in the world. He was a top rated tackle, strong pedigree, played at Alabama against top competition and big games and the NY Giants had a massive opening on the roster at the position.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
You clearly don’t understand Eric’s point. And I’m not sure why. He’s been very clear. I’m guessing it’s because you’re one of those posters he’s referring to. “They need OL so they absolutely HAVE to take OL with their first pick!”.
If this is just about posters making bad posts about how the draft works then so be it. Use up whatever energy you want with someone who didn't express the logic of a Neal pick well at the time. Hell, replace Neal with Lawrence Taylor in this discussion as it's all the same...no guarantees.
I just checked your profile. You registered in ‘23. That explains a lot. You clearly have no idea what this place is like when the Giants take a player that posters didn’t want. Or don’t take the player they did. Posters lose their freakin minds every draft season. THAT, again, is Eric’s point.
You don’t seem very bright, so I’m done with this conversation. You need to Learn. how to read AND take in what you’re reading. Eric’s point was not difficult to figure out. Yet you butchered it time and time again.
You do make it more clear to see how there are bad posters.
McCarthy only after a trade back from 6th overall to the mid first round. Say Giants send 6th overall (1600 pts) to Indianapolis for their 15th overall (1050), 46th (440) and 82nd (180) and 116th (58).
That's not how it works. If they love him, and graded him as their qb1, chances are other teams do as well, and a trade back will lose you the player. If teams grade him as a franchise qb, they need to worry more about someone jumping them than trading back.
Did anyone have Mahomes as a first round pick, let alone a team trading up for him at 10 at this same time in 17? I remember he was generally thought of as a second round pick immediately following his college season.
JJ could end up being a top 5 qb or Jones part 2 (NFL backup). It seems like he is this year's riser on NFL boards.
I think I already answered that. If someone is speaking in absolute terms about knowing the unknowable, I ignore them.
It wasn't too long ago I got into arguments that Evan Neal wasn't a sure thing or that maybe taking an OL at #5 or #7 might not be the right way to go. Those who argued against said that not taking an OL in the top 7 would be criminal, especially Neal.
I know you said to 'ignore them', I was asking for your direct response, although ignoring certainly in and of itself is a response, it is not a response containing a real answer. I actually agree with you. Say what you mean. Speaking in absolutes then falling back on 'well, it is implied I am expressing my opinion' is weak-sauce in my view. Speaking in absolutes regarding my opinion can mean that my point is weak and needs to be prompt up by language indicating facts.
Did anyone have Mahomes as a first round pick, let alone a team trading up for him at 10 at this same time in 17? I remember he was generally thought of as a second round pick immediately following his college season.
JJ could end up being a top 5 qb or Jones part 2 (NFL backup). It seems like he is this year's riser on NFL boards.
I wouldn't call McCarthy a riser. It's just that some teams have a higher grade. I don't think he's a consensus lottery QB like the big three.
FYI. Jon Gruden used to have an ESPN show where he would interview and evaluate QBs in the upcoming draft.
He had Mahomes on in 2017. After watching his film with Mahomes, Gruden called Mahomes one of the best QB prospects he'd ever seen.
Further, I would say the Giants eventually had a first round grade on him based on reports they considered trading up for him. We know McAdoo was very bullish.
Did anyone have Mahomes as a first round pick, let alone a team trading up for him at 10 at this same time in 17? I remember he was generally thought of as a second round pick immediately following his college season.
JJ could end up being a top 5 qb or Jones part 2 (NFL backup). It seems like he is this year's riser on NFL boards.
Zierlein had him as "eventually a plus starter"
Quote:
Mahomes is a big, confident quarterback who brings a variety of physical tools to the party, but he's developed some bad habits and doesn't have a very repeatable process as a passer. Mahomes' ability to improvise and extend plays can lead to big plays for his offense, but he will have to prove he can operate with better anticipation and be willing to take what the defense gives him in order to win from the pocket. Mahomes will be a work in progress, but he's a high ceiling, low floor prospect.
I think I already answered that. If someone is speaking in absolute terms about knowing the unknowable, I ignore them.
It wasn't too long ago I got into arguments that Evan Neal wasn't a sure thing or that maybe taking an OL at #5 or #7 might not be the right way to go. Those who argued against said that not taking an OL in the top 7 would be criminal, especially Neal.
I know you said to 'ignore them', I was asking for your direct response, although ignoring certainly in and of itself is a response, it is not a response containing a real answer. I actually agree with you. Say what you mean. Speaking in absolutes then falling back on 'well, it is implied I am expressing my opinion' is weak-sauce in my view. Speaking in absolutes regarding my opinion can mean that my point is weak and needs to be prompt up by language indicating facts.
The dynamics of a fan board are an interesting topic in itself.
We don't have up and down arrows on BBI. Or "hearts" or "likes".
When people who actually post read the board, no one responds to every post. That would be absurd.
If you read something you agree with, you may respond. Most will probably nod in agreement but "say" nothing. That's what I do. X has a great point, but I don't need to respond or choose not to respond.
But there are a few other posters that say something so silly on a constant basis over time, you just tune them out. Call it a self-disciplined "block" or "mute" tactic, if you will.
I tend to personally "mute" these people, not even bother reading their comments. On the other hand, there are posters who post gold almost every time they write something and I will actually do a search to see if they posted in a given week.
My point here is if you're a person who claims to know something that can't be knowable, then I (and others) probably tend to ignore you (not speaking about you personally).
I have no ideal if McCarthy will be bad, good, or great. But I do know that the people who say they know for a fact he will be one of those things is full of shit.
That's the thing. There are 32 teams out there who each spend tens of millions of dollars on professional scouts who do nothing all year long but make these decisions, and what is their batting average?
And yet someone posting on BBI on their iPhone while sitting on the john knows more?
Exactly. These same people who participate in football pools and literally have weekly evidence about how poor their ability is to predict football outcomes, but yet they acquire zero humility from experience in recognizing their limitations. Some people must feel no embarrassment for being wrong, I guess.
that's the other thing I have no patience for, people who can't admit they were wrong.
I regularly admit how I was dead wrong about something. For years on BBI, I used to kick myself publicly for saying "Charles Way was a wasted draft pick because we had Kenyon Rasheed." What a stupid thing to say! I wrote Jason Sehorn off because of his rookie season and thought Thomas Randolph was the better player. It got so bad with Eli Manning at one point, that I was really worried he was a complete bust (remember the 0.0 QBR game against the Ravens... hell he threw 3 pick 6's in a game in the year he won a Super Bowl).
Just admit you got it wrong. It happens. We're human, not machines.
I have no ideal if McCarthy will be bad, good, or great. But I do know that the people who say they know for a fact he will be one of those things is full of shit.
Talking about McCarthy are his traits that he lacks - and then you look at scouts takes and they call him his strengths.
Then they follow with “well I watched him one or two times in a game where he was severely hurt” to make my opinion.
Or they say “well the coaches ran the ball so he didn’t lose the game for them”. Like they have inside knowledge into Michigans plans all year was when they were the best team in college football haha
Huge Michigan fan, and I love McCarthy. I just don't see him as a top 10 pick. I'd say he's a Day 2 pick. If the Giants can move up late round 1 and grab him similar to the Ravens sneaking back up and grabbing Lamar.. I'm all for it.
Thank you for the candor...people think I hate all Michigan players,you and I have seen enough games of JJ's to have a true feeling of his talent level.
I would love to have Kris Jenkins or Blake Coram fall to us at some point in the draft...even JJ but like 3rd round.
PFF has him at #52-that seems about correct
PFF had Dwayne Haskins as the 10th best prospect in their 2019 rankings.
the thing... the professionals who do this for a living get it wrong all of the time. All of the time. At every positions. And it will always be this way.
It's why draft day threads drive me nuts. Jordon Riley??!!! What a waste!
I think I already answered that. If someone is speaking in absolute terms about knowing the unknowable, I ignore them.
It wasn't too long ago I got into arguments that Evan Neal wasn't a sure thing or that maybe taking an OL at #5 or #7 might not be the right way to go. Those who argued against said that not taking an OL in the top 7 would be criminal, especially Neal.
I know you said to 'ignore them', I was asking for your direct response, although ignoring certainly in and of itself is a response, it is not a response containing a real answer. I actually agree with you. Say what you mean. Speaking in absolutes then falling back on 'well, it is implied I am expressing my opinion' is weak-sauce in my view. Speaking in absolutes regarding my opinion can mean that my point is weak and needs to be prompt up by language indicating facts.
The dynamics of a fan board are an interesting topic in itself.
We don't have up and down arrows on BBI. Or "hearts" or "likes".
When people who actually post read the board, no one responds to every post. That would be absurd.
If you read something you agree with, you may respond. Most will probably nod in agreement but "say" nothing. That's what I do. X has a great point, but I don't need to respond or choose not to respond.
But there are a few other posters that say something so silly on a constant basis over time, you just tune them out. Call it a self-disciplined "block" or "mute" tactic, if you will.
I tend to personally "mute" these people, not even bother reading their comments. On the other hand, there are posters who post gold almost every time they write something and I will actually do a search to see if they posted in a given week.
My point here is if you're a person who claims to know something that can't be knowable, then I (and others) probably tend to ignore you (not speaking about you personally).
I have no ideal if McCarthy will be bad, good, or great. But I do know that the people who say they know for a fact he will be one of those things is full of shit.
Thanks for the thoughtful response Eric. We see it the same.
the thing... the professionals who do this for a living get it wrong all of the time. All of the time. At every positions. And it will always be this way.
It's why draft day threads drive me nuts. Jordon Riley??!!! What a waste!
In the same realm are fans watching a game one time then submitting certain blame or accolades for players and/or coaches. Film study is allocated a specific amount of valuable time each week for a reason. I used to do this. I would happily exclude certain players and coaches from blame or praise after watching the live game without checking to see if I was even correct.
Take the Minnesota Vikings game where Eli threw four picks (3 for pick 6s). We only learned a year or two later that on two of those picks, the receiver ran the wrong route (Shockey was one, I forget who the other was). Eli didn't say anything. He didn't throw anyone under the bus. But everyone (including me) lambasted him for it.
Same thing happened to Neil O'Donnell in the Super Bowl against the Cowboys. Receivers ran the wrong routes and the QB got blamed.
when I first did game reviews, I tried to do my best based on what I was seeing on the TV (had no full-22 at the time). And I'm a fan trying to do my best.
I went a few games criticizing the play of FB Greg Comella. Well, it struck a nerve with his dad, who started to e-mail me and tell me "you don't know what you are looking at!" (I think his dad also played...not sure about that). Anyway, what I took away from that was we may think we know what we are seeing, but that's not always the case. The player who you are sure got beat for a TD in coverage may not have been that guy. It might have been the safety who was late and the CB just looked like he was responsible.
You do your best, but we just don't know all of the facts.
Take the Minnesota Vikings game where Eli threw four picks (3 for pick 6s). We only learned a year or two later that on two of those picks, the receiver ran the wrong route (Shockey was one, I forget who the other was). Eli didn't say anything. He didn't throw anyone under the bus. But everyone (including me) lambasted him for it.
Same thing happened to Neil O'Donnell in the Super Bowl against the Cowboys. Receivers ran the wrong routes and the QB got blamed.
Right. Some of this is fans simply not knowing, some of it is being dug in on opinions which is a bias. If I am biased for a player and not honest with myself, then I may accept reasons why other players are at fault. On the flip-side, if I am biased against a player then I may dismiss reasons why the player was not at fault.
I find it easier to accept fans not knowing than us fans who consciously know what we are doing. (yes, myself as well)
when I first did game reviews, I tried to do my best based on what I was seeing on the TV (had no full-22 at the time). And I'm a fan trying to do my best.
I went a few games criticizing the play of FB Greg Comella. Well, it struck a nerve with his dad, who started to e-mail me and tell me "you don't know what you are looking at!" (I think his dad also played...not sure about that). Anyway, what I took away from that was we may think we know what we are seeing, but that's not always the case. The player who you are sure got beat for a TD in coverage may not have been that guy. It might have been the safety who was late and the CB just looked like he was responsible.
You do your best, but we just don't know all of the facts.
that's one of my huge problems with PFF grades, especially when they rate OLs. How the hell do they know who was responsible for the missed block?
I’ve always wondered how big a staff PFF has evaluating players. Evaluating every single play from every single player in the league and getting the grades out within like 24 hours seems impossible to me
One of the interesting angles if teams are high on JJ
Is this --NE needs a QB, but they have a TON of other issues too. Let's say they grade Maye and JJ in the same tier. They might be willing to trade back looking to grab McCarthy plus some much needed extra picks.
that's one of my huge problems with PFF grades, especially when they rate OLs. How the hell do they know who was responsible for the missed block?
I’ve always wondered how big a staff PFF has evaluating players. Evaluating every single play from every single player in the league and getting the grades out within like 24 hours seems impossible to me
From the PFF website:
Quote:
WHO IS DOING THE GRADING?
PFF employs over 600 full or part-time analysts, but less than 10% of analysts are trained to the level that they can grade plays. Only the top two to three percent of analysts are on the team of “senior analysts” in charge of finalizing each grade after review. Our graders have been training for months, and sometimes years, in order to learn, understand and show mastery of our process that includes our 300-page training manual and video playbook. We have analysts from all walks of life, including former players, coaches and scouts. We don’t care if you played.
Each grade is reviewed at least once, and usually multiple times, using every camera angle available, including All-22 coaches’ tape.
YOU DON’T KNOW THE PLAY CALL?
We are certainly not in the huddle, but we are grading what a player attempts to do on a given play. While football is extremely nuanced regarding the preparation and adjustments that go into each play call, once the ball is snapped, most players are clear in what they’re trying to accomplish on each play, and we evaluate accordingly. Of course, there are always some gray areas in football. Plays in which there is a clear question mark regarding assignment, we can defer to a “0” grade and not guess as to which player is right or wrong. These plays are few and far between and since we are grading every snap, missing out on a handful throughout the year should not affect player evaluations. Examples of potential gray areas include coverage busts, quarterback/wide receiver miscommunications and missed blocking assignments.
RE: I remember Malik Willis rising up in the draft
Huge Michigan fan, and I love McCarthy. I just don't see him as a top 10 pick. I'd say he's a Day 2 pick. If the Giants can move up late round 1 and grab him similar to the Ravens sneaking back up and grabbing Lamar.. I'm all for it.
This is a fantasy.. There are multiple teams behind the Giants that need QBs. I think its highly unlikely McCarthy will not be sitting there at the end or round 1.
JJ is tough evaluation because he does show the things you want to see, just a lot less of it because he's not required to due to his situation. But he's 20 years old compared to some of these guys who needed five seasons to get where they are, he's played in a pro style offense, big games, etc.
All of this amounts to an intriguing pick. Why? Because JJ is a steeper projection than the top 3, but there is nothing that disqualifies him from sitting at the same level as them other than fewer plays to support his case. This year there are so many teams that need a QB but won't be in position to draft in the consensus top 3... so suddenly JJ becomes a guy who's easy to talk yourself into if you're one of the teams trying to find an answer outside a top 5 pick.
I've seen the stat on second best comp % on passes with 20+ air yards, but lots to be intrigued about here IMO.
I obviously can't say how JJ will do in the pros, but according to my eye and research he isn't far off from QB 2 behind Daniels in my book. I'm almost starting to think 1. JD 2. JJ 3. CW 4. DM, but those are just my thoughts and I'm not able to get into the minds of each prospect like the GM's and Co will. I do get a sense that JJ had one of the better pocket presences in the pocket and that he has an intuitive, quick mind at QB but I can't really say for sure it's just an impression I get in my research on him.
I obviously can't say how JJ will do in the pros, but according to my eye and research he isn't far off from QB 2 behind Daniels in my book. I'm almost starting to think 1. JD 2. JJ 3. CW 4. DM, but those are just my thoughts and I'm not able to get into the minds of each prospect like the GM's and Co will. I do get a sense that JJ had one of the better pocket presences in the pocket and that he has an intuitive, quick mind at QB but I can't really say for sure it's just an impression I get in my research on him.
I’m with you. While I am admittedly no expert, I wouldn’t have any issues if Giants take him.
If Joe believes in him and Daboll sees a complete QB.....I am ready to roll the dice with JJ.
The alternative is that we continue on in the QB Hell that has been the Giants since our much beloved Eli took off the pads for the last time.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
Or said differently, knowing there are no sure things Neal was still an extremely logical player for the team to draft.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
You clearly don’t understand Eric’s point. And I’m not sure why. He’s been very clear. I’m guessing it’s because you’re one of those posters he’s referring to. “They need OL so they absolutely HAVE to take OL with their first pick!”.
And yet someone posting on BBI on their iPhone while sitting on the john knows more?
forget the teams batting averages - what are the first round qb's batting average from the last 3 drafts?
lawrence
wilson
lance
fields
jones
pickett
young
stroud
richardson
5 out of 9 likely busts by next year, possibly on new teams.
1 out of 9 with stroud so far? maybe 2 if you like lawrence (which i do).
that is 9 top half of first round qbs in 3 years. 6 of them selected in the top 4 picks of their draft. and the hit rate is a lot lower almost any table game at a casino.
Quote:
about using one of those early picks on Neal aligned to it probably because it made all the sense in the world. He was a top rated tackle, strong pedigree, played at Alabama against top competition and big games and the NY Giants had a massive opening on the roster at the position.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
Or said differently, knowing there are no sure things Neal was still an extremely logical player for the team to draft.
Logical? Sure in the sense that they needed an OL. The result? Not nearly what all of you that demanded they needed to take OL with that pick thought it would be. And that’s Eric’s point. Why are people going to be pissed off because they don’t take the player THEY want? The pick could suck. Or it could be great. None of us know.
We also all presumably understand that this a message board for football fans to fling around personal opinions
It's not clever or insightful to argue that, um, actually we don't know what the teams are thinking it's just analyst's perceptions that are changing.
Or to point out to others that their opinions are not objective truths, and then lambast them like that's what they were claiming. Do we really want every post to open with the disclaimer that the following is strictly an opinion of the poster in question?? No! So stop using that as some sort of clap back.
Quote:
about using one of those early picks on Neal aligned to it probably because it made all the sense in the world. He was a top rated tackle, strong pedigree, played at Alabama against top competition and big games and the NY Giants had a massive opening on the roster at the position.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
You clearly don’t understand Eric’s point. And I’m not sure why. He’s been very clear. I’m guessing it’s because you’re one of those posters he’s referring to. “They need OL so they absolutely HAVE to take OL with their first pick!”.
If this is just about posters making bad posts about how the draft works then so be it. Use up whatever energy you want with someone who didn't express the logic of a Neal pick well at the time. Hell, replace Neal with Lawrence Taylor in this discussion as it's all the same...no guarantees.
Quote:
In comment 16400341 nygiantfan said:
Quote:
about using one of those early picks on Neal aligned to it probably because it made all the sense in the world. He was a top rated tackle, strong pedigree, played at Alabama against top competition and big games and the NY Giants had a massive opening on the roster at the position.
Suggesting he wasn't a sure thing so the the team should possible consider other non-sure things isn't exactly interesting stuff.
You clearly don’t understand Eric’s point. And I’m not sure why. He’s been very clear. I’m guessing it’s because you’re one of those posters he’s referring to. “They need OL so they absolutely HAVE to take OL with their first pick!”.
If this is just about posters making bad posts about how the draft works then so be it. Use up whatever energy you want with someone who didn't express the logic of a Neal pick well at the time. Hell, replace Neal with Lawrence Taylor in this discussion as it's all the same...no guarantees.
I just checked your profile. You registered in ‘23. That explains a lot. You clearly have no idea what this place is like when the Giants take a player that posters didn’t want. Or don’t take the player they did. Posters lose their freakin minds every draft season. THAT, again, is Eric’s point.
You don’t seem very bright, so I’m done with this conversation. You need to Learn. how to read AND take in what you’re reading. Eric’s point was not difficult to figure out. Yet you butchered it time and time again.
He was in college for 6 years. He’s not a developmental guy. He is awful. How long do you give a guy to show anything? The Milton move here is crazy.
+1, if they have conviction about one of the QBs make a move. They just need to be right about it.
That's not how it works. If they love him, and graded him as their qb1, chances are other teams do as well, and a trade back will lose you the player. If teams grade him as a franchise qb, they need to worry more about someone jumping them than trading back.
JJ could end up being a top 5 qb or Jones part 2 (NFL backup). It seems like he is this year's riser on NFL boards.
It wasn't too long ago I got into arguments that Evan Neal wasn't a sure thing or that maybe taking an OL at #5 or #7 might not be the right way to go. Those who argued against said that not taking an OL in the top 7 would be criminal, especially Neal.
I know you said to 'ignore them', I was asking for your direct response, although ignoring certainly in and of itself is a response, it is not a response containing a real answer. I actually agree with you. Say what you mean. Speaking in absolutes then falling back on 'well, it is implied I am expressing my opinion' is weak-sauce in my view. Speaking in absolutes regarding my opinion can mean that my point is weak and needs to be prompt up by language indicating facts.
Quote:
In comment 16400222 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
how fans know for sure which QBs will be great pros and which will suck.
Even though we've watched these fans be wrong year after year.
You don't know. I don't know. No one knows.
You can make an educated guess. That's it.
So anyone saying they know, I recommend not paying much attention.
What would your response be to those who say it is implied that someone is expressing an opinion/guess even when speaking in absolute terms?
Well maybe those that you say are really just guessing should hold off on throwing the remote then? Just a thought
Agreed.
Quote:
Joe Milton from Tennessee later as a developmental QB.
He was in college for 6 years. He’s not a developmental guy. He is awful. How long do you give a guy to show anything? The Milton move here is crazy.
Now I'm his number 1 fan!
We'll show you! LOL.
JJ could end up being a top 5 qb or Jones part 2 (NFL backup). It seems like he is this year's riser on NFL boards.
I wouldn't call McCarthy a riser. It's just that some teams have a higher grade. I don't think he's a consensus lottery QB like the big three.
FYI. Jon Gruden used to have an ESPN show where he would interview and evaluate QBs in the upcoming draft.
He had Mahomes on in 2017. After watching his film with Mahomes, Gruden called Mahomes one of the best QB prospects he'd ever seen.
Further, I would say the Giants eventually had a first round grade on him based on reports they considered trading up for him. We know McAdoo was very bullish.
JJ could end up being a top 5 qb or Jones part 2 (NFL backup). It seems like he is this year's riser on NFL boards.
Zierlein had him as "eventually a plus starter"
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
I think I already answered that. If someone is speaking in absolute terms about knowing the unknowable, I ignore them.
It wasn't too long ago I got into arguments that Evan Neal wasn't a sure thing or that maybe taking an OL at #5 or #7 might not be the right way to go. Those who argued against said that not taking an OL in the top 7 would be criminal, especially Neal.
I know you said to 'ignore them', I was asking for your direct response, although ignoring certainly in and of itself is a response, it is not a response containing a real answer. I actually agree with you. Say what you mean. Speaking in absolutes then falling back on 'well, it is implied I am expressing my opinion' is weak-sauce in my view. Speaking in absolutes regarding my opinion can mean that my point is weak and needs to be prompt up by language indicating facts.
The dynamics of a fan board are an interesting topic in itself.
We don't have up and down arrows on BBI. Or "hearts" or "likes".
When people who actually post read the board, no one responds to every post. That would be absurd.
If you read something you agree with, you may respond. Most will probably nod in agreement but "say" nothing. That's what I do. X has a great point, but I don't need to respond or choose not to respond.
But there are a few other posters that say something so silly on a constant basis over time, you just tune them out. Call it a self-disciplined "block" or "mute" tactic, if you will.
I tend to personally "mute" these people, not even bother reading their comments. On the other hand, there are posters who post gold almost every time they write something and I will actually do a search to see if they posted in a given week.
My point here is if you're a person who claims to know something that can't be knowable, then I (and others) probably tend to ignore you (not speaking about you personally).
I have no ideal if McCarthy will be bad, good, or great. But I do know that the people who say they know for a fact he will be one of those things is full of shit.
And yet someone posting on BBI on their iPhone while sitting on the john knows more?
I regularly admit how I was dead wrong about something. For years on BBI, I used to kick myself publicly for saying "Charles Way was a wasted draft pick because we had Kenyon Rasheed." What a stupid thing to say! I wrote Jason Sehorn off because of his rookie season and thought Thomas Randolph was the better player. It got so bad with Eli Manning at one point, that I was really worried he was a complete bust (remember the 0.0 QBR game against the Ravens... hell he threw 3 pick 6's in a game in the year he won a Super Bowl).
Just admit you got it wrong. It happens. We're human, not machines.
NFC Championship Game Review: New York Giants at Green Bay Packers, January 20, 2008 - ( New Window )
I have no ideal if McCarthy will be bad, good, or great. But I do know that the people who say they know for a fact he will be one of those things is full of shit.
Good point.
Then they follow with “well I watched him one or two times in a game where he was severely hurt” to make my opinion.
Or they say “well the coaches ran the ball so he didn’t lose the game for them”. Like they have inside knowledge into Michigans plans all year was when they were the best team in college football haha
Quote:
.
Huge Michigan fan, and I love McCarthy. I just don't see him as a top 10 pick. I'd say he's a Day 2 pick. If the Giants can move up late round 1 and grab him similar to the Ravens sneaking back up and grabbing Lamar.. I'm all for it.
Thank you for the candor...people think I hate all Michigan players,you and I have seen enough games of JJ's to have a true feeling of his talent level.
I would love to have Kris Jenkins or Blake Coram fall to us at some point in the draft...even JJ but like 3rd round.
PFF has him at #52-that seems about correct
PFF had Dwayne Haskins as the 10th best prospect in their 2019 rankings.
They're not the arbiter of NFL projection.
It's why draft day threads drive me nuts. Jordon Riley??!!! What a waste!
Quote:
In comment 16400267 Eric from BBI said:
Quote:
I think I already answered that. If someone is speaking in absolute terms about knowing the unknowable, I ignore them.
It wasn't too long ago I got into arguments that Evan Neal wasn't a sure thing or that maybe taking an OL at #5 or #7 might not be the right way to go. Those who argued against said that not taking an OL in the top 7 would be criminal, especially Neal.
I know you said to 'ignore them', I was asking for your direct response, although ignoring certainly in and of itself is a response, it is not a response containing a real answer. I actually agree with you. Say what you mean. Speaking in absolutes then falling back on 'well, it is implied I am expressing my opinion' is weak-sauce in my view. Speaking in absolutes regarding my opinion can mean that my point is weak and needs to be prompt up by language indicating facts.
The dynamics of a fan board are an interesting topic in itself.
We don't have up and down arrows on BBI. Or "hearts" or "likes".
When people who actually post read the board, no one responds to every post. That would be absurd.
If you read something you agree with, you may respond. Most will probably nod in agreement but "say" nothing. That's what I do. X has a great point, but I don't need to respond or choose not to respond.
But there are a few other posters that say something so silly on a constant basis over time, you just tune them out. Call it a self-disciplined "block" or "mute" tactic, if you will.
I tend to personally "mute" these people, not even bother reading their comments. On the other hand, there are posters who post gold almost every time they write something and I will actually do a search to see if they posted in a given week.
My point here is if you're a person who claims to know something that can't be knowable, then I (and others) probably tend to ignore you (not speaking about you personally).
I have no ideal if McCarthy will be bad, good, or great. But I do know that the people who say they know for a fact he will be one of those things is full of shit.
Thanks for the thoughtful response Eric. We see it the same.
Also agree with Uber and JT on this topic.
It's why draft day threads drive me nuts. Jordon Riley??!!! What a waste!
In the same realm are fans watching a game one time then submitting certain blame or accolades for players and/or coaches. Film study is allocated a specific amount of valuable time each week for a reason. I used to do this. I would happily exclude certain players and coaches from blame or praise after watching the live game without checking to see if I was even correct.
Same thing happened to Neil O'Donnell in the Super Bowl against the Cowboys. Receivers ran the wrong routes and the QB got blamed.
I went a few games criticizing the play of FB Greg Comella. Well, it struck a nerve with his dad, who started to e-mail me and tell me "you don't know what you are looking at!" (I think his dad also played...not sure about that). Anyway, what I took away from that was we may think we know what we are seeing, but that's not always the case. The player who you are sure got beat for a TD in coverage may not have been that guy. It might have been the safety who was late and the CB just looked like he was responsible.
You do your best, but we just don't know all of the facts.
Same thing happened to Neil O'Donnell in the Super Bowl against the Cowboys. Receivers ran the wrong routes and the QB got blamed.
Right. Some of this is fans simply not knowing, some of it is being dug in on opinions which is a bias. If I am biased for a player and not honest with myself, then I may accept reasons why other players are at fault. On the flip-side, if I am biased against a player then I may dismiss reasons why the player was not at fault.
I find it easier to accept fans not knowing than us fans who consciously know what we are doing. (yes, myself as well)
I went a few games criticizing the play of FB Greg Comella. Well, it struck a nerve with his dad, who started to e-mail me and tell me "you don't know what you are looking at!" (I think his dad also played...not sure about that). Anyway, what I took away from that was we may think we know what we are seeing, but that's not always the case. The player who you are sure got beat for a TD in coverage may not have been that guy. It might have been the safety who was late and the CB just looked like he was responsible.
You do your best, but we just don't know all of the facts.
Interesting story, thanks. And agreed.
I’ve always wondered how big a staff PFF has evaluating players. Evaluating every single play from every single player in the league and getting the grades out within like 24 hours seems impossible to me
Quote:
that's one of my huge problems with PFF grades, especially when they rate OLs. How the hell do they know who was responsible for the missed block?
I’ve always wondered how big a staff PFF has evaluating players. Evaluating every single play from every single player in the league and getting the grades out within like 24 hours seems impossible to me
From the PFF website:
WHO IS DOING THE GRADING?
PFF employs over 600 full or part-time analysts, but less than 10% of analysts are trained to the level that they can grade plays. Only the top two to three percent of analysts are on the team of “senior analysts” in charge of finalizing each grade after review. Our graders have been training for months, and sometimes years, in order to learn, understand and show mastery of our process that includes our 300-page training manual and video playbook. We have analysts from all walks of life, including former players, coaches and scouts. We don’t care if you played.
Each grade is reviewed at least once, and usually multiple times, using every camera angle available, including All-22 coaches’ tape.
YOU DON’T KNOW THE PLAY CALL?
We are certainly not in the huddle, but we are grading what a player attempts to do on a given play. While football is extremely nuanced regarding the preparation and adjustments that go into each play call, once the ball is snapped, most players are clear in what they’re trying to accomplish on each play, and we evaluate accordingly. Of course, there are always some gray areas in football. Plays in which there is a clear question mark regarding assignment, we can defer to a “0” grade and not guess as to which player is right or wrong. These plays are few and far between and since we are grading every snap, missing out on a handful throughout the year should not affect player evaluations. Examples of potential gray areas include coverage busts, quarterback/wide receiver miscommunications and missed blocking assignments.
Huge Michigan fan, and I love McCarthy. I just don't see him as a top 10 pick. I'd say he's a Day 2 pick. If the Giants can move up late round 1 and grab him similar to the Ravens sneaking back up and grabbing Lamar.. I'm all for it.
This is a fantasy.. There are multiple teams behind the Giants that need QBs. I think its highly unlikely McCarthy will not be sitting there at the end or round 1.
News at 11.
All of this amounts to an intriguing pick. Why? Because JJ is a steeper projection than the top 3, but there is nothing that disqualifies him from sitting at the same level as them other than fewer plays to support his case. This year there are so many teams that need a QB but won't be in position to draft in the consensus top 3... so suddenly JJ becomes a guy who's easy to talk yourself into if you're one of the teams trying to find an answer outside a top 5 pick.
I've seen the stat on second best comp % on passes with 20+ air yards, but lots to be intrigued about here IMO.
Quote:
Link
I've seen the stat on second best comp % on passes with 20+ air yards, but lots to be intrigued about here IMO.
I obviously can't say how JJ will do in the pros, but according to my eye and research he isn't far off from QB 2 behind Daniels in my book. I'm almost starting to think 1. JD 2. JJ 3. CW 4. DM, but those are just my thoughts and I'm not able to get into the minds of each prospect like the GM's and Co will. I do get a sense that JJ had one of the better pocket presences in the pocket and that he has an intuitive, quick mind at QB but I can't really say for sure it's just an impression I get in my research on him.
I obviously can't say how JJ will do in the pros, but according to my eye and research he isn't far off from QB 2 behind Daniels in my book. I'm almost starting to think 1. JD 2. JJ 3. CW 4. DM, but those are just my thoughts and I'm not able to get into the minds of each prospect like the GM's and Co will. I do get a sense that JJ had one of the better pocket presences in the pocket and that he has an intuitive, quick mind at QB but I can't really say for sure it's just an impression I get in my research on him.
I’m with you. While I am admittedly no expert, I wouldn’t have any issues if Giants take him.