How much does having a large scouting staff really help.

[Bengalfan4life27c]

Everybody has the Mel kiper, todd mcshay, mike mayock draft boards. obviously head coaches want players that fit into their system. what does a large scouting staff really accomplish? with a large staff you get more conflicting reports on who to draft etc.. A perfectly functioning and successful organization tend to have most employees on the same page

[jfkbengals]

My $.02 is that it has nothing to do with how many scouts you have, but the quality of the scouts you have and the resources they have available to effectivily do their jobs and communicate their findings. Even more importantly is the effectiveness of the top decision maker in applying that data to their roster choices.

In my mind, the only way the larger staff can be of benefit is looking for the "diamond in the rough" players from sources like Div. III, where smaller staffs might not be able to dedicate much time there. With that said, however, when there is a guy at that level that looks like they can play the Sunday game, his name does not remain a secret. He will be properly evaluated the same as the guys from FBS. Considering the low success rate of guys from the lower divisions, it really doesn't justify the cost of dedicating any resources there.

[RagnarLothbrok]

I'd let the media do it for me. Id hire a psychologist to talk to all the candidates to judge character and fit. The media employ so many people to scout that I wouldn't need do more than read Mel Kipers Mock Drafts o watch ESPN.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(12-31-2017, 02:10 PM)Bengalfan4life27c Wrote: Everybody has the Mel kiper, todd mcshay, mike mayock draft boards. obviously head coaches want players that fit into their system. what does a large scouting staff really accomplish? with a large staff you get more conflicting reports on who to draft etc.. A perfectly functioning  and successful organization tend to have most employees on the same page

A lot. 
More scouts = more players scouted. 
More players scouted = better idea of who to draft/sign
better idea of who to draft/sign = more better players for your specific needs. 

Media draft stuff is fine for what it is, but they still don't have the access NFL teams get to scheme and personnel needs. 

[SunsetBengal]

(12-31-2017, 09:12 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: A lot. 
More scouts = more players scouted. 
More players scouted = better idea of who to draft/sign
better idea of who to draft/sign = more better players for your specific needs. 

Media draft stuff is fine for what it is, but they still don't have the access NFL teams get to scheme and personnel needs. 

Exactly, all of that canned info that guys like Kiper, McShay, etc. give off is fine, for the casual observer.  However, in order to truly know if a player will fit what you are trying to do, you have to have eyes from your organization on them, and speaking with them.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(12-31-2017, 09:38 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Exactly, all of that canned info that guys like Kiper, McShay, etc. give off is fine, for the casual observer.  However, in order to truly know if a player will fit what you are trying to do, you have to have eyes from your organization on them, and speaking with them.

It's how teams find "hidden gems" those guys Mel Kiper might not have ranked or ranked low but the team takes in rd 3 because he fits a very specific need.