Jump to content

The only thing more useless than mock drafts, looking back a year to do the draft over. Yet the NFL site publishes this.


Recommended Posts

The demand for media content continues to surprise me.  I remember a time, and it does not seem too long ago, where the daily dose of NFL content was either a Felser or Northrup story in that day's Buffalo News.  Those were the days of the TV Guide, The Sporting News and daily newspaper boxscores as important resources for sports fans. Many more folks making a living by generating NFL related content for mass consumption, all year round.  But, that's across the board in all news genres.  I do not know how newspapers can survive the internet.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with the OP.

 

I pay scant attention to mock drafts.  They're more wrong than right.  I prefer real facts over wild speculation and wait until the actual draft to get excited.


I care nothing about do-over mocks.  

 

With all this mental m*st*rb*tion going on, this is my least favorite time of the football year.  

Edited by hondo in seattle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has us taking Lamar Jackson. Puke. Also has Foster going in the first round. Pretty big jump from undrafted to first round. Also has us taking Calvin Ridley.

 

Edmunds drops a few slots but still goes in the first round.

 

After 1 year our QB goes higher, our LB falls but still goes in the first round, and our undrafted WR goes in the first round. Guess we had a good rookie class.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

...and the Giants still take Barkley over Darnold?  No way.

Hmm. I think Darnold kind of just played as expected. He didn't have an amazing rookie year or anything. Showed flashes and had some highs, but had some lows and lots of turnovers. Exactly as advertised. Why would they change their mind?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MJS said:

Hmm. I think Darnold kind of just played as expected. He didn't have an amazing rookie year or anything. Showed flashes and had some highs, but had some lows and lots of turnovers. Exactly as advertised. Why would they change their mind?

 

Because they need a QB, and Darnold was one of the best in a pretty darn strong QB class.  I’m not a big fan of taking RB’s early.  Especially in the first 15-20 picks of the first round.  JMO.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

 

Because they need a QB, and Darnold was one of the best in a pretty darn strong QB class.  I’m not a big fan of taking RB’s early.  Especially in the first 15-20 picks of the first round.  JMO.

But that was also true when they made the Barkley pick. They chose to ignore the fact that QB's are 100 times more important than RB's, and they would do it again. The only thing that should change a decision like that is if Darnold, Allen, Rosen, or Jackson had an amazing year OR if Barkley didn't do well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MJS said:

But that was also true when they made the Barkley pick. They chose to ignore the fact that QB's are 100 times more important than RB's, and they would do it again. The only thing that should change a decision like that is if Darnold, Allen, Rosen, or Jackson had an amazing year OR if Barkley didn't do well.

 

Darnold showed flashes of very good QB play on a very bad team, and Eli proved that his arm is dead AND he’s playing on a very bad team.

 

As silly as the notion of a “hindsight re-draft” might be, I think the Giants would reconsider their choice if given the opportunity.  Hell, they might even take Allen over Barkley if allowed a do-over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...