bd2999's picture


Member since 17 December 2014 | Blog


  • NFL TEAM: Miami Dolphins
  • NHL TEAM: Columbus Blue Jackets
  • MLB TEAM: Cleveland Indians

Recent Activity

Comment 12 Jun 2017

I would agree that NFL draft is not a good way to analyze these. It would be better to look over the players college career. A ton of work, but compile stats and ratings based on that and then compare to the ranking estimate.

As the point of these is to look at transition from HS to college and not college to the NFL.

Comment 19 May 2017

Would not have to. There are some that think the university was out to get him for no reason at all. Do they know what really happened? They seem like they think they do. Nobody knows the details. We know that Meyer did not agree with the university here but that in and of itself does not mean the universities decision was wrong either.

I will never understand the support the guy gets from some.

Comment 04 May 2017

Not to mention it would not be a one and one. It would be Alabama home and a neutral site that would be withing driving distance of Alabama. So, not much of a point to bother. 

Never thought of recruiting but it is a good idea with that. 

Comment 03 May 2017

I think the thing to be careful of before jumping on it too much is what the article is talking about for its comparison. It is looking at number of draft picks/average position picks and then NFL performance. This is not that OSU or whomever has not had loads of picks but how many of those picks are starting level talent over that period of time.

We think of Elliot or Bosa or Thomas but they are not really the norm either. There are many OSU players, or players from any school, that are not cut out to be full time starters in the NFL. It is just how it is. And having more guys like that, which is possible if more of your guys are picked, would hurt the number in this case.

It does not mean that OSU sucks or anything like that. As teams like Clemson and Alabama are negative in the scale too. I imagine the reason is they put lots of players in the draft, they go high and only a small number of them are starters for any period of time. By these metrics, if I understand them right, you are punished by having more players drafted (at least if they underperform). Over performance could mean that a smaller school had like two draft picks but one turned out to be a starter for quite a while.

I am not big on ESPN either, but I do not think they should be executed for this figure at all. It is trying to estimate some things that are useful. It would be neat to see something like this for recruiting purposes, but much much harder to do.

And it really just depends on your definition of an NFL factory. As nonproductive, as you mention, has more to do with general player performance than number taken and percieved NFL talent.

Comment 30 Apr 2017

Maybe? For some guys it is their prime time show case. Given the number of bowl games, it will probably get worse as some of the bigger stars start sitting out. I am not a fan of that at all, but financially it makes sense for them not to bother. 

Really, even the playoff game, other than bragging rights could suffer. Though I doubt it. If we are only making a purely economic decision from the kids point of view. 

Comment 29 Apr 2017

I am a bit skeptical. More because neither really were that impressive. Brown had a few games but was not consistent. Smith was similar and his last year was injury plagued and not impressive. 

They are not bad WRs but they are not really elite or anything either. 

Comment 28 Apr 2017

They are mostly props, they are not very useful. Cheating them is a misnomer as little useful comes out of them directly. Even if there is a contradiction it does not indicate guilt or a lie necissarily. And follow ups would be needed. It is more an excuse to use them.

Depending on the individual they do not need to learn how to cheat them. The tests assume constant physiological responses to stress. Which are not always true.

Comment 28 Apr 2017

Not that I am aware of, as they have never been verified to be useful. There is little scientific reason to trust them and they are not admissible in court.

If all the assumptions are met than they can work ok. But it relies on a constant physiological response, fear of punishment (even innocent people can get scared of that sort of thing) and so on. It is just not a reliable tool for many things. As a nervous person could be called for lying despite telling the truth.

Comment 27 Apr 2017

Not sure I agree with any of this. Or maybe I misunderstand you. A company is under no obligation to tolerate speech that could be detrimental to the company one way or another. And it is at their discretion for the most part. Nor for that matter, are their talking heads getting paid or are experts in any area other than potentially sports.

They should stick to sports. I do not care what their political or opinions on science are. They have a fair number of guys that are given a platform to talk about sports, not to spouse what their thoughts are on other matters. Unless it happens to be butting into sports.

Just not sure I care what Curt Shiling's opinion is or was on evolution or any other matter other than maybe baseball.

Comment 24 Apr 2017

If he was solid PSU it is strange that he would decommitt. I remember the USC kid last year doing that but strange. As they can decommit and go somewhere else as it is, the same day or whatever. As the whole thing means little.

Have to wait and see, but it is not ideal for PSU.

Comment 21 Apr 2017

I am not sure I agree with covered up. As people were on him too. But, good play calling can play to teams strengths and help overcome weaknesses. For some reason, the coaches never did that last year. They refused to call screens despite issues with the line in pass protection and that being a great way to overcome the rush or poor protection to get the other side to back off.

Comment 20 Apr 2017

I feel that there are a number of them really. Tennessee deserves to be up there because of how highly ranked they are and they keep falling apart. Notre Dame is along the same lines most years. I would say USC but the sanctions were an issue for quite a while for them. Georgia belongs up there, LSU and Michigan as well. The later is not horrible, but it gets old hearing they are back every year. It is like all they need is a winning season and they are good. 

Seems like the standard at a big time power school is to make it deep into the playoff. Not just only lose one or two games. They still have not beaten their rivals. They beat MSU last year but so did darn near everybody. 

Comment 20 Apr 2017

OU is the biggest test and early given their passing attack and OSU's young secondary. Almost the same as last year. There are a few tough road games like UM, Iowa and so on too. There are loads of tough games and not the cupcake games to start the year either. So, quick learning curve. 

As far as I know, this year does not have back to back weeks of teams with two weeks to prepare either. Which was pretty brutal and both were in their house in two loud stadiums.