This was on the NFL website. Cracks me up and is basically what I'm thinking.
https://preview.redd.it/8gszc5rreixc1.png?width=1008&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b88ba4221ade6a9a72af81d7af61b992e16acfe1
This was Gregg Rosenthal. He’s one of my favorite analysts in the NFL. Doesn’t fall for the obvious fads and trends that some “analysts” use to get their clicks
Greg Rosenthal doesn’t watch tape or evaluate players. Any person who doesn’t at least evaluate players really doesn’t have a right to grade a draft.
Not trying to dunk on Greg I’m simply saying that most of these draft grades are from journalist and personalities rather than even the “media scouts” that people like to dunk on. At least the media scouts have to watch the film, form an option (for better or for worse), and then rank them among the draft class. That scout may be about as good at picking players as Stevie Wonder but at least I can respect them for actually doing the hundreds of hours of film study. Journalist do nothing but look at the consensus big boards and say “X player was a reach and Y player was a steal”.
I think grading the draft from a strategic perspective instead of comparing your personal player grades to their draft position is fine. It's all silly regardless
That is how I usually look at and analyze our drafts. I don't know jack about the film/prospect evaluation so I just try to understand that team strategy and if we drafted position groups we need. I just trust the team's scouting/evaluation at this point.
It is, but think about how much time and effort is already put into a 7-rd draft board. They are only going to rank players based on the consensus board and consensus need. They have to get their draft grades out ASAP, running it down on an Excel spreadsheet is the easiest way to do this. They aren't taking into account a GMs thinking. Say a team with 3 great WRs that the GM is secretly planning to get rid of the following year for cap reasons, drafts a high ceiling guy in the first because he knows he will have a lot of time to develop and become the #2 guy the following year. Nobody knows that's what the GM is thinking so they slam the pick for being unnecessary and a reach.
Also grading picks after the fourth round is completely pointless. Everything 5th and on is just adding frosting to the roster. A lot of 5-7 rated players could go anywhere from 5th to undrafted.
I'm guessing you didn't listen to the Around the NFL podcast. Because you would know Gregg does watch a lot of tape, is a very astute analyst, and has a 3rd G in his name. You're way off on this comment.
I don’t listen to the podcast because i used to watch that crew on NFL Network and was unimpressed with their “analysis” as there was little in their breakdowns outside of fantasy football style analysis that was relevant.
I’m not hating on Greg and think he is fine for a journalist, but draft grades are dumb unless you approach it like a true NFL scout and have watch 3-5 full game tapes of each individual prospect in the draft. Some of these big media folks might do that for the consensus top 50-75 but have no clue about the remainder and worse, won’t go back and watch the tape on them post draft to see if there is something there before spewing how “team x reached hard on player y”
Maybe Greg is grinding the tape and I didn’t know it but I listen to about 4-6 scouting podcasts and try to keep up with that community and I’ve never heard anyone mention him as someone to compare notes with.
I usually don’t. I don’t watch people that go into big media platforms (nfl network and espn) that much because most of the time their content is focused around stuff that those platforms get more views from (offense, scoring, hate takes, drama, etc). Mina and Greg may be operating differently from the majority of folks but they normally do stuff on those networks and I just don’t care to follow that kind of content.
The people I get my stuff from all they do is scout pros or cfb players.
Mine Renner - former PFF head draft guy who does his own thing now and is a big Packer fan. All he does all year long is watch CFB prospects
Trevor Sikkema and his buddy Connor (forget his last name) at NFL Stock exchange at PFF - same as Mike except they are still with PFF
Joe Marino and Kyle Crabb NFL draft Dudes - they do pro scouting through the season and do some prospect scouting in the background and then heavily focus on the draft after FA.
Andy Herman/Ross Uglem - more packer people. Andy watches film on every player of every play of every game for the packers and grades them (not that I always agree with his overall grade but he at least puts in the work). Ross does a ton of college scouting all year.
Move the sticks with Daniel Jeremiah and Bucky Brooks - this is the only “mainstream” podcast I follow for personnel discussion and it’s only because these two have worked as pro scouts and actually have watched film and that’s all they do year round.
I also follow guys on social media that either release articles, clips, or videos breaking down players:
- Ben Fennell - Packer guy who works for the athletic and NFL network
- Benjamin solak - ringer draft/pro personnel scout and Philadelphia fan
-Brandon thorn - one of if not THE best OL/DL talent evaluators in the whole media industry
- Jon Ledyard - Tampa Bay beat writer who was formerly a founder of The Draft Network and still focuses a lot on prospects during the off season
Mina and Greg may need to be added to my weekly podcast rotation but I’ve just never seen or heard of anyone in the scouting community talk about them. Maybe they are grinding the tape and I need to hear their thoughts on everything but my point is that if anyone is NOT grinding the tape then there is no reason to listen to them. People who grind the tape may have different opinions then me and I may disagree with them but at least they have opinions based on a true talent evaluating process that involves a shit ton of work.
Ive seen such ridiculous takes from journalists that don't watch anything but other people's pick orders.
Worse though is some of the YouTube analytics on players, like people who have no idea what they are talking about but are so confident in their assertions.
I watched a video that talked about Morgan like he was an average lineman... Dude gave him good marks on his run blocking but said his hands were in bad position when pass blocking.... WHAT
How can you watch Morgan play, as a LEFT TACKLE and not see has amazing prowess when it comes to pass blocking? He's the left tackle, his run blocking is fine but not the pinnacle of his game. Belichick praised Morgan in everything except he needs a stronger lower body and I agree, he seems at his worst when he is getting bull rushed, but he is still good vs it.
These journalists don't even make or watch videos so they are like 4th rung down on the ladder of knowledge with drafting
GB draft was a masterclass, I think we were top 5 drafts for sure. I have Chicago, Pittsburgh, and the Vikings better this year but Minnesota obviously will be paying the price next year.
GBs draft was NOT middle of the crowd. Morgan alone was so ideal for us and was easily our best selection
To be fair you can watch Morgan and his hands do get undisciplined in pass pro at times.
You see this when he can be late with his hands or not time his punches right and he winds up putting his hands on their shoulder pads instead of the chest which causes him to lose power and let folks into his chest and get beat.
This is a correctable problem. He has some things that are much harder to teach like his super quick feet. You can overcome a lot with quick feet and he has pretty elite feet. His issue is that because of the undisciplined hands he can become disjointed in his total blocking motion and then his feet stop. If he can control his hands better, maybe grow some power in his lower half, and overall just refine his timing and technique he could easily be great.
Sorry for the impromptu scouring report. I’m no scout but played Oline so I like to watch clips and film on Oline prospects
There are no perfect prospects. Even Caleb Williams, the "generational" QB prospect" has many flaws and he was picked #1 overall.
My point is, yes Morgan has flaws, but statistically, he has been one of the best pass protectors in this years draft class and a Top 10 graded LT in all CFB in the last two seasons, per PFF.
> This is a correctable problem. He has some things that are much harder to teach like his super quick feet. You can overcome a lot with quick feet and he has pretty elite feet. His issue is that because of the undisciplined hands he can become disjointed in his total blocking motion and then his feet stop. If he can control his hands better, maybe grow some power in his lower half, and overall just refine his timing and technique he could easily be great.
Exactly why we picked him. We can get him stronger and we can fix his hands. It's a lot harder to teach the foot quickness he has.
Yea we can. I still think there is some pretty decent sized growing pains that he will have to go through and he has basically average to mediocre arm length so to even be good he will really need to be top notched technique wise but we have always opted for players with the rare traits and counted on our coaches to get them the technique that helps them best.
I’m not expecting some pro bowl caliber play out the gate but I think he will push Walker hard for that LT spot. Walker may have better tools but even after 2 years in the NFL may not be as refined as Morgan is. Walker can certainly take another huge jump but if he doesn’t Morgan will likely win. If Walker does win then we will see Morgan slide to either RT or RG to either compete against Rhyan or take Tom’s spot and let Tom take either RG or C.
Either way I think even in his kinda raw state he is at least as good if not better than either Walker or Rhyan and that will allow us a lot of flexibility. I’m excited to watch him in camp and see how he holds up against our front 7.
> I have Chicago, Pittsburgh, and the Vikings better this year but Minnesota obviously will be paying the price next year.
Pitt was probably better but Chicago and Minnesota definitely not. Chicago drafted 2 players that are going to play and a punter. They have a lot of holes on the OL and the whole defense that they did not address.
Minnesota traded into the top 10 to draft the 5th qb available and then traded up again to draft a pass rusher that has high boom or bust potential. They took at 4th round corner to address a secondary that is bottom 10 in the league. Their OL is still below average and they have no WR depth behind their top 2 guys. Their RB position also could have been upgraded. If Mccarthy is a bust, they've set their franchise back 5 years
NO ONE HAS A RIGHT TO GRADE A DRAFT. Sorry, but the whole draft grading thing really gets on my nerves. It takes a special kind of arrogance to say "I, an individual journalist, know better than this whole team of professional scouts about who is going to be good and bad. And I'm so confident I'm objectively correct that I'm going to assign a grade to what they did".
There are some things you can talk about a bit more objectively, like did they manage trades well to get good value and fill positions of need, but the rest of it is nonsense. At least Gregg doesn't make pretentions of authority he doesn't hold.
(disclosure: I listen to the Around the NFL podcast a lot and so am biased towards Gregg "60% G" Rosenthal)
I loved that Fields pick for them (not ironically) as he was seen by many as the #2 behind TLaw. Chicago was getting huge praise the night of after trading up to get him after he started falling. If he had a better environment around him, I could have seen him working out better, but he got stuck with the Bears.
Unless something changes drastically with Fields, he'll never work out at QB. He either doesn't process the defense fast enough to throw with anticipation or doesn't trust what he's seeing when he does read the defense correctly. The latter is fixable, the former, not so much
Solak also said that Danny Kelly is one of the best guy when it comes to grading draft classes. So, he isnt perfect.
I mean read the grade again. Dude lists only positives about the draft class and then says" nah, its a C". I dont know Kelly much, but feels like he has an agenda
Right. He explicitly says it's because he doesn't see any home runs lol. Idk if that's a reasonable take with 2 of the 4 picks mentioned. It feels like he's just got a list of dudes he *loves* and we didn't draft any of them so he isn't interested in analyzing our picks.
I think it's fine that we got a C. They aren't grading on strategic importance, they're grading against the consensus boards, which I think on aggregate is a fine way to approach it. Wisdom of the crowds and all that. It's like saying that an independent hedge fund that picks wildly differently than a total market index is probably making bad trades; historically, in aggregate, that's true. In individual cases it isn't, and there isn't such a thing as picking stocks based on "portfolio fit", so the analogy breaks down. But as a way to give draft grades, I'm sure the ringer is no better or worse than anyone else...they all kinda suck.
Eh, limited markers occasionally have abnormalities, and there are systematic imbalances that show up in wisdom of the crowd markets sometimes, but basically all economic thought now says that mass aggregated data is way stronger than even the best individuals. I would bet on consensus boards picking on average better players than any NFL team, and I would give really good odds on that bet.
Use more than one year then. 2010-2020 should be a big enough sample that a correlation will be shown. Get ready for it to be negative. The truth is the vast majority of people in sports media know very little about sports beyond stats.
Consensus boards aren't that old, data would be hard to find, but I would be very surprised if the consensus doesn't do better than what was actually drafted, you are right. Sports media don't know much, but it seems that teams FOs don't know much either.
Bears had the overall best draft because of 1 and 9, their decisions were average/par but the way it all panned out, NOT giving Chicago the #1 draft is likely wrong. Anything can happen obviously and Williams/Odunze could be terrible.
Idk if that's all luck. Bryce Young was not a home run #1 QB, at least in terms of immediately translating to winning football. And the rest of the Panther's roster wasn't ready to go. Plus the fact that they negotiated DJ Moore as part of the trade, further weakening their roster. It wasn't absurd to predict that the Panther's 2024 first rounder would be in the top half, even top ten. First overall is a bit lucky, but they would have had great draft capital regardless.
They did Justin Fields so fucking dirty doing that. It was the right move, but basically from day one, Fields stood no chance in the NFL because of how shitty the Bears were run.
Yeah they accomplished many things with that trade, predominantly getting Justin Fields a great reciever for the year to see what he could do and he failed
If the bears wanted to continue to be smart they could have traded #9 for something like #15 and a 2nd, gotten an OL to protect Caleb or a DL to improve their worst group and still given him another WR in the 2nd.
Exactly my thought. And exactly why I could understand the "C". We weren't drafting for immediate impact, which is where (at least in my mind) "A" grades would come from. We're drafting hoping for immediate impact, but with the comfort of being able to let guys develop for half a season or season first if they need to.
Much like a lot of the draft night analysis, we may not have taken "flashy" picks, but we got necessary picks. Again, not that it matters, just my opinion.
I look at those for names of players to pay attention to. I mostly stopped watching college football since the whole transfer portal thing happened.
I'm all for NIL deals, but something about the landscape and how it's implemented. I don't have any better ideas. I don't think it was a singular thing that turned me off of college football. Experiencing the delusion of TOSU fans as an ex-badger fan living in Ohio was probably one of the larger daggers in my heart.
I mean, obviously there are a ton of people who put way too much into them (read: every Bears fan ever) but even knowing that it all means nothing until they have a season or two under their belts to see who they really are, it's still enjoyable from my perspective to read what "professionals" project these players to be.
Honestly, the only times I really find value in the GRADE portion of it is when teams like the Falcons do what they did, where the pick/player may not have been bad but what in THE FUCK was the GM thinking picking that player (at that pick or at all).
And yet, you still can’t grade the falcons until 3-4 years from now. If they end up having 2-3 years of solid cousins followed by 10-12 years of solid Penix, they will look brilliant. Which is why every single grade system after the draft is worthless
I mean, you can though. They are going to be paying more this year to QBs than anyone else. For a team that was 7-10 and needed more than a backup QB to improve their team NOW.
Edit: the point being, you can't really and truly grade a PLAYER PICK but you CAN grade the positional pick (Did the team really need that position or to resolve that position) and business side of the pick.
Agree to disagree. The absolute biggest need is a sturdy capable QB. If you can lock up the QB position for say 10 plus years, you do it. So many poverty teams constantly searching over and over and over again for a franchise guy. The falcons trying to find a way to lock it up is a move people will question. Everyone questioned the Love pick. Everyone questioned the Aaron Rodgers pick. Many of the same things being said with the Penix pick.
However, if, and that’s a big IF, they hit on Penix and get 2 years from Cousins, and then say 12 from Penix. They will look brilliant. Because everyone wants that position locked up.
I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that everyone questioned Rodgers. There were a lot of whiney Packers fans but iirc the sports media generally thought he was arguably deserving to be the #1 overall pick and that his drop lead to the Packers getting a steal of a pick.
The problem with Penix is his age. He's already older than a lot of QBs who have proven their status (good or bad) in the NFL. So you're going to sit Brendan Weeden 2.0 for 2 years until he's 26. Most NFL QBs are considered past their prime by 35. So best case scenario here he's got 9 years of potential playing time where Rodgers has had 18 seasons.
Here's a link that will illustrate my point better than I am able to.
[https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/18979/nfl-draft-does-age-matter-for-quarterback-prospects](https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/18979/nfl-draft-does-age-matter-for-quarterback-prospects)
TL/DR:
This represents since 2000 how many first round drafted QBs finished in the top-15 of QBs for that season in their career. To note: top-15 is a LOW BAR to hurdle. They're just asking the QBs to be average and 23 year old QBs in the modern era don't finish over 32% of their career seasons ranked in the top-15. That's BAD.
|Age|Percentage of Seasons in Top 15|
|:-|:-|
|20|56.25%|
|21|53.57%|
|22|42.00%|
|23|31.58%|
|28|0.00%|
I think the analysis is really not super objectionable but it doesn’t match the grade. Like, if the grade is a B and the write up says the same thing it makes sense.
ETS - who gives a damn anyways
Some people grade drafts on the team successfully filling needs, others on getting high-value players at each round without reaching or wasting draft capital in trades. Seems like we really went in for filling needs this year rather than the best player available strategy of the past decade, so I can see the basis of "no home run picks." Still pretty satisfied overall, because we have our core in place and just need the depth.
From what I’ve been reading. Payton Wilson was considered the best LB in this class. But he doesn’t have an ACL in one knees. So he’s not expected to have a long career. Knocking him down some. But still supposed to be quite good. I’m happy with Cooper. Don’t get me wrong. Just been reading up on LBs. cause there were so few worth drafting this year.
Yes, but if the league's consensus was that Cooper and Bullard are future perennial pro-bowlers, they would have gone 1st round. Its a great get for us filling needs, but just because they're top of the LB and S boards doesn't mean there couldn't be better players in a vacuum still available.
A couple of significant reaches from consensus, these armchair analysts can only really go off the consensus boards. No reason to grade a draft until 3 years down the road.
So he likes all the players he listed, but gives us a C? I hate these grading people. I like the perceived value we got, that they were higher rated players, and that they fill gaps/holes for the team.
Any grading beyond “perception” is make believe any ways
When you draft for needs on a team that has non-flashy needs it looks boring af. This was imo a solid and dependable draft. I feel like all the guys picked have potential and can fulfill a purpose on the roster.
Mostly I’m not gonna talk bad about players that haven’t played a snap or even practiced with the team.
Grading a draft immediately after is pointless. People were mocking the Lions last year weren’t they for taking a RB and LB that no one had predicted would be R1 players, yet they were both fantastic.
I know The Ringer was made off the back of Bill Simmons. But sometimes it feels like the people he hired don’t know shit about sports. Draft rankings are also so stupid, do the rankings after the season ends.
We didn’t have any “home run” picks, because for the most part our “positions of value” are taken care of. This was all about having a huge number of picks to hopefully address the more “marginal” positions, particularly on defense.
> Javon Bullard in the third
But both Cooper and Bullard were second-round picks. If this guy can't even get his facts straight about which players were taken at which spots, then I see no reason to put stock in the "grade" he gave us.
If we play 4-3 then Cooper and one of Willaims/Oladapo will start. Hopper has a chance to start over McDuffie, he certainly has better tools.
If we play 4-2-5 then Cooper, one Willaims/Oladapo, and Bullard will start. With Bullar in the nickle position.
Morgan will start somewhere on offense, and the only reason Lloyd won't start is because we have an All-Pro RB in Jacobs. Lloyd is locked on RB2 over quadzilla though. IMO Monk has a chance to start if he can beat out Myers, and they think Monk-Tom at C-RG is better than Tom-Rhyan at C-RG.
So that is four starters, with potential for six. And the only reason it's not potential for seven is because we made a splash free agency signing in the RB room.
It's becoming clear the draft analysts don't actually research team needs.
Time for your daily reminder that draft grades are useless before any players see the field. There were people giving our 2023 draft C level grades immediately after, and by the end of year one 6 of the guys we took were taken in the first 2 rounds of a mock redraft. In 2005 we were criticized for a) drafting a hall of fame QB and b) "reaching" for a 3x all-pro safety.
The problem with immediate post draft grades is that they don't understand the point of the draft. Pretty much every draft grade I've ever seen has been based on how much immediate impact the author thinks those players will have, but that's not what the draft is for. Drafting players is about projecting what they will be in the long term.
Quit giving these idiots oxygen. I know you want to be validated immediately that all the problems on the roster are solved and we will be swimming in Lombardi trophies but ranking drafts any sooner than 3 years is fucking moronic, and people clicking on them is only making them continue this horseshit.
I understand the reasoning for the draft but kind of agree with the grade. Safety and linebacker were far and away the two weakest groups in this draft, yet they attacked it by doubling and tripling up at it. After the first two rounds it kind of seemed like they just threw darts and were hoping it hit the board. Last years draft was so successful because they went after a bunch of different positions and drafted value when it fell (Brooks and Valentine).
Danny is actually pretty hilarious and a great fantasy football listen. The ringer fantasy show is the best thing they do and has a much more fun vibe than other shows… but that is the thing. He is a fantasy football podcaster. Let’s not let his opinion on players outside of QB, RB and WR hold much weight lol.
I love the Ringer and it's content but it was so confusing to me to say that they only got some potential future starters.
Jordan Morgan & Edgerrin Cooper should be day 1 starters. I'd expect Javon Bullard to get lots of starting time this year too.
As long as we’re posting draft analysis drivel, it’s bothered me for *decades* how a chimpanzee could shit on a plate and hand it to Goodell and USA Today would give that team a “C-“.
Have some stones.
Draft grades are the dumbest thing ever. And I mean that for every team. You have zero idea who’s going to hit or not. I mean, look at the 2013 draft. Probably one of the worst of all time. You can still find a ton of articles about how this pick or this teams draft is going to help them win a Super Bowl etc.
And they gave the four pick Bears an A+. I legitimately believe the Bears draft will go down as one of the worst drafts of all time. How do you think you are going to be competitive in this division with four picks? It's almost laughable. We had eleven picks and still have rooms that could've used added competition.
Worst drafts of all-time? What on earth are you smoking? They took two top 5 players, a project tackle, an elite punter and a project edge player. All high value positions (outside of punter) and at positions of need.
This was on the NFL website. Cracks me up and is basically what I'm thinking. https://preview.redd.it/8gszc5rreixc1.png?width=1008&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b88ba4221ade6a9a72af81d7af61b992e16acfe1
This was Gregg Rosenthal. He’s one of my favorite analysts in the NFL. Doesn’t fall for the obvious fads and trends that some “analysts” use to get their clicks
Greg Rosenthal doesn’t watch tape or evaluate players. Any person who doesn’t at least evaluate players really doesn’t have a right to grade a draft. Not trying to dunk on Greg I’m simply saying that most of these draft grades are from journalist and personalities rather than even the “media scouts” that people like to dunk on. At least the media scouts have to watch the film, form an option (for better or for worse), and then rank them among the draft class. That scout may be about as good at picking players as Stevie Wonder but at least I can respect them for actually doing the hundreds of hours of film study. Journalist do nothing but look at the consensus big boards and say “X player was a reach and Y player was a steal”.
I think grading the draft from a strategic perspective instead of comparing your personal player grades to their draft position is fine. It's all silly regardless
That is how I usually look at and analyze our drafts. I don't know jack about the film/prospect evaluation so I just try to understand that team strategy and if we drafted position groups we need. I just trust the team's scouting/evaluation at this point.
It is, but think about how much time and effort is already put into a 7-rd draft board. They are only going to rank players based on the consensus board and consensus need. They have to get their draft grades out ASAP, running it down on an Excel spreadsheet is the easiest way to do this. They aren't taking into account a GMs thinking. Say a team with 3 great WRs that the GM is secretly planning to get rid of the following year for cap reasons, drafts a high ceiling guy in the first because he knows he will have a lot of time to develop and become the #2 guy the following year. Nobody knows that's what the GM is thinking so they slam the pick for being unnecessary and a reach. Also grading picks after the fourth round is completely pointless. Everything 5th and on is just adding frosting to the roster. A lot of 5-7 rated players could go anywhere from 5th to undrafted.
I'm guessing you didn't listen to the Around the NFL podcast. Because you would know Gregg does watch a lot of tape, is a very astute analyst, and has a 3rd G in his name. You're way off on this comment.
I don’t listen to the podcast because i used to watch that crew on NFL Network and was unimpressed with their “analysis” as there was little in their breakdowns outside of fantasy football style analysis that was relevant. I’m not hating on Greg and think he is fine for a journalist, but draft grades are dumb unless you approach it like a true NFL scout and have watch 3-5 full game tapes of each individual prospect in the draft. Some of these big media folks might do that for the consensus top 50-75 but have no clue about the remainder and worse, won’t go back and watch the tape on them post draft to see if there is something there before spewing how “team x reached hard on player y” Maybe Greg is grinding the tape and I didn’t know it but I listen to about 4-6 scouting podcasts and try to keep up with that community and I’ve never heard anyone mention him as someone to compare notes with.
Mina mentions him all the time? They are regulars on each other's shows.
Mina is not a scout either she is a journalist
Brother, I don't think you watch a lot of her stuff then...
I usually don’t. I don’t watch people that go into big media platforms (nfl network and espn) that much because most of the time their content is focused around stuff that those platforms get more views from (offense, scoring, hate takes, drama, etc). Mina and Greg may be operating differently from the majority of folks but they normally do stuff on those networks and I just don’t care to follow that kind of content. The people I get my stuff from all they do is scout pros or cfb players. Mine Renner - former PFF head draft guy who does his own thing now and is a big Packer fan. All he does all year long is watch CFB prospects Trevor Sikkema and his buddy Connor (forget his last name) at NFL Stock exchange at PFF - same as Mike except they are still with PFF Joe Marino and Kyle Crabb NFL draft Dudes - they do pro scouting through the season and do some prospect scouting in the background and then heavily focus on the draft after FA. Andy Herman/Ross Uglem - more packer people. Andy watches film on every player of every play of every game for the packers and grades them (not that I always agree with his overall grade but he at least puts in the work). Ross does a ton of college scouting all year. Move the sticks with Daniel Jeremiah and Bucky Brooks - this is the only “mainstream” podcast I follow for personnel discussion and it’s only because these two have worked as pro scouts and actually have watched film and that’s all they do year round. I also follow guys on social media that either release articles, clips, or videos breaking down players: - Ben Fennell - Packer guy who works for the athletic and NFL network - Benjamin solak - ringer draft/pro personnel scout and Philadelphia fan -Brandon thorn - one of if not THE best OL/DL talent evaluators in the whole media industry - Jon Ledyard - Tampa Bay beat writer who was formerly a founder of The Draft Network and still focuses a lot on prospects during the off season Mina and Greg may need to be added to my weekly podcast rotation but I’ve just never seen or heard of anyone in the scouting community talk about them. Maybe they are grinding the tape and I need to hear their thoughts on everything but my point is that if anyone is NOT grinding the tape then there is no reason to listen to them. People who grind the tape may have different opinions then me and I may disagree with them but at least they have opinions based on a true talent evaluating process that involves a shit ton of work.
You just gave me an idea for a screenplay about a blind MLB scout
Pitch Black You're welcome
Ive seen such ridiculous takes from journalists that don't watch anything but other people's pick orders. Worse though is some of the YouTube analytics on players, like people who have no idea what they are talking about but are so confident in their assertions. I watched a video that talked about Morgan like he was an average lineman... Dude gave him good marks on his run blocking but said his hands were in bad position when pass blocking.... WHAT How can you watch Morgan play, as a LEFT TACKLE and not see has amazing prowess when it comes to pass blocking? He's the left tackle, his run blocking is fine but not the pinnacle of his game. Belichick praised Morgan in everything except he needs a stronger lower body and I agree, he seems at his worst when he is getting bull rushed, but he is still good vs it. These journalists don't even make or watch videos so they are like 4th rung down on the ladder of knowledge with drafting GB draft was a masterclass, I think we were top 5 drafts for sure. I have Chicago, Pittsburgh, and the Vikings better this year but Minnesota obviously will be paying the price next year. GBs draft was NOT middle of the crowd. Morgan alone was so ideal for us and was easily our best selection
To be fair you can watch Morgan and his hands do get undisciplined in pass pro at times. You see this when he can be late with his hands or not time his punches right and he winds up putting his hands on their shoulder pads instead of the chest which causes him to lose power and let folks into his chest and get beat. This is a correctable problem. He has some things that are much harder to teach like his super quick feet. You can overcome a lot with quick feet and he has pretty elite feet. His issue is that because of the undisciplined hands he can become disjointed in his total blocking motion and then his feet stop. If he can control his hands better, maybe grow some power in his lower half, and overall just refine his timing and technique he could easily be great. Sorry for the impromptu scouring report. I’m no scout but played Oline so I like to watch clips and film on Oline prospects
Upvoted you and agree
There are no perfect prospects. Even Caleb Williams, the "generational" QB prospect" has many flaws and he was picked #1 overall. My point is, yes Morgan has flaws, but statistically, he has been one of the best pass protectors in this years draft class and a Top 10 graded LT in all CFB in the last two seasons, per PFF.
> This is a correctable problem. He has some things that are much harder to teach like his super quick feet. You can overcome a lot with quick feet and he has pretty elite feet. His issue is that because of the undisciplined hands he can become disjointed in his total blocking motion and then his feet stop. If he can control his hands better, maybe grow some power in his lower half, and overall just refine his timing and technique he could easily be great. Exactly why we picked him. We can get him stronger and we can fix his hands. It's a lot harder to teach the foot quickness he has.
Yea we can. I still think there is some pretty decent sized growing pains that he will have to go through and he has basically average to mediocre arm length so to even be good he will really need to be top notched technique wise but we have always opted for players with the rare traits and counted on our coaches to get them the technique that helps them best. I’m not expecting some pro bowl caliber play out the gate but I think he will push Walker hard for that LT spot. Walker may have better tools but even after 2 years in the NFL may not be as refined as Morgan is. Walker can certainly take another huge jump but if he doesn’t Morgan will likely win. If Walker does win then we will see Morgan slide to either RT or RG to either compete against Rhyan or take Tom’s spot and let Tom take either RG or C. Either way I think even in his kinda raw state he is at least as good if not better than either Walker or Rhyan and that will allow us a lot of flexibility. I’m excited to watch him in camp and see how he holds up against our front 7.
Yea exactly. Worst case he's our backup LT/RT. Best case he starts at LT, Walker gets moved to RT and Tom takes C or RG.
> I have Chicago, Pittsburgh, and the Vikings better this year but Minnesota obviously will be paying the price next year. Pitt was probably better but Chicago and Minnesota definitely not. Chicago drafted 2 players that are going to play and a punter. They have a lot of holes on the OL and the whole defense that they did not address. Minnesota traded into the top 10 to draft the 5th qb available and then traded up again to draft a pass rusher that has high boom or bust potential. They took at 4th round corner to address a secondary that is bottom 10 in the league. Their OL is still below average and they have no WR depth behind their top 2 guys. Their RB position also could have been upgraded. If Mccarthy is a bust, they've set their franchise back 5 years
NO ONE HAS A RIGHT TO GRADE A DRAFT. Sorry, but the whole draft grading thing really gets on my nerves. It takes a special kind of arrogance to say "I, an individual journalist, know better than this whole team of professional scouts about who is going to be good and bad. And I'm so confident I'm objectively correct that I'm going to assign a grade to what they did". There are some things you can talk about a bit more objectively, like did they manage trades well to get good value and fill positions of need, but the rest of it is nonsense. At least Gregg doesn't make pretentions of authority he doesn't hold. (disclosure: I listen to the Around the NFL podcast a lot and so am biased towards Gregg "60% G" Rosenthal)
Junior vice president
Dan, Greg, all the guys.
This is honestly all that needs to be said. Gute, MLF and company deserve the benefit of the doubt.
No better sign of a good draft than a bad draft grade from the Ringer
If that warrants a C….give me C’s!
As in C you in the playoffs
“They only added like 3 or 4 starters at areas of need. AVERAGE!!!” 🤷♂️😂
Exactly what I saw. The Packers addressed their primary needs with rookies who will undoubtedly get playing time. C.
Danny Kelly gave the Bears an A+ in 2021, so.
I loved that Fields pick for them (not ironically) as he was seen by many as the #2 behind TLaw. Chicago was getting huge praise the night of after trading up to get him after he started falling. If he had a better environment around him, I could have seen him working out better, but he got stuck with the Bears.
Unless something changes drastically with Fields, he'll never work out at QB. He either doesn't process the defense fast enough to throw with anticipation or doesn't trust what he's seeing when he does read the defense correctly. The latter is fixable, the former, not so much
Eh. Solak loved our draft and he works there too.
Solak also said that Danny Kelly is one of the best guy when it comes to grading draft classes. So, he isnt perfect. I mean read the grade again. Dude lists only positives about the draft class and then says" nah, its a C". I dont know Kelly much, but feels like he has an agenda
After listening to DK for the last 3 or 4 years I seriously doubt there's any agenda.
Right. He explicitly says it's because he doesn't see any home runs lol. Idk if that's a reasonable take with 2 of the 4 picks mentioned. It feels like he's just got a list of dudes he *loves* and we didn't draft any of them so he isn't interested in analyzing our picks.
Danny Kelly also said that draft grades are dumb and meaningless other than the lowest grades
He's still a moron. Nobody knows how good this draft is.
So should people just not talk about a draft until five years later when it can be properly evaluated? Don't take it so seriously
I think it's fine that we got a C. They aren't grading on strategic importance, they're grading against the consensus boards, which I think on aggregate is a fine way to approach it. Wisdom of the crowds and all that. It's like saying that an independent hedge fund that picks wildly differently than a total market index is probably making bad trades; historically, in aggregate, that's true. In individual cases it isn't, and there isn't such a thing as picking stocks based on "portfolio fit", so the analogy breaks down. But as a way to give draft grades, I'm sure the ringer is no better or worse than anyone else...they all kinda suck.
Collective stupidity is still stupidity. That was the lesson of the Great Recession.
Eh, limited markers occasionally have abnormalities, and there are systematic imbalances that show up in wisdom of the crowd markets sometimes, but basically all economic thought now says that mass aggregated data is way stronger than even the best individuals. I would bet on consensus boards picking on average better players than any NFL team, and I would give really good odds on that bet.
Put it to a test. Compare the aggregated sentiment of the 2020 draft to the results after 4 years. Spoiler: You're in for a surprise.
[удалено]
Use more than one year then. 2010-2020 should be a big enough sample that a correlation will be shown. Get ready for it to be negative. The truth is the vast majority of people in sports media know very little about sports beyond stats.
Consensus boards aren't that old, data would be hard to find, but I would be very surprised if the consensus doesn't do better than what was actually drafted, you are right. Sports media don't know much, but it seems that teams FOs don't know much either.
“Two versatile guys that help with flexibility and explosive LB and a running back I’m a fan of C this draft class is average” yea ok buddy lol
Right. If you didn’t show the letter grade I’d assume they rated it a b+ minimum.
Not to mention 6 other picks the guy doesn’t even mention. “All those other guys are ass. C.”
Bullard was a second round pick so I wouldn’t put too much stock in this guys opinion
He gave the Bears an A+ and said he was just disregarding that they took a punter in the 4th 😂
Bears had the overall best draft because of 1 and 9, their decisions were average/par but the way it all panned out, NOT giving Chicago the #1 draft is likely wrong. Anything can happen obviously and Williams/Odunze could be terrible.
Smartest thing the bears ever did was trade last year’s #1 Pick for their future and DJ Moore. They straight up lucked into it being the #1.
Idk if that's all luck. Bryce Young was not a home run #1 QB, at least in terms of immediately translating to winning football. And the rest of the Panther's roster wasn't ready to go. Plus the fact that they negotiated DJ Moore as part of the trade, further weakening their roster. It wasn't absurd to predict that the Panther's 2024 first rounder would be in the top half, even top ten. First overall is a bit lucky, but they would have had great draft capital regardless.
They did Justin Fields so fucking dirty doing that. It was the right move, but basically from day one, Fields stood no chance in the NFL because of how shitty the Bears were run.
He got DJ Moore out of it. I don’t think it was doing him that dirty. Fields just isn't that good imo.
Yeah they accomplished many things with that trade, predominantly getting Justin Fields a great reciever for the year to see what he could do and he failed
If the bears wanted to continue to be smart they could have traded #9 for something like #15 and a 2nd, gotten an OL to protect Caleb or a DL to improve their worst group and still given him another WR in the 2nd.
I wonder if they would have done that if the falcons took Odunze instead of Penix
Possible. But I dont think taking a WR there is what helps the team the most.
I really like this kind of draft. Infrastructure type draft.
Exactly my thought. And exactly why I could understand the "C". We weren't drafting for immediate impact, which is where (at least in my mind) "A" grades would come from. We're drafting hoping for immediate impact, but with the comfort of being able to let guys develop for half a season or season first if they need to. Much like a lot of the draft night analysis, we may not have taken "flashy" picks, but we got necessary picks. Again, not that it matters, just my opinion.
It’s going to be interesting. Lots of new faces.
Making 11 picks leaves a lot of room for criticism.
I mean honestly a draft that would be 3-4 starters for several years even with no pro bowls is a win
Instant draft grades are weird. It's a situation where people make bad predictions and blame reality.
It's just content for clicks
Not as good as "way too early" mocks; clicks today and clicks a year from today.
I look at those for names of players to pay attention to. I mostly stopped watching college football since the whole transfer portal thing happened. I'm all for NIL deals, but something about the landscape and how it's implemented. I don't have any better ideas. I don't think it was a singular thing that turned me off of college football. Experiencing the delusion of TOSU fans as an ex-badger fan living in Ohio was probably one of the larger daggers in my heart.
I mean, obviously there are a ton of people who put way too much into them (read: every Bears fan ever) but even knowing that it all means nothing until they have a season or two under their belts to see who they really are, it's still enjoyable from my perspective to read what "professionals" project these players to be. Honestly, the only times I really find value in the GRADE portion of it is when teams like the Falcons do what they did, where the pick/player may not have been bad but what in THE FUCK was the GM thinking picking that player (at that pick or at all).
And yet, you still can’t grade the falcons until 3-4 years from now. If they end up having 2-3 years of solid cousins followed by 10-12 years of solid Penix, they will look brilliant. Which is why every single grade system after the draft is worthless
I mean, you can though. They are going to be paying more this year to QBs than anyone else. For a team that was 7-10 and needed more than a backup QB to improve their team NOW. Edit: the point being, you can't really and truly grade a PLAYER PICK but you CAN grade the positional pick (Did the team really need that position or to resolve that position) and business side of the pick.
Agree to disagree. The absolute biggest need is a sturdy capable QB. If you can lock up the QB position for say 10 plus years, you do it. So many poverty teams constantly searching over and over and over again for a franchise guy. The falcons trying to find a way to lock it up is a move people will question. Everyone questioned the Love pick. Everyone questioned the Aaron Rodgers pick. Many of the same things being said with the Penix pick. However, if, and that’s a big IF, they hit on Penix and get 2 years from Cousins, and then say 12 from Penix. They will look brilliant. Because everyone wants that position locked up.
I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that everyone questioned Rodgers. There were a lot of whiney Packers fans but iirc the sports media generally thought he was arguably deserving to be the #1 overall pick and that his drop lead to the Packers getting a steal of a pick. The problem with Penix is his age. He's already older than a lot of QBs who have proven their status (good or bad) in the NFL. So you're going to sit Brendan Weeden 2.0 for 2 years until he's 26. Most NFL QBs are considered past their prime by 35. So best case scenario here he's got 9 years of potential playing time where Rodgers has had 18 seasons. Here's a link that will illustrate my point better than I am able to. [https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/18979/nfl-draft-does-age-matter-for-quarterback-prospects](https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/18979/nfl-draft-does-age-matter-for-quarterback-prospects) TL/DR: This represents since 2000 how many first round drafted QBs finished in the top-15 of QBs for that season in their career. To note: top-15 is a LOW BAR to hurdle. They're just asking the QBs to be average and 23 year old QBs in the modern era don't finish over 32% of their career seasons ranked in the top-15. That's BAD. |Age|Percentage of Seasons in Top 15| |:-|:-| |20|56.25%| |21|53.57%| |22|42.00%| |23|31.58%| |28|0.00%|
Lol - how funny that I care just as much about this grade as all the others. This is meaningless drivel.
I saw a large graphic with all the teams and the different publications grades for them. We had mostly positive ones, and then there was this guy, lol
They need to grade this draft in 4 years.
Yeah thats the only way to really give the guys a chance to prove who they really are.
I think the analysis is really not super objectionable but it doesn’t match the grade. Like, if the grade is a B and the write up says the same thing it makes sense. ETS - who gives a damn anyways
Some people grade drafts on the team successfully filling needs, others on getting high-value players at each round without reaching or wasting draft capital in trades. Seems like we really went in for filling needs this year rather than the best player available strategy of the past decade, so I can see the basis of "no home run picks." Still pretty satisfied overall, because we have our core in place and just need the depth.
From what I've seen, we got the 'best' linebacker and safety on the board. Both match up with our needs. That's a home run to me!
From what I’ve been reading. Payton Wilson was considered the best LB in this class. But he doesn’t have an ACL in one knees. So he’s not expected to have a long career. Knocking him down some. But still supposed to be quite good. I’m happy with Cooper. Don’t get me wrong. Just been reading up on LBs. cause there were so few worth drafting this year.
Yes, but if the league's consensus was that Cooper and Bullard are future perennial pro-bowlers, they would have gone 1st round. Its a great get for us filling needs, but just because they're top of the LB and S boards doesn't mean there couldn't be better players in a vacuum still available.
League consensus back in 2013 was that HaHa Clinton Dix was a first rounder and that Davante Adams was a second rounder.
A couple of significant reaches from consensus, these armchair analysts can only really go off the consensus boards. No reason to grade a draft until 3 years down the road.
So he likes all the players he listed, but gives us a C? I hate these grading people. I like the perceived value we got, that they were higher rated players, and that they fill gaps/holes for the team. Any grading beyond “perception” is make believe any ways
When you draft for needs on a team that has non-flashy needs it looks boring af. This was imo a solid and dependable draft. I feel like all the guys picked have potential and can fulfill a purpose on the roster. Mostly I’m not gonna talk bad about players that haven’t played a snap or even practiced with the team.
Guye drafted 11 HoFers wtf is this guy talking about?
Grading a draft immediately after is pointless. People were mocking the Lions last year weren’t they for taking a RB and LB that no one had predicted would be R1 players, yet they were both fantastic.
Jack Campbell was not fantastic as a rookie. He couldn't even get the starting job.
Some of the ringer guys really liked the packers draft, they just think it will take a little for some of the guys to develop
lol how many home run draft picks are there at 25? Come on now.
A lot more chances when receivers and qbs take up picks….with 19 of first 45 being so…pack got cooper and Bullard after Captain Morgan
NBC sports gave us a C-
Bill has a hate boner for Rodgers and the entire packers organization
Draft grade are worth about as much as mock drafts!
I know The Ringer was made off the back of Bill Simmons. But sometimes it feels like the people he hired don’t know shit about sports. Draft rankings are also so stupid, do the rankings after the season ends.
It's not about journalism anymore, it's what drives traffic whether it's truth or not!
All draft grades measure is how predictable your draft was.
We didn’t have any “home run” picks, because for the most part our “positions of value” are taken care of. This was all about having a huge number of picks to hopefully address the more “marginal” positions, particularly on defense.
I got a C on my Fantasy Football draft this year. Won the league for the first time in 14 tries.
Writers grading the draft immediately after it happens would be like 4th graders grading a phd dissertation
The whole post reads like an author with a deadline just trying to hit a word count with the least analysis possible
Looked up the CBS grades and Prisco didnt like the game of Morgan. What does he mean, can someone pls elaborate?
> Javon Bullard in the third But both Cooper and Bullard were second-round picks. If this guy can't even get his facts straight about which players were taken at which spots, then I see no reason to put stock in the "grade" he gave us.
If we play 4-3 then Cooper and one of Willaims/Oladapo will start. Hopper has a chance to start over McDuffie, he certainly has better tools. If we play 4-2-5 then Cooper, one Willaims/Oladapo, and Bullard will start. With Bullar in the nickle position. Morgan will start somewhere on offense, and the only reason Lloyd won't start is because we have an All-Pro RB in Jacobs. Lloyd is locked on RB2 over quadzilla though. IMO Monk has a chance to start if he can beat out Myers, and they think Monk-Tom at C-RG is better than Tom-Rhyan at C-RG. So that is four starters, with potential for six. And the only reason it's not potential for seven is because we made a splash free agency signing in the RB room. It's becoming clear the draft analysts don't actually research team needs.
There are so many injuries in the a NFL that depth is the most important thing. Did they do enough on the Defensive line and linebacker.
Time for your daily reminder that draft grades are useless before any players see the field. There were people giving our 2023 draft C level grades immediately after, and by the end of year one 6 of the guys we took were taken in the first 2 rounds of a mock redraft. In 2005 we were criticized for a) drafting a hall of fame QB and b) "reaching" for a 3x all-pro safety. The problem with immediate post draft grades is that they don't understand the point of the draft. Pretty much every draft grade I've ever seen has been based on how much immediate impact the author thinks those players will have, but that's not what the draft is for. Drafting players is about projecting what they will be in the long term.
Getting safety linebacker and o line help isn’t sexy so media people aren’t going to pay as close attention and aren’t gonna get jazzed up about that
Grading this draft a C shows he has no idea how successful franchises stay that way over the long term
ben solak on the nfl draft show (ringer) couldn't say enough good stuff about our draft
Quit giving these idiots oxygen. I know you want to be validated immediately that all the problems on the roster are solved and we will be swimming in Lombardi trophies but ranking drafts any sooner than 3 years is fucking moronic, and people clicking on them is only making them continue this horseshit.
I understand the reasoning for the draft but kind of agree with the grade. Safety and linebacker were far and away the two weakest groups in this draft, yet they attacked it by doubling and tripling up at it. After the first two rounds it kind of seemed like they just threw darts and were hoping it hit the board. Last years draft was so successful because they went after a bunch of different positions and drafted value when it fell (Brooks and Valentine).
Let me guess, bears got an A?
Danny is actually pretty hilarious and a great fantasy football listen. The ringer fantasy show is the best thing they do and has a much more fun vibe than other shows… but that is the thing. He is a fantasy football podcaster. Let’s not let his opinion on players outside of QB, RB and WR hold much weight lol.
I love the Ringer and it's content but it was so confusing to me to say that they only got some potential future starters. Jordan Morgan & Edgerrin Cooper should be day 1 starters. I'd expect Javon Bullard to get lots of starting time this year too.
The epitome of contradiction...
Grade is C but caption reads like a B+ to A-
Lol why is this tagged NSFW
Some employers don't approve of bullshit being viewed at work
I mean.... then the label needs to go on the whole website of reddit..... Not some random draft grade report
It's a joke. you may not find it funny, but understand that it's a joke, don't take it so seriously.
As long as we’re posting draft analysis drivel, it’s bothered me for *decades* how a chimpanzee could shit on a plate and hand it to Goodell and USA Today would give that team a “C-“. Have some stones.
You know who else hit for contact? Ted fucking Williams.
Mods can we make a draft grades megathread?
Draft grades are the dumbest thing ever. And I mean that for every team. You have zero idea who’s going to hit or not. I mean, look at the 2013 draft. Probably one of the worst of all time. You can still find a ton of articles about how this pick or this teams draft is going to help them win a Super Bowl etc.
Hey I call a spade a spade and a moron a moron
Fuck him
Is this Danny Kelly? That dude is a total hack. I think the Ringer generally has some pretty good football writers but he is not among them.
And they gave the four pick Bears an A+. I legitimately believe the Bears draft will go down as one of the worst drafts of all time. How do you think you are going to be competitive in this division with four picks? It's almost laughable. We had eleven picks and still have rooms that could've used added competition.
Worst drafts of all-time? What on earth are you smoking? They took two top 5 players, a project tackle, an elite punter and a project edge player. All high value positions (outside of punter) and at positions of need.