Greg Cosell's Mock Draft

[Master Exploder]

I actually enjoyed it. Sure, it's not as realistic as some of you think, but it does give some insight on how actual NFL teams might feel about certain players compared to the media. What I gathered from it is that while some of us think it's crazy for a player like Stephen Gilmore to be selected over Morris Claiborne at this point in time, it's actually a very real possibility. Every year a team throws everybody off early in the draft. The fact is these teams watch more film than we or the media and they derive their own rankings. So, while it's not realistic, it certainly shows quite a few players who some of you may be "surprised" to see selected earlier than their more "elite" counterparts.

[Complex]

Originally Posted by SenorGato

What's so crzy about Gilmore as the top CB? The guy is quality stuff...

Lance Lewis made him his *****.

[bornnraisedwhodat]

Waaaahhhh........His mock is not like the 100 million other mocks out there, its tuuurble!!

[phlysac]

My only frustration is that he repeatedly says how everything is based solely on tape. "I watch tape." ad nauseum...

and then he says things like "intriguing combination of size, length and athletic movement."

What does that have to do with tape? Measureables and tape are different. He's absolutely accurate in combining the measureables with what is seen on tape, but for him to say his opinion is solely due to tape, I feel in untrue.

[jackalope]

Originally Posted by phlysac

My only frustration is that he repeatedly says how everything is based solely on tape. "I watch tape." ad nauseum...

and then he says things like "intriguing combination of size, length and athletic movement."

What does that have to do with tape? Measureables and tape are different. He's absolutely accurate in combining the measureables with what is seen on tape, but for him to say his opinion is solely due to tape, I feel in untrue.

Well, you can understand a player's athletic ability and physical potential from watching his play. Just watching tape doesn't mean you only look at the end result of the play. You see how the guy plays and use it to project how they'll adjust to the NFL.

[Shane P. Hallam]

Originally Posted by jackalope

Well, you can understand a player's athletic ability and physical potential from watching his play. Just watching tape doesn't mean you only look at the end result of the play. You see how the guy plays and use it to project how they'll adjust to the NFL.

QFT. Greg evaluates players on tape and you can DEFINITELY tell length and athletic ability from that.

[hagy34]

Originally Posted by Wrathman

Cosell mentioned that he hates mocks but he would do one in a very different style than the typical mock. He did exactly what he said he would do and people are whining because he didn't do something else.

I don't get it.

You're mistaken. I'm not whining. I'm simply saying that the mock is pointless. Just because he's a member of the media doesn't mean that the mock isn't stupid. If I posted that mock on the forum I would get roasted by the majority of posters.

That is just a fact.

[jackalope]

Originally Posted by hagy34

You're mistaken. I'm not whining. I'm simply saying that the mock is pointless. Just because he's a member of the media doesn't mean that the mock isn't stupid. If I posted that mock on the forum I would get roasted by the majority of posters.

That is just a fact.

If you came on and said, "I've spent countless hours evaluating players on coach's tape, and I'm going to use a mock draft format to present and explain my rankings and evaluations of players," I don't think people would roast you.

[phlysac]

Originally Posted by Shane P. Hallam

QFT. Greg evaluates players on tape and you can DEFINITELY tell length and athletic ability from that.

But it's still a projection based upon a measureable as opposed to actually production on the field.

Like I said, he's accurate in combining the facts to make an educated projection. But that, at least to me, isn't simply film evaluation.

[Wrathman]

Originally Posted by jackalope

If you came on and said, "I've spent countless hours evaluating players on coach's tape, and I'm going to use a mock draft format to present and explain my rankings and evaluations of players," I don't think people would roast you.

Exactly, context is the difference.

Cosell provided context for his mock, but I see a lot of comments that demonstrate some don't get the context. It clearly doesn't fit in the box of what most of us expect in a mock, but there's no excuse for those who blew it up for this when, as I just mentioned, it was put into context before he ever started.

[Wrathman]

Originally Posted by phlysac

But it's still a projection based upon a measureable as opposed to actually production on the field.

Like I said, he's accurate in combining the facts to make an educated projection. But that, at least to me, isn't simply film evaluation.

I disagree.

A player demonstrates length on the field by reaching to bat down balls, grab ball-carriers and/or keep defensive linemen off him. That you can see on film.

A measurable is saying someone has an 84" wingspan, so he must be able to knock down passes at the line of scrimmage or reach over cornerbacks on jump balls. This is a supposition based on a measureable that may or may not be true.

[phlysac]

Originally Posted by Wrathman

I disagree.

A player demonstrates length on the field by reaching to bat down balls, grab ball-carriers and/or keep defensive linemen off him. That you can see on film.

A measurable is saying someone has an 84" wingspan, so he must be able to knock down passes at the line of scrimmage or reach over cornerbacks on jump balls. This is a supposition based on a measureable that may or may not be true.

I agree with you. The difference is you made a direct correlation between the observation "length" with something directly viewed on tape.

A player can have great length but not utilize it well on the field. Saying "he has great length and athleticism" without direct context doesn't necesarily mean it's observeable production on the field.

Picking nits I think. I agree that you can see production on the field based upon a measureable attribute.

[whatadai]

I think he's overrated and his head has grown too big.

Greg Cosell's past evaluations...

-Andy Dalton is a 4th round talent and needs a strong running game to be successful.
-Ranked CBs in 2011: 1. Jimmy Smith, 2. Patrick Peterson, 3. Prince Amukamura...4 days later he ranks his top 5 in 2011: 1. AJ Green, 2. Patrick Peterson, 3. Von Miller, 4. Marcel Dareus, 5. Nick Fairley
-Miami's Mike Pouncey would be a worse player than his brother, Pittsburgh's Maurkice Pouncey.
-Had Ponder and Stanzi as his 1 and 2 for the 2011 NFL draft
-Ranked Beck higher than Ponder and Dalton after the 2011 NFL draft
-Thought Henne and Beck would be starting QBs coming out of college.
-Thought JaMarcus Russell would be a great QB and that he threw well without planting his feet.

I'm too lazy to list more. But seriously...I wonder if he accidentally said Russell was great at throwing without planting his feet when he meant to say Russell was great at throwing at feet.

[Bixby (Thumper)]

Never go full meta.

[hagy34]

Originally Posted by jackalope

If you came on and said, "I've spent countless hours evaluating players on coach's tape, and I'm going to use a mock draft format to present and explain my rankings and evaluations of players," I don't think people would roast you.

I disagree. I would also go as far to say that if I walked into every war room on draft day and explained to the GM that Janoris Jenkins was worth the risk at 5 I would be laughed at.

Watching a lot of film doesn't mean that you are exempt from criticism. And just because he said his mock would be different doesn't mean it can't be criticized either.

The fact is he makes a few outrageous predictions that will prove out come draft day. If teams actually wanted to select certain guys this high then they would be willing to move down at a very small price.

Value is key in a mock draft and he is just off base in this case.

[Master Exploder]

Originally Posted by whatadai

I think he's overrated and his head has grown too big.

Greg Cosell's past evaluations...

-Andy Dalton is a 4th round talent and needs a strong running game to be successful.
-Ranked CBs in 2011: 1. Jimmy Smith, 2. Patrick Peterson, 3. Prince Amukamura...4 days later he ranks his top 5 in 2011: 1. AJ Green, 2. Patrick Peterson, 3. Von Miller, 4. Marcel Dareus, 5. Nick Fairley
-Miami's Mike Pouncey would be a worse player than his brother, Pittsburgh's Maurkice Pouncey.
-Had Ponder and Stanzi as his 1 and 2 for the 2011 NFL draft
-Ranked Beck higher than Ponder and Dalton after the 2011 NFL draft
-Thought Henne and Beck would be starting QBs coming out of college.
-Thought JaMarcus Russell would be a great QB and that he threw well without planting his feet.

I'm too lazy to list more. But seriously...I wonder if he accidentally said Russell was great at throwing without planting his feet when he meant to say Russell was great at throwing at feet.

A lot of people liked Russell, Henne, and Beck. They were all good prospects. The rest of the rankings are too early to tell, obviously.

[Master Exploder]

Originally Posted by hagy34

I disagree. I would also go as far to say that if I walked into every war room on draft day and explained to the GM that Janoris Jenkins was worth the risk at 5 I would be laughed at.

Watching a lot of film doesn't mean that you are exempt from criticism. And just because he said his mock would be different doesn't mean it can't be criticized either.

The fact is he makes a few outrageous predictions that will prove out come draft day. If teams actually wanted to select certain guys this high then they would be willing to move down at a very small price.

Value is key in a mock draft and he is just off base in this case.

You obviously missed the point. Greg Cosell knows that Janoris Jenkins isn't going to be a top 5 pick. He just thinks his game tape looks better than Morris Claiborne's and I actually agree with him.

You should re-read this part "The main objective of my mock is to further discuss the top players by putting them in a draft format."

[whatadai]

Originally Posted by Master Exploder

A lot of people liked Russell, Henne, and Beck. They were all good prospects. The rest of the rankings are too early to tell, obviously.

So a lot of people are just as bad at analyzing draft prospects as Cosell...even though he watches thousands of hours of gametape...honestly...if you watch that many hours of gametape I'd expect you to at least be closer to the truth. Just cause you watch a lot of gametape doesn't mean you know what you're looking for in them.

[Master Exploder]

Originally Posted by whatadai

So a lot of people are just as bad at analyzing draft prospects as Cosell...even though he watches thousands of hours of gametape...honestly...if you watch that many hours of gametape I'd expect you to at least be closer to the truth. Just cause you watch a lot of gametape doesn't mean you know what you're looking for in them.

Have you ever watched JaMarcus Russell in college?

[hagy34]

Originally Posted by Master Exploder

You obviously missed the point. Greg Cosell knows that Janoris Jenkins isn't going to be a top 5 pick. He just thinks his game tape looks better than Morris Claiborne's and I actually agree with him.

You should re-read this part "The main objective of my mock is to further discuss the top players by putting them in a draft format."

I didn't miss the point at all. I'm also not arguing the tape of Jenkins vs. Claiborne.

My point is that if you want to produce rankings or a mock draft you need to include things aside from straight game tape into them. The way I look at it is if NFL teams consider other things when drafting then rankings and mocks should as well.

Jenkins would have to be far and away better on film in order to justify ranking him ahead of Claiborne.

[Master Exploder]

Originally Posted by hagy34

I didn't miss the point at all. I'm also not arguing the tape of Jenkins vs. Claiborne.

My point is that if you want to produce rankings or a mock draft you need to include things aside from straight game tape into them. The way I look at it is if NFL teams consider other things when drafting then rankings and mocks should as well.

Jenkins would have to be far and away better on film in order to justify ranking him ahead of Claiborne.

There are literally millions of different ways to rank players. He is simply using different parameters to rank them by. He specifically stated that they are not over-all rankings and yet you have a problem with them for some reason. He put them in a mock draft format to make things a bit more fun for readers. It's clearly not meant to be taken seriously. It's meant to provide an alternative point of view from what we are used to in a "fun" environment.

[killxswitch]

You dorks talking about how we are "missing the point" are missing the point. No one cares that he has a different view of some prospects. Whoopity ****. The point is that this isn't a mock. It's a big board dressed up like a mock. A mock, to most people is an attempt at accuracy. It is a prediction based on research. Cosell's "mock" is just a big board with explanations on his ratings and a little bit of team need thrown in to make it not quite a big board. It is pointless. I respect him as a talent evaluator, he's watched more tape than any of us on this board. But given all that, this is a pretty ****** representation of his efforts.

[hagy34]

I'm simply stating that I disagree with them. Obviously I don't know as much as Greg Cosell and I'm wrong.

[jackalope]

Originally Posted by whatadai

So a lot of people are just as bad at analyzing draft prospects as Cosell...even though he watches thousands of hours of gametape...honestly...if you watch that many hours of gametape I'd expect you to at least be closer to the truth. Just cause you watch a lot of gametape doesn't mean you know what you're looking for in them.

There are hundreds of people working in the NFL who watch hours upon hours of film, and yet the draft is a complete crap-shoot filled with misses. This isn't unique to Cosell.

[PossibleCabbage]

I honestly think that if someone watches a serious amount of tape, the best way to write a mock draft is to draft as though you are the GM of all 32 teams, rather than trying to project what will actually happen.

I'm honestly kind of sick of mock drafters trying to get every pick absolutely right, and overreacting to every single report from NFL sources this time of year. I mean, if Mayock really thought Chandler Jones was one of the ten best prospects and the best DE in the draft, why on earth wasn't he telling us this two weeks ago? This wasn't a realization Mayock had himself from watching tape, it was just based on stuff he was told.

If you actually evaluate prospects yourself, then the most honest way to mock is based solely on your own evaluations.