10-23-2017, 04:57 PM
(10-23-2017, 04:46 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Depends on who the selections fall under I guess. From what we've heard, Paul Alexander is given a lot of power to hand-pick the OL selections. I wonder who was the driver behind some of the bad defensive selections.
I do agree with you though that Hunt was a better fit as a 3-4 DE and Hardison was a 3-4 DE in college. However, I did think he would fit as a 4-3 UT, but I guess I was wrong.
It's why Watt became so much more effective in the NFL. Played 4-3 DE at Wisconsin almost exclusively. But then in the NFL they moved him around and he flourished. Maximizing talent. Bengals put Hunt and Hardison in positions to fail because it's what THEY wanted a player to do, not what was best for the player.
Justin Smith looked like a HOFer in San Fran but was always just "good" here. Why? They kept him on the edge almost exclusively and didn't move him around. They didn't start that until Zimmer was here. It's silly when you think about it.
Coaches should have some say, but the amount of say they have here is absurd. Scouts are scouts and coaches are coaches for a reason. Two completely different skill sets. Paul Alexander is a shitty scout. He shouldn't be asked to scout. Hire scouts. But Mike is cheap.
(10-23-2017, 04:49 PM)Wyche Wrote: I agree. I'd like to see this entire team and staff under different ownership before I pass too much judgment. You have a situation scouting college players that is absolutely a hindrance, and I also often wonder how much scouting of the opponents they can do ahead. Like, if you had a bigger scout count, they could be scouting teams a couple weeks out on the schedule while the staff works on THIS week. The way things are, you don't really have time for, correcting mistakes from the prior week, working on this week, and looking forward down the schedule.
You know, I've always blamed the coaching, but this discussion has raised a few possibilities to me as to why the coaching may "appear" substandard compared to our opponents. Good points Royle. I mean, it could absolutely boil down to coaching, but this could very well be a factor that contributes to it as well.
We draft a lot of "favorites" if you've noticed. We "win" a lot of drafts on paper but never on the field.
Because we seemingly rely a lot on narratives and things like that instead of intensive scouting.
Results based scouting vs evaluation scouting.
Do you look at the results and say "good enough" or do you dive into the how and the why.
