2011 NFL Draft: My Ultimate Draft Class (Rounds 1-3)

Too many mock drafts and pre-draft anaylsis articles fawn over the top of the draft and do little for the middle of the road guys.  There are plenty of talented guys hidden in the 3rd-7th rounds who have fallen off NFL radars for one reason or another.  My “Ultimate Draft Class” takes more than just draftnik expectation into account.  I’m looking for production at the collegiate level, leadership qualities, heart and motivation.  Taking some average draft predictions (taken from a few of my trusted research publications), I’ll pick one guy for each round based on a mid-round selection (i.e. my 1st rounder will not be Bowers or Fairley).  Imagine picking teams on the playground for a heated pickup kickball game; six heavy hitters don’t make a perfect roster, you need a balance of hitting, pitching, fielding and dedication to the team.

Everybody has their favorite players and guys they pull for when the Draft rolls round, so let me know who you’re looking at and who you would want on your team.

 

ROUND 1: JJ Watt, DE, Wisconsin:  I fell in love with JJ Watt sometime in November while watching him carve up Big Ten offensive lines.  He has a great motor and doesn’t give up on any play.  He has great size at 6’6″ and 290lbs (he’s bigger than Da’Quan Bowers and Adrian Clayborn, two other DE I like).  Realistically, his size will also allow him to switch inside to play DT in a 4-3 scheme as well.  In addition to Watt’s size, he has some great intangibles.  He started his career at Central Michigan as a TE, so he understands how offenses work.  He has great vision, as well.  In 2010, Watt batted down 8 passes; that’s more than Bowers and Clayborn had in their careers.  His athleticism won’t blow anybody away (4.85 speed), but he’s a complete package.  21 tackles for loss and 7 sacks means he can get into the offensive backfield and impact the game.  If drafted by the right team, I see Watt succeeding in the NFL for years to come.  (I gushed over Watt in a previous article)

ROUND 2: Jake Locker, QB, Washington: Locker’s draft stock took a hit after his poor Senior season.  He’s always had accuracy issues and hasn’t gotten past 58% completion percentage.  He has an injury history.  Too often, he disappears in the big games (5 completions in the Holiday Bowl; 4 completions against Nebraska).  Even with questions abound, Locker is an undeniably talented individual.  I’m not sure there is another quarterback with as good of an overall package.  Prospects Colin Kapernick and Tyrod Tayler are certainly faster and more athletic, but they do not have the passing ability that Locker has.  Despite his ups and downs, Locker’s teammates love him, he’s a great leader.  He has more heart than most, and will not back down from a challenge.  I think a team with an established starter should take a chance on him in the 2nd round (not worth a 1st rounder) and let him develop ala Aaron Rodgers.

ROUND 3: Jacquizz Rodgers, RB, Oregon State: Depending on who you ask or what you read, Rodgers is as high as a late 2nd round pick or a early 4th round pick.  The vacillation is no doubt due to the questions regarding ‘Quizz’s size.  There are six guys I would put ahead of Rodgers: Mark Ingram, Mikel LeShoure, Daniel Thomas, Ryan Williams, Jordan Todman and Kendall Hunter.  Of those six, Rodgers is by far the smallest.  He’s also one of only two “draftable” RBs who have 3 career 200+ attempt seasons (undersized in his own right, Noel Devine is the other), and the only with 3 250+ attempt seasons.  So, despite his diminutive size, he’s durable and tough.  Rodgers suffered one injury in 2008 that forced him to miss two games and leave a third early.  Not counting those three contests, Rodgers has never had fewer than 14 carries per game.  Did I mention that Rodgers has also averaged 50+ receptions and 300+ receiving yards per season?  If it weren’t for his size, Rodgers, in my opinion, would be the undisputed #1 RB in the draft.

Next Week: Rounds 4-7

A Medieval Study Hall

“A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall.”

-Vince Lombardi*

Football fans have no idea if we’ll see NFL football played in 2010.  Right now, I’d estimate the chances are 40/60 in favor of a lockout.  We’re more likely to see a shortened season, but I’m not sure that’s a better situation.  Thankfully, we will have the NCAA game (watch how many FCS games find their way onto the air) and even the UFL to fall back on, but it’s a sad time for NFL fans.

As you’ll read below, I’m not really interested in the labor talks.  I’ve begun tuning out of Sportscenter and similar programs when the topic comes up.  John Clayton and Adam Schefter used to be mandatory listening on the ESPN airwaves, but lately, I don’t go out of my way to hear the news.  Unfortunately, my blog will lose some of its luster if I don’t want to harp on the daily banality of the labor dispute, so don’t be surprised to find some non-football pieces.  It’s not that I’ve lost my love, it’s that my desire to write is forcing me to find another, less odious topic.  The Draft is still of great interest to me, and many fans, so I’ll do my best to cover the event and include plenty of Mocks and player analysis.  Hopefully once July rolls around, we’ll be on here discussing training camps and the merits of the pre-season and not how deleterious a locked out season may be.

The following may be a long read (1400 words total), but you may find it interesting if you’re a “regular” fan and are frustrated with the goings-on.  I’m not an anti-trust lawyer.  I’ve never read a CBA in my life.  Like I mentioned, I’m not even paying 100% attention on the newest announcements coming from the NFL’s mediation sessions.  So, you may disagree with what I’m saying, but keep in mind it’s just an opinion on how I’d like things to play out.

 

I’m not a fan of all the back and forth banter about who is saying what, to whom and what impact it may have.  Major US sports have been down this road before.  We’ve lost full seasons (the NHL is so far the only major league to do so), partial seasons (NHL, NBA, MLB) and even played with replacement players (NFL, MLB).  None of the current issues are surprising, groundbreaking or all that difficult to figure out.  Ultimately, it comes down to Billionaires arguing with Millionaires over hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Both sides are looking for resolution for their “needs” and “wants.”  I see four major issues, two per side, which fit well together to form a compromise.

First and foremost, the NFLPA wants a larger share of the profit for its players.  Fine, I can see their argument.  Truthfully, owners really don’t have a leg to stand on here.  If the NFLPA were asking to double their current share, I could see the reservations; a gradual increase, to go along with increases in inflation and cost of living makes sense to me.

When the owners concede to the increase, and I believe they will, they’ll immediately ask for one thing in return: an 18 game schedule.  There’s obviously no direct research or evidence yet into the possible effects of an 18 game regular season versus a 16 game regular season over the course of a career; simple logic, though, tells us it’s more wear and tear for a player and will ultimately lead to a shorter amount of years in the league.  The average NFL career is somewhere around 3-5 years (I’ve heard just about every possible decimal in between), so players are looking at an average of 6-10 more games over the same career length.  It’s more than a 10% increase in games played (or decrease in career length, if you’re pessimistic) and would put the average player on the shelf a half-season earlier.  (See my below note regarding this point,  I didn’t want to clog up my four point plan here with it)^

The players got what they wanted, so they’ll have to cave into the owners on the extended schedule.  Knowing the NFLPA, they’ll hit their next hot button issue: player benefits.  For as violent as the game is, the NFL does a poor job of keeping up with player health after they retire.  I think it’s partly due to the anonymous nature of many players (other than the big name QBs, RBs and WRs, could you pick anybody out of a lineup?) and the fact that career length can vary greatly and end for many different reasons (including injury, off-field legal issues, etc).  I’m a firm believer that the NFL needs to step up and figure out a way to help out its former employees.  Tragic cases such as the recent suicide of Dave Duerson, which has been allegedly tied to his NFL career, are a constant reminder of how real the post-career traumas are for players.

Finally, the NFL will fire back and propose one more compromise to level the CBA.  The extra money will have to come from somewhere and I think that will come from one of two places (or both).  First, the NFL needs a rookie wage scale desperately.  Boys (yes, boys) three years out of high school should not be making tens of millions of dollars in the NFL.  Your first contract should be somewhat predetermined (based on draft position and on-field position) and if you play well, then you cash in for the big bucks.  The high salary going to the top draft picks has made those selections undesirable and flies into the face of the NFL’s presumed parity.  If the Panthers save $5 million on their #1 overall pick, they can place it elsewhere.  I’m not an expert, but that money could go to other veteran players, or maybe the salary cap is re-structured to reflect the lessened amount young players will earn.  For example, if teams would save, on average, 10% per year due to lesser salaries for rookies, that money should be put somewhere else.  Either the league’s cap could be lessened (and the difference be put towards player benefits) or the veteran minimum salary (and as the dominoes fall into one another, all veteran salaries) be increased.  Either way, the veteran players would benefit.  As it stands right now, a player is better off being drafted in the Top 10, never playing a down, taking the guaranteed money and retiring than attempting to play out a successful career.  Players who have put in the time and effort in the NFL, should be rewarded, not somebody who got lucky with a soft non-conference schedule at a BCS school.

There’s my plan.  Until we have some sort of resolution, I won’t be speaking of the madness.  It frustrates me and forces me to face the reality of a lost season.  Working with kids for the better part of my life has taught me that sometimes the best way to move along from a temper tantrum throwing toddler is to ignore them and pretend that they aren’t getting to you.  Maybe the NFL and the NFLPA will heed my silence and work this thing out.

 

*Most credits I’ve found online have this as a Lombardi quote, but I did find one site that noted Frank Leahy as the speaker.

^My thinking regarding the extended season is that it also benefits the player.  We know that NFL contracts aren’t “guaranteed” so one could argue that playing as many games (and, in turn, earning as many game checks as possible) at a younger, presumably healthier, age could help you earn more.  For example, consider that in the current 16-game format Player X (barring injury) will play his 100th NFL game in Season 7, Week 4; in an 18-game format, however, he’ll play that game in Season 6, Week 10.  If you could stay injury-free, you’re looking at getting to that milestone about a year earlier and an entire training camp and pre-season sooner.  Again, that is if you stay healthy, if you’re injury prone and your individual game checks are diluted by 10% you will suffer in the new format.  I just want to prove that you can flip just about any argument in labor talks so it fits your side of the coin.  (My thought process here is for the average player, who if they suffer a major injury, will likely be cut by the team at some point.  Remember, players are paid for pre-season games, however, my thinking is that if they add more “real” games in place of “fake” ones the players will request some sort of salary restructuring.  It would be tough to argue that the 2nd pre-season game is “worth” the same amount to a player as a game on Week 19)

Nice Find:NFL Team Name Origins

Take a look through this page on RootZoo.  It’s a collection of team name origins for the NFL franchises.

 

NFL Team Name Origins – RootZoo Sports Articles.

The Myth of SEC Dominance

On PTI this evening, the show’s hosts were discussing the presumed “dominance” of the SEC in today’s game and if it’s good for the overall game.  I can’t argue with their recent BCS Championship record (five wins in a row), but I can argue the bigger picture.  My baseline argument: the top of the SEC (Auburn and maybe Alabama) is superior to everybody else, but as you go down the standings, everybody is interchangeable.  Also, I believe the myth of the SEC dominance is a self fulfilling prophecy, because the more we believe in and pump up the SEC teams, the more the human polls inflate their standings.

It’s sort of like the “east coast bias” in other sports.  Generally, teams and games on the East Coast get more attention and television airtime because a disproportionate amount of people live in the Northeast and due to television and newspaper time constraints and deadlines (the NY Times and the USA Today can’t write about the Spurs/Lakers game as well [if at all] as the Magic/Heat game because by the time the game is over they may have 45 minutes before printing).  There’s no doubt that a topographical map of the United States of College Football would concentrate the population in the Southeast (Texas and Florida are high school football breeding grounds).  The NYC metropolitan area only has Rutgers to root for.  Boston has BC, but they’ve only had 2 10-win seasons in the last 25+ years.  Philadelphia has Villanova who is at the top of the FCS game, but relies on Temple and transplant fans from Penn State and Rutgers in the FBS.  Long story short, there is a definite Southeastern bias in the college football world.

A majority of fans (myself included) get their sports news from media outlets such as ESPN, CBS College Sports and any of dozens of regional sports networks.  When these networks prejudice their programming towards certain teams or certain regions, it takes a very keen eye to differentiate and realize what’s happening.  If you don’t have cable (which a portion of Americans do not), you have a limited number of football games you can watch each Saturday.  Generally, you will get any Notre Dame home games and the SEC game of the week on CBS.  If you are lucky enough to have cable, you have many more options.  ESPN’s coverage tends towards the Big Ten during the daytime hours, but there are plenty of SEC games left over that weren’t selected by CBS.  On my cable system, one of our local regional networks, MSG (home of the Rangers and Knicks games), plays host to the SEC Network!  Figure that one out. For the most part, as a fan, you are forced to watch what the networks will broadcast, and generally that is what will garner the most eyeballs.

I don’t fault ESPN or any other media outlet; they do what they do to sell advertisement space and to drive ratings.  If a higher proportion of the college football world root for Florida and Tennessee, then damn it, broadcast those teams.  Unfortunately, this same bias leaks into other programming such as pre-game shows and commentary/analysis shows.  I wish I had statistics for the number of mentions of SEC and their teams during a typical broadcast, but I would bet that it was proportionately higher than other teams and conferences on normal days (obviously, leading up to the BCS game the talk will be for the SEC and the PAC-10).  These shows, like College Game Day or College Football Live on ESPN, are at the base of our acquired sports knowledge.  It’s analogous to the debates on whether or not to teach evolution or creationism in school.  Depending on where you grow up (aka what channels and programs you watch) and what your school teaches (aka what regions/teams you bias) you will likely live your life believing that theory (aka which teams are best).

Anyway, back to my point… The people who vote in the human polls rely on the same news and media that other fans do.  Sure, some may have some inside information and may be “in the know” but in reality, they don’t know all that much about every team.  The final USA Today Coaches Poll actually has 37 teams ranked because 12 teams also received votes.  Do you mean to tell me that Nick Saban of Alabama could rattle off statistics or even starting players of Tulsa or San Diego State?  Maye he knows of the top guys, but does he know enough to make an educated estimation of their place amongst Northern Illinois, West Virginia, Iowa and Miami (OH)?  I doubt it.  Human (poll) nature is to go with your gut, and that is easily influenced by what you see, read and hear through the media.  If Cam Newton was on Iowa and they still finished with the same record, I guarantee they would be ranked higher because of the airtime the Hawkeyes would have received.

So, from week to week and year to year, we talk about the SEC and it’s presumed dominance, but in reality we are inflating the effect.  As I mentioned at the start, Auburn has proved they are the best team in the Nation (or a very close second to TCU), but are they that much better?  They beat a gimmicky Oregon by 3 points.  They had three 3-point games in the regular season against Mississippi State, Clemson and Kentucky (a combined 20-16 in the regular season; Clemson and Kentucky finished 6-6 and squeaked out bowl games, which they lost).  You can make two points here, 1) the mid-tier (Mississippi State or Kentucky) of the SEC is so good it can nearly beat the upper-tier or, 2) that Auburn (and by osmosis, the SEC) isn’t far and away the best team.

I’ll go with the second.

PS- I started out writing this as a quick hitter type of article but ended up spending an hour crafting the ideas.  I think I’m going to turn this into something more substantial and do some research and see what results show up.

Nice Find: CFBStats.com – Hard to Find College Football Stats

If you’re a die hard NCAA fan or if you have a keen eye for the NFL Draft, you may have noticed the lack of statistics websites dedicated to the college game.  For sites that have good offensive statistics (ESPN, for example) defensive statistics are non-existant.  The NCAA.com stat charts are difficult to navigate and are user un-friendly when you can finally find them.

The other day when working on my first NFL Draft lead-up, I came across a site I wish I found years ago: cfbstats.com.

The sheer amount of statistical analysis that can be done using cfbstats.com is exhaustive.  I’m sure I haven’t even scratched the surface yet.  So, you’re a Cincinatti fan and want to take a closer look at backup QB Chazz Anderson’s stats.  You can find that he’s averaging 13.3 yards rushing per game or that he’s just 2-6 for 12 yards in the Red Zone; useless stats for many, but entirely important to others.  The game logs and situational stats are a must for any writter, blogger or any bar bet.

Considering the dearth of quality stat websites, cfbstats.com amazes me.  Honestly, I would love to know how the site’s author compiles all the information, but I’m sure that’s a trade secret they would rather keep quiet.  Take a few minutes to go peruse the site and definitely bookmark it for next season when you need some stat help.