Ex Scouts from the Cowboys

[xwalker]

I was listening to Glenn “Stretch” Smith on the radio yesterday. It occurred to me that he sounds very dumb. He sounds like a guy that would have a hard time operating a cash register at McDonalds and is lucky that he got work in football.

Smith is the 2nd ex-scout from the Cowboys that is now in the media. Brian Broaddus was with ESPN radio and then went to work for the Cowboys. Similar to Smith, I find Broaddus to be somewhat dumb. He obviously has some knowledge of football and the draft from being a scout; however, anytime that he tries to use logic it seems to fail. He says many things that don’t make sense and his writing style is similar to a 5th grader’s.

The other thing that both Smith and Broaddus have in common is that they apprear to often be intentionally vague. This seems to be a conditioned response with the goal of covering-their-backsides (CYA) and not being blamed for failed opinions. Many of Broaddus’ player evaluations are written in a manner that could be interpreted differently depending on who is reading them. My guess is that this is an intentional style that was developed to avoid being blamed when draft picks fail. He can always say that his bosses misinterpreted his analysis.

I will give Broaddus credit for having a much better and more professional presentation than the other guys (Derek Eagleton, Nick Eatman) in the videos on the Cowboys website.

I feel somewhat bad about criticizing Broaddus because he seems like a nice guy and is not an evil media guy like Skip Bayless or anything of that nature.

I’m just curious if these guys represent NFL scouts in general or if they represent the reasons that the Cowboys have failed at the draft in the past.

 

[Staggerlee]

I was listening to Glenn “Stretch” Smith on the radio yesterday. It occurred to me that he sounds very dumb. He sounds like a guy that would have a hard time operating a cash register at McDonalds and is lucky that he got work in football.

Smith is the 2nd ex-scout from the Cowboys that is now in the media. Brian Broaddus was with ESPN radio and then went to work for the Cowboys. Similar to Smith, I find Broaddus to be somewhat dumb. He obviously has some knowledge of football and the draft from being a scout; however, anytime that he tries to use logic it seems to fail. He says many things that don’t make sense and his writing style is similar to a 5th grader’s.

The other thing that both Smith and Broaddus have in common is that they apprear to often be intentionally vague. This seems to be a conditioned response with the goal of covering-their-backsides (CYA) and not being blamed for failed opinions. Many of Broaddus’ player evaluations are written in a manner that could be interpreted differently depending on who is reading them. My guess is that this is an intentional style that was developed to avoid being blamed when draft picks fail. He can always say that his bosses misinterpreted his analysis.

I will give Broaddus credit for having a much better and more professional presentation than the other guys (Derek Eagleton, Nick Eatman) in the videos on the Cowboys website.

I feel somewhat bad about criticizing Broaddus because he seems like a nice guy and is not an evil media guy like Skip Bayless or anything of that nature.

I’m just curious if these guys represent NFL scouts in general or if they represent the reasons that the Cowboys have failed at the draft in the past.

Not much of an opinion on this whole matter but I would say that the format of a scout's analysis is probably pretty standard across the nfl. Not sure on that obviously, maybe couchscout could shed more light on this.

Also, I think that there are different types of intelligence and just because one's writing style or use of logic isn't superior doesn't necessarily make them dumb. Skills are skills and are acquired through work and practice. I don't view my college professor as being superior to my mechanic in any way, except maybe economically. They both can do things the other can't.

 

[RS12]

All I'll say is that since Broaddus gets his income from the Cowboys, I question what he actually thinks versus what he writes and says. We all gotta eat. BTW there hasnt been a scout yet that hasnt been wrong about multiple players. Maybe the ones who are wrong more often end up in the media.

 

[TheSport78]

I don't even listen to what guys like Ed Cahill and Derek Eagleton say. Even Nick Eatman has been disappointing as of late.

Broaddus, all day.

 

[Machete]

I'm a fan of Broaddus, and not to familiar with Stretch. Broaddus presents his results with no fluff. If the guy can't run, block, or throw, he'll tell you in as few words as possible. It may be the way scouts talk and present their material to the GM and coach. Rather than present a huge report on the players, you sum it up in a few lines, with key words that GMs or coaches are able to understand. And I certainly don't think it is a lack of intelligence.

 

[Manster54]

Not much of an opinion on this whole matter but I would say that the format of a scout's analysis is probably pretty standard across the nfl. Not sure on that obviously, maybe couchscout could shed more light on this.

Also, I think that there are different types of intelligence and just because one's writing style or use of logic isn't superior doesn't necessarily make them dumb. Skills are skills and are acquired through work and practice. I don't view my college professor as being superior to my mechanic in any way, except maybe economically. They both can do things the other can't.

"8 year olds dude"

 

[Seven]

I was listening to Glenn “Stretch” Smith on the radio yesterday. It occurred to me that he sounds very dumb. He sounds like a guy that would have a hard time operating a cash register at McDonalds and is lucky that he got work in football.

Smith is the 2nd ex-scout from the Cowboys that is now in the media. Brian Broaddus was with ESPN radio and then went to work for the Cowboys. Similar to Smith, I find Broaddus to be somewhat dumb. He obviously has some knowledge of football and the draft from being a scout; however, anytime that he tries to use logic it seems to fail. He says many things that don’t make sense and his writing style is similar to a 5th grader’s.

The other thing that both Smith and Broaddus have in common is that they apprear to often be intentionally vague. This seems to be a conditioned response with the goal of covering-their-backsides (CYA) and not being blamed for failed opinions. Many of Broaddus’ player evaluations are written in a manner that could be interpreted differently depending on who is reading them. My guess is that this is an intentional style that was developed to avoid being blamed when draft picks fail. He can always say that his bosses misinterpreted his analysis.

I will give Broaddus credit for having a much better and more professional presentation than the other guys (Derek Eagleton, Nick Eatman) in the videos on the Cowboys website.

I feel somewhat bad about criticizing Broaddus because he seems like a nice guy and is not an evil media guy like Skip Bayless or anything of that nature.

I’m just curious if these guys represent NFL scouts in general or if they represent the reasons that the Cowboys have failed at the draft in the past.

Failed drafts also fall into the laps of the GM's. One with a clue and isn't the owner.

 

[Verdict]

I was listening to Glenn “Stretch” Smith on the radio yesterday. It occurred to me that he sounds very dumb. He sounds like a guy that would have a hard time operating a cash register at McDonalds and is lucky that he got work in football.

Smith is the 2nd ex-scout from the Cowboys that is now in the media. Brian Broaddus was with ESPN radio and then went to work for the Cowboys. Similar to Smith, I find Broaddus to be somewhat dumb. He obviously has some knowledge of football and the draft from being a scout; however, anytime that he tries to use logic it seems to fail. He says many things that don’t make sense and his writing style is similar to a 5th grader’s.

The other thing that both Smith and Broaddus have in common is that they apprear to often be intentionally vague. This seems to be a conditioned response with the goal of covering-their-backsides (CYA) and not being blamed for failed opinions. Many of Broaddus’ player evaluations are written in a manner that could be interpreted differently depending on who is reading them. My guess is that this is an intentional style that was developed to avoid being blamed when draft picks fail. He can always say that his bosses misinterpreted his analysis.

I will give Broaddus credit for having a much better and more professional presentation than the other guys (Derek Eagleton, Nick Eatman) in the videos on the Cowboys website.

I feel somewhat bad about criticizing Broaddus because he seems like a nice guy and is not an evil media guy like Skip Bayless or anything of that nature.

I’m just curious if these guys represent NFL scouts in general or if they represent the reasons that the Cowboys have failed at the draft in the past.

I'll be honest. I read people for a living and am very good at it. But Broaddus is one of those guys that is really hard to get a read on. At times he seems spot on and his analysis of a player seems pretty sound. At other times it makes you wonder what in the world he is thinking.

My best guess on Broaddus is that if he really has scouted a player and has done his homework he probably does a decent job at talent evaluation. On the other hand, he is doing more talking than scouting at this point and he is expressing opinions formed based on less actual scouting (in some cases none) so he is just spouting off uninformed opinions some of the time.

Also since he is working for the Cowboys he may try to talk a particular player up or down to suit the Cowboys' interests, and if so, then he is just doing his job.

I will say that the guy is awesome about replying to tweets. He is on that like a duck on a june bug.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Not much of an opinion on this whole matter but I would say that the format of a scout's analysis is probably pretty standard across the nfl. Not sure on that obviously, maybe couchscout could shed more light on this.

Also, I think that there are different types of intelligence and just because one's writing style or use of logic isn't superior doesn't necessarily make them dumb. Skills are skills and are acquired through work and practice. I don't view my college professor as being superior to my mechanic in any way, except maybe economically. They both can do things the other can't.

Absolutely correct. It's ridiculous to conclude that these guys are "dumb" based on the way they sound on the radio. I'm guessing the OP thinks Smith in particular sounds stupid because he has the Texas accent thing going... Well, that means nothing when it comes to evaluating football players. That C.O. Brocato from the Titans is one of the most highly respected scouts anywhere and he supposedly is about as country as it gets... Doesn't mean he's not good at his job.

Your mechanic example is a good one and one I've thought of many times. Evaluating football players is a skill, much like being a good mechanic, that isn't readily apparent by outward appearance or dialect.

From what I've heard, Smith is a lot better than Broaddus. Broaddus has very thin skin (as many of our inboxes have learned) and gets defensive easily, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's one thing Parcells didn't like about him. Smith at least has a forceful personality and strong beliefs. That doesn't mean that either one is a better football talent evaluator than the other, though.

 

[DFWJC]

I was listening to Glenn “Stretch” Smith on the radio yesterday. It occurred to me that he sounds very dumb. He sounds like a guy that would have a hard time operating a cash register at McDonalds and is lucky that he got work in football.
.

Was this really necessary?

 

[Idgit]

I like Broaddus. And I appreciate what he's done to raise the level of football sophistication in the local coverage. And he seems like a nice guy. I do think sometimes he's more opinionated than he is smart.

As you mention in the OP, he's not a logical thinker. But it's possible one can be very good at analysis and pattern recognition without a lick of logic.

All a good scout really needs to do is understand the traits a team looks for at each position and then review enough players to find the best fits for that set of traits. That takes a real understanding of what's wanted, and enormous diligence and patience to grade and score that much data. It's a mistake to then think these guys are any better than anyone else at predicting how their grades compare to another teams' with an entirely different set of objectives and traits they're looking for.

That said, I agree that Broaddus draws some strange conclusions sometimes.

As to scouts in general, I imagine it's a career area where a lot of them are still not comfortable with this internet thing. There's a wealth of football knowledge that's only learned over significant time, and mostly not online. I don't imagine that knowledge has been effectively translated to a generation that's as comfortable with a keyboard as they are a football. That time has got to be coming, soon, though. I bet there's a generation of up-and-coming scouts that are fairly threatening to the established old-boys' network.

 

[Idgit]

...Your mechanic example is a good one and one I've thought of many times. Evaluating football players is a skill, much like being a good mechanic, that isn't readily apparent by outward appearance or dialect.

This is a really good analogy.

 

[DFWJC]

I like Broaddus. And I appreciate what he's done to raise the level of football sophistication in the local coverage. And he seems like a nice guy. I do think sometimes he's more opinionated than he is smart.

As you mention in the OP, he's not a logical thinker. But it's possible one can be very good at analysis and pattern recognition without a lick of logic.

All a good scout really needs to do is understand the traits a team looks for at each position and then review enough players to find the best fits for that set of traits. That takes a real understanding of what's wanted, and enormous diligence and patience to grade and score that much data. It's a mistake to then think these guys are any better than anyone else at predicting how their grades compare to another teams' with an entirely different set of objectives and traits they're looking for.

That said, I agree that Broaddus draws some strange conclusions sometimes.

As to scouts in general, I imagine it's a career area where a lot of them are still not comfortable with this internet thing. There's a wealth of football knowledge that's only learned over significant time, and mostly not online. I don't imagine that knowledge has been effectively translated to a generation that's as comfortable with a keyboard as they are a football. That time has got to be coming, soon, though. I bet there's a generation of up-and-coming scouts that are fairly threatening to the established old-boys' network.

It would fun to have a data base that has our draft picks each year, or at least those that would like to participate. Those picks would not be predictions of who Dallas will pick, but real time who they should pick with the actual pick they are using while Dallas is on the clock.

Too bad it'd be so hard to do--as everyone can't be online during the draft.

In any case, it'd be fun but humbling a year or so later as we found out how good each player was or was not.

 

[jterrell]

various....

1st being a scout is a remarkable and hard job. It is low paying, involves insane travel, and the best of the best are wrong more than they are right. They have to know when to fight for players and when to just let the thing breathe. When to concede to colleagues and when to double-check their own opinions. I respect the grind those guys go through. I dont need scouts that are eloquent and polished. I need them to identify talent and see potential.

Media and Scouting are very separate entities. I like what Galloway has done by giving former scouts a radio voice. To me Broaddus has done a great job in that regard. Unfortunately as noted by the OP his media presence has also lent itself to scrutiny for his scouting and he hasn't stood up as well there. He has well-formed opinions but they seem to contradict other data and thus far his pet cats haven't really panned out. Of late he tries to predict what Dallas feels thus distancing himself from the opinion. Not a bad tactic if also a bit slick. Very media.

Stretch Smith... I have to agree that right now he really doesn't seem a good fit for radio. Especially not in extended runs. His football opinions are often just odd. Definitely not mainstream football thought. Not sure if this is more his "radio" voice talking or his actual beliefs. But I'd say right now he is struggling to find his footing as a media member the way Broaddus has done so well.

 

[Bluestang]

The style of writing is developed from a short hand that scouts use when evaluating players. When a scout evaluates a player they have to observe and write at the same time so they use a lot of short hand. Steve Belichek emphasized how important this was in his book and it probably is something that it standardized in the scouting community.

I like both Broaddus and Smith and both guys are very different in terms of media skills. At times I feel bad for Smith because he has to work with Galloway and Mosley who are the masters of baited questions. To his credit though he does give a straight answer even though the questioning though is annoying. Broaddus is pretty good too and he isn't afraid to voice his opinions either. Broaddus had to deal with the same nonsense at ESPN too. When he talks on Talkin Cowboys he often brings up his concerns of the team but it is Mickey who usually deflects the conversation elsewhere or disputes it with his interpretation. He is also very straight forward on Twitter. Matter of fact Broaddus exposed PFF's main issue with their grading last year and that was that they do not use the ALL22 to grade players and called them out on it.

 

[Verdict]

Mickey must have some pictures of someone doing something really strange to have the job he has. Mickey really isn't very good at what he does in my humble opinion.

 

[AsthmaField]

Yeah, it's probably best not to go around calling people stupid. Particularly because of the way they talk or put together written words.

There are some really smart people who aren't good with grammar, while conversely, there are some people who can write well that aren't very smart.

The mechanic analogy is an apt one and something that should be kept in mind while cruising around the internet, judging people's intelligence based on the words they write.

 

[xwalker]

Absolutely correct. It's ridiculous to conclude that these guys are "dumb" based on the way they sound on the radio. I'm guessing the OP thinks Smith in particular sounds stupid because he has the Texas accent thing going... Well, that means nothing when it comes to evaluating football players. That C.O. Brocato from the Titans is one of the most highly respected scouts anywhere and he supposedly is about as country as it gets... Doesn't mean he's not good at his job.

I was born in Texas and have always lived in Texas. My parents and grandparents were born in Texas.

To me, Smith does not sound like he has an "accent". He just sounds normal. If I were criticizing someone because I didn't like their "accent", it would be someone like Collin Cowherd.

 

[Hoofbite]

I was listening to Glenn “Stretch” Smith on the radio yesterday. It occurred to me that he sounds very dumb. He sounds like a guy that would have a hard time operating a cash register at McDonalds and is lucky that he got work in football.

Smith is the 2nd ex-scout from the Cowboys that is now in the media. Brian Broaddus was with ESPN radio and then went to work for the Cowboys. Similar to Smith, I find Broaddus to be somewhat dumb. He obviously has some knowledge of football and the draft from being a scout; however, anytime that he tries to use logic it seems to fail. He says many things that don’t make sense and his writing style is similar to a 5th grader’s.

The other thing that both Smith and Broaddus have in common is that they apprear to often be intentionally vague. This seems to be a conditioned response with the goal of covering-their-backsides (CYA) and not being blamed for failed opinions. Many of Broaddus’ player evaluations are written in a manner that could be interpreted differently depending on who is reading them. My guess is that this is an intentional style that was developed to avoid being blamed when draft picks fail. He can always say that his bosses misinterpreted his analysis.

I will give Broaddus credit for having a much better and more professional presentation than the other guys (Derek Eagleton, Nick Eatman) in the videos on the Cowboys website.

I feel somewhat bad about criticizing Broaddus because he seems like a nice guy and is not an evil media guy like Skip Bayless or anything of that nature.

I’m just curious if these guys represent NFL scouts in general or if they represent the reasons that the Cowboys have failed at the draft in the past.

There was a video on NFL.com I think where Eric Winston rumors had just popped up and Broaddus pulled out the ol', "There are people who report about what happens at Valley Ranch and there are people who live at Valley Ranch. I live here, I'm telling you it's completely inaccurate".

Just a little amusing to see him sort of thump his chest like that.

 

[xwalker]

Yeah, it's probably best not to go around calling people stupid. Particularly because of the way they talk or put together written words.

There are some really smart people who aren't good with grammar, while conversely, there are some people who can write well that aren't very smart.

The mechanic analogy is an apt one and something that should be kept in mind while cruising around the internet, judging people's intelligence based on the words they write.

I'm not calling out a mechanic for his writing ability. I'm criticizing a person that gets paid to write.

There have been tens of thousands of posts here about Jerry's intelligence and the way that he talks.

Part of the intent of my OP was that possibly people other than Jerry have contributed to failed drafts in the past. I'm curious if Glenn Smith was ousted by Garrett similar to how Larry Lacewell and Brian Broaddus were ousted by Parcells.