DCOrange

Seems like it’s down to us, WKU, and San Diego State from what I’ve been reading. It’s played out in our favor to get to this point at least but you could make a good case for any of the remaining 3 schools.

I haven’t watched anything outside of a highlights video of him so far. Seems like a more mobile big man than any of our current centers based on that but aside from that I wouldn’t be confident saying anything.

He's the most excited I've been about an SU recruit since Lydon or possibly even MCW. He's got a ton of cleaning up to do in terms of his shooting mechanics, but if he can even become an MCW level shooter, he should be really really good. He has the potential to physically overpower smaller guards and make bigger wings/big men look foolish with his crossovers. Unfortunately I don't like Woody Newton nearly as much. If the coaching staff can't get him to play hard (which he didn't do in any of the 4 or 5 high school games I watched), I see him as a transfer candidate after a year or two of being in Boeheim's doghouse. There's plenty of potential there if they can get him to buy in; I'm just always weary of guys that don't have the skills yet and also don't seem to play hard.

FWIW, my company’s COO has been told the government expects a decrease in our GDP of roughly 50% over the next 4 months. Feels like the government would theoretically be trying anything they can to avoid that happening but we’ll see.

Outside of Front Page Sports, which I never played, I agree with everything you just wrote. Also, not sure if you're aware, but the NFL and 2K reached a deal so 2K will begin making some sort of NFL game moving forwards, though the deal specifies that it cannot be "a sim game" or something like that. At least not yet; seems like it could be a step towards the NFL opening it up to both EA and 2K competing with one another again. I can only hope. I just bought myself a copy of NFL 2K5 to try to play and I've recently busted NCAA 14 back out as well.

It's not the best juke ever but I'm a sucker for ones like the Metcalf one posted early and this one (starts at 2:32):

I imagine this improves the odds of an NCAA game in the near future from 0% to some non-zero-but-close %. As the last tweet mentions, they deemed video games featuring the players' likenesses to be unworkable at the moment since there is no players union. I think a college video game will happen at some point, but for example, if they wanted to get every FBS scholarship player into one union, it would be larger than the entire NFLPA (including retired players). And they'd obviously have a ton of people joining that union with each passing year. The video game developer would then have to decide how much using college players' likenesses is worth. If they currently spend roughly $40 million to use NFL players' likenesses, what is an appropriate amount to pay for college players? If it's $40 million, you're talking about roughly $3,600 per player. If they decide it's more like $20 million, then obviously that ends up being more like $1,800 per player, and at that point, would the players agree? It's "free money" but still, not sure. I guess not everyone enjoyed the college games in the same exact way that I did, but I personally didn't care at all about having real players in the game. I would generally start out at a school where I didn't know any of the players anyways and once you're a couple years in, all the real players were gone. I don't really see the need to have player likenesses in college games at all. But it seems that either video game companies have numbers that suggest getting the player likeness is a huge deal for their sales, or they simply didn't make as much money off the college games and use the player likeness issue as an excuse to get out of the market. Either way, it seems like if companies felt that a college game without player likenesses would work, we would have had it by now. And even with this announcement, a deal where a video game pays for player likenesses seems to be a very long ways away still.

I don't think it particularly matters as speed really isn't all that important in a RB (unless their game relies on bouncing everything outside, which is probably not a good idea to begin with), but I would bet if someone takes Moss' pro day video frame by frame, it's probably about a 4.60 40 just like he timed at the Combine. And again, that's fine, but it almost certainly was not the 4.52 that it was reported as. And to be fair, the Combine time may have been off slightly as well; I don't really care enough to download the videos and do it frame-by-frame.

Pennington was insanely accurate back then though. Fromm's accuracy is nothing special; better than his velocity for sure, but he's far more likely to be a game manager if he ever turns into a starter than the stud that Pennington looked like he might be before the injuries really took their toll on him. He's not a special passer but he could be good enough mentally to survive as a below-average starter or solid backup.

I don't really agree with this. Time will tell, but I think you can clearly see where Beane would say he did indeed add touchdown makers. Moss had 39 TDs the last 3 years, one of if not the highest elusive ratings to come around in a very long time, and had the second most average yards after contact of any RB in the class. Between his power in short-yardage situations and his ability to bounce off people and pick up big chunks, I'm sure Beane thinks he is indeed a touchdown maker. As far as the WRs go, before this draft we had no size. Diggs is very good at making contested catches despite his size, but we had three good WRs that generally win with their quickness and speed. Davis and Hodgins bring us a different element with their size. Davis had the 2nd highest average depth of target in the class; he was pretty much purely a deep ball guy in college and recorded 19 TDs the last two years. Between his size, his deep ball ability, and his TD production, I'm sure Beane would consider him to be a touchdown maker and he definitely fits a different mold from our other WRs. Hodgins even moreso, as he gives us a big bodied red zone target that we didn't have on the roster before. With his size, body control, and hands, he dominated in the red zone in college, making him a potential touchdown maker. He struggled pretty badly to create separation against college athletes. There's no reason to think he won't have problems separating in the NFL.

Figured it would have already been posted in here, but this is #FakeNews. Chargers get their comp pick; Gordon had already signed.

I think it’s realistic to not expect all of the picks to hit even if I personally liked almost all of the picks. Regarding Moss though, he’s more athletic than Singletary and obviously Singletary played quite well as a rookie.

Yeah he was supposed to be one of the late risers in the draft process. Ended up getting taken in the 6th by Jacksonville.

Fromm has the potential to be a really nice fit here: a backup QB that is capable of being a below-average starter, but more importantly, a guy that can make reads pretty well and get the ball into the hands of our playmakers (now that we're finally starting to have some playmakers on the team) to keep the offense on schedule. He certainly doesn't have Josh Allen's upside. But I think he's likely to end up around the same level of player that Barkley is right now and there's at least a little bit of upside that he could become something like a poor man's Marc Bulger or something like that.

When we ranked the RBs that we wanted most this year a week or so ago, Moss was my #1 (based on the idea that I thought we could get him at 86). Needless to say I’m happy with the pick, especially considering a few teams reached on RBs ahead of him. This has been a very strong start to the draft.

I would guess Beane might like: Donovan Peoples-Jones K’Von Wallace John Simpson I would personally like: Amik Robertson (but he doesn’t meet the physical traits McBeane usually look for) James Proche Donovan Peoples-Jones Kalija Lipscomb Or one of the OLine guys

The Andrew Thomas one was nice. Now if I can have just one more miracle prop: Ashtyn Davis first safety taken at +5000 odds.

I'm fine with Shenault and Robinson and I'll defer to smarter people regarding Hunt. Astro was a good resource for my own spreadsheet of trying to track who we've been in contact with among other things, but I don't really see the point in a mock where every single pick is someone we've scouted in person or met with in the offseason; that's just not very realistic as we've averaged roughly 50% of our picks being people that were publicly on our radar and most teams don't even hit 50%. Having every single pick be someone that we watched in person or met with is just incredibly unlikely.

Yeah, I literally bet it a couple hours before there were all of a sudden a bunch of reports of teams being higher on him than people realize lol. Still don't think it'll hit but we'll see.

My bets: Andrew Thomas top 10 (feel pretty good about this one) CeeDee Lamb 13th or later (ehhhh) Andrew Thomas first OL taken (don't actually believe it, but couldn't resist at +950) JK Dobbins first RB taken (same as above) Jedrick Wills first OL taken (actually believe this) I have a couple others that are much longer shot bets where I just bet a couple dollars for fun.

Michael Pittman is the one that I actually have in my mock that would count as a surprise. The others that are mildly surprising but wouldn't be very shocking IMO are: Ross Blacklock Cesar Ruiz Zack Baun Clyde Edwards-Helaire is a possibility as well but I don't have any RBs in my mock.

FYI Akers is 41 on TDN

Man that would be a lot to give up for them. I personally wouldn't do it if I were in their shoes but they definitely have the ammo if they want to.