Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Gil Brandt's top 100, for what it's worth.


top dawg

Recommended Posts

Tunsil comes in first (with good reason). 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000652753/article/hot-100-laremy-tunsil-is-top-prospect-in-2016-nfl-draft

Interestingly enough, Brandt has both Henry's ranked at 32 and 33. He also says that S'ua Cravens (49) "is a very competitve player, but a prospect without a true position" much like Shaq Thompson last year.

I also think that it's very notable that he said "Whoever drafts [Sterling] Shepard (39l will be very glad that they did."

Note that he has both Dodd (16) and Shaq Lawson (24) ranked higher than where our actual draft spot at 31 falls.

I find it a little intersting that the main suspects in our party of draft prospects, in addition to the whisperings by Jeremy Igo, seem to kind of align with Brandt's rankings.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, sml1950 said:

I've followed the godfather's top 100 for a number of years and he's unbelievably accurate.  While they may not come off the board exactly, he got 96 of the 100 last year and has averaged around 94/95. 

Thanks for this.  I was really impressed with this ranking.  I'll give it extra weight in any further consensus rankings and/or draft availability analysis I do.  Hoping I'll manage some more position analyses later this week.  Hit a very busy patch of work the past 4 - 5 days, and the coming week is still pretty maxxed out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm on the Shepard train 100%. Like Funchess he can line up everywhere.  Imagine using KB, Funch, and Shepard as chess pieces at the X Y and Z WR positions for mismatches. Imagine bunch formations with those 3 and Olsen on the oppiste side of the formation.

 

 

I got a Lil chub just thinking about it tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Rags said:

I'm on the Shepard train 100%. Like Funchess he can line up everywhere.  Imagine using KB, Funch, and Shepard as chess pieces at the X Y and Z WR positions for mismatches. Imagine bunch formations with those 3 and Olsen on the oppiste side of the formation.

 

 

I got a Lil chub just thinking about it tbh.

Jumbo package of KB, Funch, Olsen and Dickson. 

Speed package of Ginn, Brown and Shepard. 

Then there's mixing it up.

Do love. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gil STILL knows the game and one of the very few that I respect their opinion.

Echo the praise already shared here. Gil changed NFL with his computers and rankings, waaaaay ahead of his time and remains connected. If you land three out his top 100, they have a good chance to pan out.

I remember him praising Tri Turner, saying he was the steal of the third. Said if he stayed at school for another year, been a first rounder. 

Funny his board mirrors my over in the draft forum, but where he has Noah Spence..... Wow.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to discount Brandt, but it's interesting that he's so high on Neal. It's not just him, a lot of media guys are suddenly buying him in the first. A week ago he was usually in the mid-40s, but now that he's been invited to the draft he's now knocking on the door of the top 25. He's also suddenly jumped guys like Joseph and Bell to become the top Safety on a lot of boards (unless you count Ramsey as a Safety).

I know Brandt likes to wait on his lists; but it feels like the sudden shuffling a lot of these guys are doing is more about them trying to get as close as possible to the actual results, rather than actually doing more research and altering their rankings organically. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am actually more excited about who we take 2-4. That is where you see GMan come thru.  He has a guy at the bottom named Willy Beavers.  While I would love to draft him just for the immature yet extremely entertaining puns regarding his name, I am also intrigued at the thought of a utility lineman. There are other guys there who also look interesting but I like me some wiley Beaver.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got this thing figured out.  No charge. 

If there is no DE from Clemson, we consider Shepherd (WR-Smitty clone, but a reach at 30, imo), Ifedi (OT--our OL staff can make elite--this is my pick, btw). Could a Decker or Conklin drop to us? 

The second round HAS to be where we grab our SS unless we move up to get the player we did not take in the first.  Look at all of the SS candidates sitting there around 50-75.

In the third round, we grab Harlan Miller, CB.  He is a Norman clone in nearly every sense of the word.

In the fourth round, we probably take a TE, DE, or DT.  The DT crop could be the best.

The crystal ball gets foggy after that.  I would rather take Shepherd in the second, but the only way we get him there is if we package our third and second rounders to move up into the second round.   If we do that, we could end up with Ifedi and Shepherd with no pick until the fourth round.  We would just about have to take a CB there, and that is fine--we have found CB gold late in the draft a few times (Norman, Benwikere).  We should add that we have been looking at later-round SS and DE candidates lately.   So, does that clear it up?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Give me Mitchell Evans over T Sanders in this run heavy offense any day of the week. 
    • What's up gents, the OGs remember me, the guy who single-handedly gave the Panthers the greatest uniform in history moniker. Not too long after that I got involved with Pro Football Focus (pre-Collinsworth acquisition) and ended up taking backseat here to preserve some objectivity. But from a distance I noticed a lot. After the end of the Cam era this place devolved into the most un-fun, petty, negative cesspool of whining and bitching that has ever graced the internet. The worst part of it all is that the level of discussion turned into the most ill-informed, hot-take, unnuanced crap, rife with people talking out of their posteriors as if they have any clue about what they are watching. Once you get into the professional side of the sport and actual film rooms, you start to understand there's an absurd number of moving parts to pretty much every snap and the details you are privy to are truly only half the picture. The absolute most important thing I learned from being part of professional level football analysis is that quarterbacking is literally the most intricate and difficult position in all of professional sports, and that the NFL itself is struggling to develop any workable model that allows them to understand what makes one succeed vs what makes one fail. Because of this paradox it has also made the quarterback position itself grossly overvalued from a fan and media standpoint, creating an absurd fixation on the results delivered by a single player who has to rely on the contributions of everyone around them. This also drives the dreaded inflation of QB salaries that inevitably cause even elite teams to lose key talent all to pour cash into the one player supposed to be able to single-handedly elevate the entire team (and defense and special teams and coaching and ownership by some mysterious proxy), yet without those same players even talented teams can wander the wilderness searching for the right guy to take advantage of their talent window. The discussions the last few years around Bryce has personified this insanity, as this board has devolved into some sort of electronic civil war between the hyperbolic Young supporters and the vitriolic Bryce haters. The reality, like practically everything in this world, is somewhere in the middle. He has traits that can absolutely elevate a team with creativity, play recognition, off-arm angle throws, mental toughness, etc. He's also physically limited, with mostly "good-enough" qualities for most situations that a professional quarterback is asked to do, and will never be an overpowering physical force like pre-injury Cam. But "good-enough" physicality represents a large majority of championship-winning quarterbacks, even in the modern era. There's a reason the corpse of Peyton Manning took the chip from elite physical specimen Cam, because the team surrounding him was talented enough to get him there, while we all know Cam was the driving force of that 2015 team. That's no knock on him, that's just how the game of football tends to work: the more complete team usually wins. The summary is this: if this team lives or dies solely on the performance of its quarterback, then it is absolutely a paper tiger even if he plays brilliantly week in and out. There are no superheroes in this sport, there are only conduits that proxy the collective efforts of much of the team around them. And no one alive can tell you how the position is played perfectly, it's all a confluence of circumstance and what unique collection of traits each player brings to the position, which can never be truly recreated season after season, even for the same player on the same team. If this place remains a raging hellscape of idiotic hot takes I will happily remove myself again and do something more productive for yet another decade, but maybe's there hope that we can all get back to the old adage, and keep pounding.
    • Really impressed how the bottom six have looked the past couple games
×
×
  • Create New...