From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
I've been interested for years in making a website with commonly sought data, by people like us, not exactly tens of thousands of us, but data we find useful. But simple data like that, results.
Gil Brandt used to do it at NFL.com; all the Pro Days, by schedule; results listed on each one; plus his analysis blurbs. That was very nice.
Even if it's not a combine-results style, sortable chart of results; I just want one-stop shopping
seems every draft site has a pay wall these days, Draft tech is the only one I've found that gives a explanation of a player, and draft tech was never one of my fav draft sites.
years ago I'd look for Gil Brandts analysis on players, he seemed the most accurate and would do a college season ending grade on a lot of players, he tipped me off the Mathews long before the combine and pro days, now he has a pay wall, the industry has cut us out unless we want to pay for the info.
Gil Brandt used to do it at NFL.com; all the Pro Days, by schedule; results listed on each one; plus his analysis blurbs. That was very nice.
Even if it's not a combine-results style, sortable chart of results; I just want one-stop shopping
seems every draft site has a pay wall these days, Draft tech is the only one I've found that gives a explanation of a player, and draft tech was never one of my fav draft sites.
years ago I'd look for Gil Brandts analysis on players, he seemed the most accurate and would do a college season ending grade on a lot of players, he tipped me off the Mathews long before the combine and pro days, now he has a pay wall, the industry has cut us out unless we want to pay for the info.
People wanting to get paid for their work.
The inhumanity!
they are already being paid by nfl teams, who do you think footed the bill for the PFF start up?
I get it when News sites want money for online info, not so much when drafts sites who sell there info to the nfl want more.
seems every draft site has a pay wall these days, Draft tech is the only one I've found that gives a explanation of a player, and draft tech was never one of my fav draft sites.
years ago I'd look for Gil Brandts analysis on players, he seemed the most accurate and would do a college season ending grade on a lot of players, he tipped me off the Mathews long before the combine and pro days, now he has a pay wall, the industry has cut us out unless we want to pay for the info.
People wanting to get paid for their work.
The inhumanity!
they are already being paid by nfl teams, who do you think footed the bill for the PFF start up?
I get it when News sites want money for online info, not so much when drafts sites who sell there info to the nfl want more.
If they are directly affiliated with the NFL I agree. But most draft sites are not directly affiliated with the NFL.
The NFL in the past though always did provide data on the combine. I agree if they want to promote their NFL draft product they should up their ability this year with no draft.
But my guess is that NFL draft data and scouting is a LOT of work that doesn't bring much revenue. I mean ESPN used to always provide McShay and Kiper mocks for free. Now they don't and they likely don't for a reason. You have to either tune into their show or pay for it.
Again. It is a lot of work and most people who actually care, only care about the first round or top 50 players. So to get a pool of hundreds of players and filter them down to even a top 250 list is just a lot, a lot of work.
So they have to monetize that work somehow. The NFL at large knows only 1% of the fan base cares about anything after Round 3. They also know maybe 5% to 10% of the fan base care about Rd 2 and 3. Advertisers know this too so they won't pay.
My guess is there is a reason paywalls have been put up for this stuff. Especially in an era where literally anyone can do it. If anyone found a way to provide this stuff free to people....it would be out there.
I've been interested for years in making a website with commonly sought data, by people like us, not exactly tens of thousands of us, but data we find useful. But simple data like that, results.
Gil Brandt used to do it at NFL.com; all the Pro Days, by schedule; results listed on each one; plus his analysis blurbs. That was very nice.
Even if it's not a combine-results style, sortable chart of results; I just want one-stop shopping
I think it's going to be hard to rely on measurables this year too because they are all Pro Day which almost always appears better than actual combine results.
Not that I am questioning if the numbers are legit, but the combine provides its own stresses which can hurt performance. So if we see a LOT of people under 4.45 for instance and think everyone is fast....a few of those guys may have been in the 4.5's at Indy.
I think it's going to be hard to rely on measurables this year too because they are all Pro Day which almost always appears better than actual combine results.
Not that I am questioning if the numbers are legit, but the combine provides its own stresses which can hurt performance. So if we see a LOT of people under 4.45 for instance and think everyone is fast....a few of those guys may have been in the 4.5's at Indy.
I mean sure sure, but it's still far more useful than no information. You can apply the old standard to 40-times of adding like 0.05 to pro day times. But you can compare to peers, as well. Plus the jumps are a lot harder to fudge, and things like 3-cone and short-shuttle should still get you in the ballpark.
I like not relying so much on measurables. I doubt TT would have ever drafted the great Jaire due to his apparent lack of size. Moving off the firm law of measurables allowed us to get a great player.
I like not relying so much on measurables. I doubt TT would have ever drafted the great Jaire due to his apparent lack of size. Moving off the firm law of measurables allowed us to get a great player.
TT didn't draft the great Jaire.
I long had a theory that the Packers don't take those measurables as gospel, at least back in the TT days. But more that athletes with elite measurables, jumping, COD, twitch, etc., should already be showing up on game tape and those traits on tape were what was so coveted.
I like not relying so much on measurables. I doubt TT would have ever drafted the great Jaire due to his apparent lack of size. Moving off the firm law of measurables allowed us to get a great player.
TT didn't draft the great Jaire.
I long had a theory that the Packers don't take those measurables as gospel, at least back in the TT days. But more that athletes with elite measurables, jumping, COD, twitch, etc., should already be showing up on game tape and those traits on tape were what was so coveted.
i know he didnt. I was implying that he would not be a Packer if TT was in charge of that draft because Jaire is short. I could be wrong tho
I like not relying so much on measurables. I doubt TT would have ever drafted the great Jaire due to his apparent lack of size. Moving off the firm law of measurables allowed us to get a great player.
TT didn't draft the great Jaire.
I long had a theory that the Packers don't take those measurables as gospel, at least back in the TT days. But more that athletes with elite measurables, jumping, COD, twitch, etc., should already be showing up on game tape and those traits on tape were what was so coveted.
For the record, I long contended that the rumors of CB height hardlines in the GB front office was a myth based on small sample size and focusing on drafted players and not undrafted FAs... people said the hard line was 5'11" until they had one or two who was 5'10 1/2" and people said they probably round up and then we took Jaire who is 5'10 1/4" and people are like "wow, they broke their rules." I mean
More importantly is that Jaire is a pretty normal-sized CB--he's over 5'10" and was 196 pounds at the combine, which is decent bulk for that height. And his OTHER measurables are a huge part of his appeal. He ran sub 4.4 in the 40, had a sub-4.0 short shuttle and an outstanding 3-cone at 6.71.
While Jaire's instincts and attitude are a huge part of his game, he is a TERRIBLE example of not following measurables. He's got outstanding measurables aside from height, which is still totally fine. There are CBs in the league playing at 5'8" and 5'9". We've never gone that far, and most of those guys (but not all) get stuck inside.
Measurables matter. There are exceptions, but there are also different measurables that matter to different teams at different positions, so a blanket statement about them is hard to make.
Last edited by Pckfn23 on 18 Mar 2021 11:57, edited 4 times in total.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
Yeah, scroll down. There are only three pro days listed and only Pitt has more than one player.
Unless there's some "next page" button that is taking 8 minutes to load, which I would not rule out.
Ya, I am not sure what is going on there. I have been avoiding the site for a few years now since better options have come about and their site sucks.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
