this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

NFL

76 readers
2 users here now

A place for NFL news, game highlights and everything that excites you about American Football.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Let’s hear it! Give me your most unpopular opinions so far this season. I know this sub can be a hive mind echo chamber sometimes where people all arrive at certain assumptions and conclusions based on small sample sizes or bias’.

Here’s a few of my unpopular (to this sub) takes:

  1. RBs aren’t a “luxury” pick in the first round of the draft, you just have to accept that the pick won’t be as “long term” as other positions. Drafting guys like CMC, Travis ETN, Bijan, etc. aren’t “wastes” or “luxuries”. Those guys can really aid an offense, especially in the current era where we’re coming back around to ground attacks. The big issue is the second contract, but you’ll still have a stud weapon on the cheap for 4-5 years. More specially, I don’t see anything wrong with the Gibbs pick. People think he’s a bust or a waste bc he hasn’t been a 20-25 touch guy 6 games into his career… I think he can be a huge contributor for them for 4 seasons or so. If he helps them in big playoff games, then the pick is worth it, even if he’s not a guy who’s around for 6-10 seasons.

  2. A QBs ability to process info and remained poised is far more important than athletic ability. Everyone is looking for the shiny athlete like Josh Allen or Lamar, but honestly guys like Brock Purdy, Kirk, Goff, etc. are way more attainable and way safer. They can process info and deliver accurate passes. Obviously the gold standard is a freak athlete who’s an elite processor, but I think some teams try to find the athletes first then try to teach the mental aspect. While it’s true that you can’t teach athletic ability like Fields has, or the arm talent Wilson has, it’s not so easy to teach the mental component either.

What’re your guys’ hot takes and unpopular opinions?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Quirky-Lawyer-3409@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

99% of the time, pre-draft analysis is completely full of shit. Not a single person in the league or on TV has the slightest clue whether a player is going to be any good. They don't just exaggerate, they really don't know.

[–] mccamey-dev@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

I think people in the league know, if they do it right. They have to really know their own team, what direction they want their team to take, and whether the skills of the prospect fit into their desired system. An error in evaluation at any one of those steps can lead to a "bust."

People on TV are generally full of shit.

[–] Charrgerrr@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

I mean, first round picks generally do better in the league than 7th round picks. I don't think that's random

[–] alsott@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

People also don’t know the nuances the scouts go into. Not every HOF player was going to work on every team. They try to find the best fit for the team, and it might not be the top 5 draft pick on your table.

Character issues are also heavily taken into account

[–] snarpy@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

It's likely they know less than they profess to know, but 99% is wild hyperbole.

There's a reason that the higher you're drafted the higher you have to succeed is borne out by reality.