About those "anonymous scouts"

[Alexander]

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/172974292/nfl-draft-anonymous-scouts

Pretty interesting write up.

 

[Idgit]

Yeah, this is good stuff. Thanks for sharing it.

 

[slick325]

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/172974292/nfl-draft-anonymous-scouts

Pretty interesting write up.

Good read. Thanks.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Or it could be the writers just making up these sources. Been known to happen.






YR

 

[skinsscalper]

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/172974292/nfl-draft-anonymous-scouts

Pretty interesting write up.

Good stuff. Thanks for posting.

 

[Rogerthat12]

Enjoyed the read, thank you for posting!

 

[tyke1doe]

The entire scouting department was called into a meeting, and everyone was given the same stern lecture from upper management: Nobody here had better be spilling to the media about who they like.

Exactly as I've said.

 

[RS12]

Doubt Bob McGinn makes stuff up.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Always love this stuff.

 

[Alexander]

Or it could be the writers just making up these sources. Been known to happen.

I am sure some do, but there seems to be a running sentiment that they are all faked, which I don't believe.

As the article suggests, sometimes this is the only time scouts get some attention. In some places, they are treated like second class citizens after the coaches and GM wreck their work and flip a board upside down.

That's why sometimes the earlier buzz you hear about some prospects right around the end of the season before the Combine is more "pure", simply because coaches and front office types aren't involved in the process yet. That is solely off tape. Not interviews or workouts.

I firmly believe the healthiest front offices have the best relationship with their scouts. Those that don't tend to be more on the dysfunctional side.

 

[Risen Star]

Frankly I think the lady who finds this so "offensive" is the face of the destruction of American society. Everyone's a victim of something. Let's meet at a safe space and talk about our feelings.

I have no problem with anonymous scouts. I understand why they have to remain anonymous. I understand the process. And I don't give a rat's behind if any of their comments offend anyone.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I am sure some do, but there seems to be a running sentiment that they are all faked, which I don't believe.

As the article suggests, sometimes this is the only time scouts get some attention. In some places, they are treated like second class citizens after the coaches and GM wreck their work and flip a board upside down.

That's why sometimes the earlier buzz you hear about some prospects right around the end of the season before the Combine is more "pure", simply because coaches and front office types aren't involved in the process yet. That is solely off tape. Not interviews or workouts.

I firmly believe the healthiest front offices have the best relationship with their scouts. Those that don't tend to be more on the dysfunctional side.

I thought the article showed that many scouts struggle with allowing their personal biases that have nothing to do with football get in the way of their judgment. One scout obviously didn't like Jameis Winston, perhaps because of his rape case at FSU or perhaps getting blown off by Jameis, and let it influence his judgment. It's much like Moneyball where the scouts let trivial things like the attractiveness of the player's girlfriend influence their analysis of a player.

And then you have the reporter that gleefully reports this stuff without following thru to see why this anonymous source may feel that way. Especially if that scout has been wrong many times before...the reporter gets their soundbyte and that is all that matters.

And scouts can't have it all one way. The GM, the coach and the position coaches play a vital role in the process as well. We didn't want Sharrif Floyd because he didn't fit Kiffin's defense. How the scouts missed that one was an embarrassment to the scouts. They got upset because we ended up with Travis Frederick, somebody the scouts thought was a 2nd rounder and he's already one of the best centers in the league.





YR

 

[Alexander]

I thought the article showed that many scouts struggle with allowing their personal biases that have nothing to do with football get in the way of their judgment. One scout obviously didn't like Jameis Winston, perhaps because of his rape case at FSU or perhaps getting blown off by Jameis, and let it influence his judgment. It's much like Moneyball where the scouts let trivial things like the attractiveness of the player's girlfriend influence their analysis of a player.

Part of their job is to dig into character. I am just saying it is odd how that kind of deep dive into a player's situation is viewed.

They put in the work. And let's just assume for every Winston, there is a Manziel or Leaf they were right about.

From the way this article sounds the talent evaluation portion is trending towards minimizing those who are paid to find out these details.

And scouts can't have it all one way. The GM, the coach and the position coaches play a vital role in the process as well. We didn't want Sharrif Floyd because he didn't fit Kiffin's defense. How the scouts missed that one was an embarrassment to the scouts. They got upset because we ended up with Travis Frederick, somebody the scouts thought was a 2nd rounder and he's already one of the best centers in the league.

Coaches are the worst evaluators of talent. They are not objective. They are under the microscope with pressure to produce and most of the time they spend very little time getting to know the players on a personal level.

How many times in the minus-Johnson era have we heard of coaches swaying Jones' ear? Too many to count.

That is why the communication gap is so hard to bridge. If people say McClay is doing that, great.

All I know, and as this article pointed out, there was a big issue when Frederick was picked.



YR[/quote]

 

[conner01]

Part of their job is to dig into character. I am just saying it is odd how that kind of deep dive into a player's situation is viewed.

They put in the work. And let's just assume for every Winston, there is a Manziel or Leaf they were right about.

From the way this article sounds the talent evaluation portion is trending towards minimizing those who are paid to find out these details.



Coaches are the worst evaluators of talent. They are not objective. They are under the microscope with pressure to produce and most of the time they spend very little time getting to know the players on a personal level.

How many times in the minus-Johnson era have we heard of coaches swaying Jones' ear? Too many to count.

That is why the communication gap is so hard to bridge. If people say McClay is doing that, great.

All I know, and as this article pointed out, there was a big issue when Frederick was picked.



YR

[/quote]

Who ever made the decision on Fred should be making more of them
It's a hard process. It's not just about the football player but also the person. Evaluating talent is hard, evaluating what kind of person you are dealing with is even harder

 

[arglebargle]

I thought the article showed that many scouts struggle with allowing their personal biases that have nothing to do with football get in the way of their judgment. One scout obviously didn't like Jameis Winston, perhaps because of his rape case at FSU or perhaps getting blown off by Jameis, and let it influence his judgment. It's much like Moneyball where the scouts let trivial things like the attractiveness of the player's girlfriend influence their analysis of a player.

And then you have the reporter that gleefully reports this stuff without following thru to see why this anonymous source may feel that way. Especially if that scout has been wrong many times before...the reporter gets their soundbyte and that is all that matters.

And scouts can't have it all one way. The GM, the coach and the position coaches play a vital role in the process as well. We didn't want Sharrif Floyd because he didn't fit Kiffin's defense. How the scouts missed that one was an embarrassment to the scouts. They got upset because we ended up with Travis Frederick, somebody the scouts thought was a 2nd rounder and he's already one of the best centers in the league.





YR

Kiffin and Marinelli got snagged as coaches late in the process. They spent much of the early part of that year watching tape on the Cowboys players, so they'd have an idea what they did have. You didn't get the full sequence of communication between coaches, scouts, and front office, due to the booting of Ryan and the new folks getting up to speed. That year, during the college season and beyond, the scouts were working from the template of players that fit Ryan's 3-4 scheme. Gears didn't get changed fast enough. That lack of co-ordination probably led to McClay's ascendancy as a mover and shaker in the Cowboys hierarchy.

 

[Risen Star]

I see a future of draft reports without any negative comments. These are kids after all. We must protect them.

Maybe it'll get to the point where excluding anyone from their dream of playing in the NFL, which is their right as a human being, gets you picketed as Hitler.

 

[Fredd]

Who ever made the decision on Fred should be making more of them
It's a hard process. It's not just about the football player but also the person. Evaluating talent is hard, evaluating what kind of person you are dealing with is even harder[/quote]

I am Fredd, and I approve of this message

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Who ever made the decision on Fred should be making more of them
It's a hard process. It's not just about the football player but also the person. Evaluating talent is hard, evaluating what kind of person you are dealing with is even harder

Fred wasn't picked by the scouts. They wanted Floyd.

Callahan, a coach, convinced them to draft Fred.

I find position coaches to be the most critical of the process. They are the bridge between the HC and the scouts. In fact, many scouts are former position coaches and vice versa.




YR

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Kiffin and Marinelli got snagged as coaches late in the process. They spent much of the early part of that year watching tape on the Cowboys players, so they'd have an idea what they did have. You didn't get the full sequence of communication between coaches, scouts, and front office, due to the booting of Ryan and the new folks getting up to speed. That year, during the college season and beyond, the scouts were working from the template of players that fit Ryan's 3-4 scheme. Gears didn't get changed fast enough. That lack of co-ordination probably led to McClay's ascendancy as a mover and shaker in the Cowboys hierarchy.

I think the lack of coordination absolutely led to McClay's new position. I think it was an indictment on Ciskowski because the error in judgment was so brutally obvious by the scouts and the communication was obviously unclear. I don't think it's hard to give scouts the first page of Kiffin's defensive playbook where they discuss overall strategies and what they are looking for in personnel and how the D-Linemen are called 'rushmen' instead and their job is to get upfield.






YR

 

[dogunwo]

Frankly I think the lady who finds this so "offensive" is the face of the destruction of American society. Everyone's a victim of something. Let's meet at a safe space and talk about our feelings.

I have no problem with anonymous scouts. I understand why they have to remain anonymous. I understand the process. And I don't give a rat's behind if any of their comments offend anyone.

I have no issue with anonymous scouts either. I just wish that the guys who are in the media who get paid for their opinion get held accountable for their predictions about players right or wrong instead of it just being forgotten. Someone needs to ask Terry Bradshaw about his horrifically wrong opinion about Cam Newton for example.