DrDawkinstein Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 (edited) I think Gruden said he would have worked as an assistant to Chip Kelly for free, when Chip was at Oregon, just to learn the nuances of that offense. He's a big X's and O's guy. But he also seems to love college QBs - having heavily praised many that did little in the NFL. Perhaps a knowledge of what their game tape looks like from 6 different angles doesn't necessarily translate into an ability to prognosticate NFL success & failure. You are assuming that Gruden is providing complete and honest assessments of these QBs. That is not the case. ESPN is nothing more than an advanced advertising platform for the sports leagues with which they have contracts. Taking it a step further, Gruden's show is merely an advertising showcase for these young men. It is NOT an accurate scouting report or predictor of future success. The worst thing that could happen would be to criticize one of these kids, and then he goes on to be a star who holds a grudge against Gruden (who might one day end up coaching one of these guys) and ESPN (which needs access to the players). It's better to err on the side of praising everyone and keeping those relationships. Gruden's show is merely entertainment value. The best thing to take from it is how the players carry themselves in the interview portion. Do they have a brain in their heads? A likeable personality? That type of thing. If he were coaching and working back in the NFL, it would be a different story. I find it funny that he is so involved in the draft. From what I remember about his coaching career, he used aging veteran's much more than draft picks - and especially at qb. Seems like he just wasn't good at evaluating college talent as a coach. That's not a coach's job. Edited May 13, 2016 by DrDareustein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 You are assuming that Gruden is providing complete and honest assessments of these QBs. That is not the case. Well, I'm glad I don't bother to watch him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Well, I'm glad I don't bother to watch him. It's an entertaining show though. And without it, Id had never heard Cardale Jones speak beyond his poorly typed tweets from 3 years ago. Much better in person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 I think Gruden said he would have worked as an assistant to Chip Kelly for free, when Chip was at Oregon, just to learn the nuances of that offense. He's a big X's and O's guy. But he also seems to love college QBs - having heavily praised many that did little in the NFL. Perhaps a knowledge of what their game tape looks like from 6 different angles doesn't necessarily translate into an ability to prognosticate NFL success & failure. Or his ESPN job isn't to be the most accurate, but most interesting for brief moments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 It's an entertaining show though. And without it, Id had never heard Cardale Jones speak beyond his poorly typed tweets from 3 years ago. Much better in person. Fair point. If the could do Gruden's show.......say, without Gruden, I'd probably be more likely to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webster Guy Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 I watched every down from that game...Twice...Gruden owes Shaq a formal apology...Period... He owes a lot of draftees a formal apology. Way too negative on most reviews, nobody wants to hear the minuses on a guy their team just picked. What a stupid approach. We turned to another network after the first handful of picks because it was so ridiculous. He said Nassib was the best qb of his draft too. Good call Johnny, he's lighting it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtDart Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 I guess he missed the play where Stanley had to tackle Lawson after a beautiful spin move. https://vine.co/v/iPdQU7Z6xgW Great move!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 He owes a lot of draftees a formal apology. Way too negative on most reviews, nobody wants to hear the minuses on a guy their team just picked. What a stupid approach. We turned to another network after the first handful of picks because it was so ridiculous. He said Nassib was the best qb of his draft too. Good call Johnny, he's lighting it up. As OldTimer pointed out on the previous page, Gruden was most likely designated to be the naysayer by ESPN during the draft coverage. ESPN does this thing where, they will have a 2nd analyst argue a contrarian point just for the sake of discussion and filling time. They even do it on their "good" shows like PTI. I've watched Tony and Mike argue against each other on something and at the end one of them says "I cant believe you really feel that way", and the other will go "I don't but we can't agree on everything, it's horrible TV". All this stuff becomes much easier to watch when you know the game they are playing. It's all simply advertising and a little entertainment. Nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 You are assuming that Gruden is providing complete and honest assessments of these QBs. That is not the case. ESPN is nothing more than an advanced advertising platform for the sports leagues with which they have contracts. Taking it a step further, Gruden's show is merely an advertising showcase for these young men. It is NOT an accurate scouting report or predictor of future success. The worst thing that could happen would be to criticize one of these kids, and then he goes on to be a star who holds a grudge against Gruden (who might one day end up coaching one of these guys) and ESPN (which needs access to the players). It's better to err on the side of praising everyone and keeping those relationships. Gruden's show is merely entertainment value. The best thing to take from it is how the players carry themselves in the interview portion. Do they have a brain in their heads? A likeable personality? That type of thing. If he were coaching and working back in the NFL, it would be a different story. Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 For some reason, I always assumed Gruden's enthusiasm for certain players was genuine while his criticisms were prompted by some producer. The praise and positivity just seem to come more naturally to him. But Dr. D is probably right that he's often positive to start building good relationships with college guys who could be tomorrow's NFL stars. And OldTimer is probably right that producers may sometimes ask Gruden to be negative when a contrarian view is required for entertainment value. For the millions he gets paid, Gruden's probably positive and negative more-or-less where ever needed. It'd be interesting to have a private, confidential conversation with him and find out what he really believes after all his film study. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB3 Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 (edited) He owes a lot of draftees a formal apology. Way too negative on most reviews, nobody wants to hear the minuses on a guy their team just picked. What a stupid approach. We turned to another network after the first handful of picks because it was so ridiculous. He said Nassib was the best qb of his draft too. Good call Johnny, he's lighting it up. He hasn't been proven wrong yet, unless you think the proof is that he hasn't supplanted Eli as a starter. Edited May 13, 2016 by LBSeeBallLBGetBall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 For the millions he gets paid, Gruden's probably positive and negative more-or-less where ever needed. TOLD. I think this is more accurate now. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4BillsintheBurgh Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 You are assuming that Gruden is providing complete and honest assessments of these QBs. That is not the case. ESPN is nothing more than an advanced advertising platform for the sports leagues with which they have contracts. Taking it a step further, Gruden's show is merely an advertising showcase for these young men. It is NOT an accurate scouting report or predictor of future success. The worst thing that could happen would be to criticize one of these kids, and then he goes on to be a star who holds a grudge against Gruden (who might one day end up coaching one of these guys) and ESPN (which needs access to the players). It's better to err on the side of praising everyone and keeping those relationships. Gruden's show is merely entertainment value. The best thing to take from it is how the players carry themselves in the interview portion. Do they have a brain in their heads? A likeable personality? That type of thing. If he were coaching and working back in the NFL, it would be a different story. That's not a coach's job. So you think he had zero input on the draft as a coach? That he didn't watch film on guys and provide his thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 It'd be interesting to have a private, confidential conversation with him and find out what he really believes after all his film study. This is what I want more than anything. 5 minutes of "real talk" from these guys. I dont expect them to do it on the air, but I'd love to get them in person somewhere. But yeah, you arent going to get it on air, ever. So you think he had zero input on the draft as a coach? That he didn't watch film on guys and provide his thoughts? Not zero, but nothing so much where you could determine whether he can scout players well or not. The personnel decisions ultimately come down to the GM and their scouts. For an example, Rex and Whaley both detailed their process (in separate interviews). The scouting department give each coach 4-5 "assignments" (read:players) to review and give feedback on. Again, that's just a handful of players for each coach. And what the coaches advise is just a small part of the scout's ultimate report and determination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 But Dr. D is probably right that he's often positive to start building good relationships with college guys who could be tomorrow's NFL stars. And OldTimer is probably right that producers may sometimes ask Gruden to be negative when a contrarian view is required for entertainment value. additionally, they are talking about 2 different settings --- in his qb camp, he almost has to stay positive in order to ensure that agents keep sending him their clients in the draft they need to create entertainment so a little good cop bad cop helps, since no prospect is without flaw and no agent or player will care much about a 35 second clip on espn during the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 I actually dont even mind the negative comments from Gruden What I mind is the comments that are in direct contradiction to what is happening on the field? Lawson was making life MISERABLE for those guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Gruden is a twat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 Gruden is a twat #HotTakes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That's No Moon Posted May 14, 2016 Share Posted May 14, 2016 Gruden said last night that Lawson wouldn't have managed to get a sack against Stanley if they played a doubleheader. That comment has taken on a life of its own, but it's actually bulls**t. In that game, Lawson had 7 tackles and 3.5 stops for a loss. No sacks though! http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1983523/shaq-lawson http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/2977679/type/college/shaq-lawson When are we going to realize that the slants are determined in pre-production meetings well before the Draft even starts. They have to pick selections to hate in order to have an edge and drive interest, none of that is spontaneous. You didn't think it was odd that they had all the negative Shaq Lawson stuff queued up and ready to go? Particularly when they specifically chose the plays that made him look the worst and excluded the ones that didn't fit that narrative v. Stanley? One of two things happened pre-production. They either decided that they were going to hate Shaq Lawson virtually regardless of where he was chosen, or they decided to hate whoever Buffalo picked. I think it's more likely that they decided to hate Lawson because it's simpler to prepare for that. If he went early it was a reach, if he went where he was supposed to he was overrated, if he dropped he dropped because of the secret shoulder issue and poor secret coaches tape v. good players. They had their copy written and slanted video all set to go. Meanwhile, Myles Jack is selected by a Jacksonville team after a HUGE slide and it's lauded as value and the positive tape rolled. They JUST as easily could have found a group of plays where Jack was overpowered at the point of attack and chosen to emphasize the knee problem. The NFL Draft is scripted show, not a documentary of authentic spontaneous reactions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts