Get ready for seven rounds of fun as Too Deep Zone mocks the draft with pinpoint accuracy, then has an existential crisis about the whole experience. (Existential crises are fun, right?)
Lance Zierlein has also been responsible for some of the most spontaneously funny radio moments I’ve ever heard. Really.
It reminds me a little of discovering Mike a few years back. It was kind of startling. How could someone be that insightful and that funny, sometimes in the same sentence? And how had I not heard of him before this?
So I’ve been chasing him around the web ever since. Since I am not wealthy enough to just sponsor him like Michelangelo or something, I will happily make this contribution to the cause.
Maybe part of what this forum provides you with is a chance to write about the business of NFL writing? I doubt there's a wide readership for that stuff as stand-alone essays, but folded into other NFL-themed content as you did here? Yeah, that might work. At any rate, I found this to be a fascinating read. Thanks.
Dallas Goedert, like Zach Ertz and Brent Celek before him, is a great argument that one shouldn't pay any attention at all to a TE prospect's ability to block. If he's good at catching the ball, you can teach him to lose slowly as a blocker.
I've actually made a conscious effort to tune out most predraft coverage over the last few years. In particular I won't read a mock draft, because they are COMPLETELY pointless, and very often the people writing them don't seem to understand that certain teams operate in certain ways. Like, the Eagles aren't going to draft a linebacker in the first round unless they are guaranteed he's going to be Ray Lewis, so someone mocking one to the Eagles just shows me they don't know anything about the Eagles.
I've always found your draft coverage to be a lot more useful than most. I like the mix of stats, on field analysis, and character traits you weave in. I'm glad you don't use nebulous buzzwords like "twitchy" to talk about a prospect. And you do a good job analyzing how a player fits (or doesn't fit) into what a team looks for or needs. Long story short, I'm numb to the flash but appreciate the substance.
Mike I am completely with you on the industrial draft machine. I do not care one iota about anyone's mock draft. I do not care one iota about the tight end from mid-power State U who's stock is rising. I do not care about anything about anyone. All I care about is who my team drafted drafted and I can learn all that shit AFTER it has happened. The NFL draft sets an annual record for ratio of amount of energy spent "analyzing" it and the value of that "analysis".
Why people think anyone care about their dipshit mock draft they spent 22 minutes on after reviewing a couple YT vids is beyond me. WHy people attend an event where the "action" consists of an old white guy making a 10-second announcement once every 15 minute is also beyond me.
Every year I celebrate the NFL draft. Not because it warrants any celebration but bc it means the temporary cessation of of activity from the basement dwelling wannabe GMs who think anyone cares about their "latest mock".
To be honest I've always said that I don't really care which prospects *might* go to which team, but I do care which prospects *did* go to which team. My favorite draft articles always come after the draft.
How about focusing on team needs and the past tendencies of various GMs / front offices? What approach (can they really evaluate, pure bpa, needs,trades etc.) have they used in the past, their results, and why some do better than others. That's something that can be analyzed with certainty based on past results and then can be tied into draft picks as they come in. Definitely sentence 1 BTW.
I like mock drafts articles. They’re frivolous reading material while I eat my lunch or enjoy a burger or other dining meal and when I’m snacking. They work fine for my interests. Regarding what you choose to write, Mike, I’ll paraphrase the old Greyhound Bus slogan: I’ll leave the driving to you.
Mims looks good in the video. Drops his hips well, maintains a forward lean, engages with his appropriately long arms. Able to pancake much small opponents.
I think the Packers trade up a few spots to grab their tackle of choice. I do enjoy watching YouTube draft simulations, but only for the Packers and done by hardcore Packer fans. I get a few different views of a variety of players and each YouTuber is concentrating on the Packers' positions of need. I'll enjoy the draft more with a little extended knowledge aforehand.
Can't wait until the 2025 draft to be held in Green Bay. We'll never host a Super Bowl, so this will be our one shot at a huge league event. I'll be 65 by then, but I'll be down at the Lambeau / Titletown complex every day for that.
It has always been my assumption that terms like “twitch” and “fluid hips” were invented by an imaginative writer who was attempting to give the readers something more than just a block of stats. Unfortunately, that devolved into the jargon-filled nonsense paragraphs we get these days.
The other major issue, from my point of view, is the basic assumption that college football is such a different monster from the NFL that the film is meaningless and we must instead deconstruct the players to try to translate college production into NFL estimations.
All of that to say, While I enjoy the draft process and am, admittedly, a sucker for the occasional mock draft, I totally agree that a novel sized report on 1200 prospects whose names I will immediately forget and never hear from again is not something I would read. I am looking forward to your articles over the next three weeks. :)
Lance Zierlein has also been responsible for some of the most spontaneously funny radio moments I’ve ever heard. Really.
It reminds me a little of discovering Mike a few years back. It was kind of startling. How could someone be that insightful and that funny, sometimes in the same sentence? And how had I not heard of him before this?
So I’ve been chasing him around the web ever since. Since I am not wealthy enough to just sponsor him like Michelangelo or something, I will happily make this contribution to the cause.
Maybe part of what this forum provides you with is a chance to write about the business of NFL writing? I doubt there's a wide readership for that stuff as stand-alone essays, but folded into other NFL-themed content as you did here? Yeah, that might work. At any rate, I found this to be a fascinating read. Thanks.
Dallas Goedert, like Zach Ertz and Brent Celek before him, is a great argument that one shouldn't pay any attention at all to a TE prospect's ability to block. If he's good at catching the ball, you can teach him to lose slowly as a blocker.
I definitely prefer Sentence 1.
I've actually made a conscious effort to tune out most predraft coverage over the last few years. In particular I won't read a mock draft, because they are COMPLETELY pointless, and very often the people writing them don't seem to understand that certain teams operate in certain ways. Like, the Eagles aren't going to draft a linebacker in the first round unless they are guaranteed he's going to be Ray Lewis, so someone mocking one to the Eagles just shows me they don't know anything about the Eagles.
I've always found your draft coverage to be a lot more useful than most. I like the mix of stats, on field analysis, and character traits you weave in. I'm glad you don't use nebulous buzzwords like "twitchy" to talk about a prospect. And you do a good job analyzing how a player fits (or doesn't fit) into what a team looks for or needs. Long story short, I'm numb to the flash but appreciate the substance.
Always worth a read for the best fourth wall breaks in sports journalism.
Mike I am completely with you on the industrial draft machine. I do not care one iota about anyone's mock draft. I do not care one iota about the tight end from mid-power State U who's stock is rising. I do not care about anything about anyone. All I care about is who my team drafted drafted and I can learn all that shit AFTER it has happened. The NFL draft sets an annual record for ratio of amount of energy spent "analyzing" it and the value of that "analysis".
Why people think anyone care about their dipshit mock draft they spent 22 minutes on after reviewing a couple YT vids is beyond me. WHy people attend an event where the "action" consists of an old white guy making a 10-second announcement once every 15 minute is also beyond me.
Every year I celebrate the NFL draft. Not because it warrants any celebration but bc it means the temporary cessation of of activity from the basement dwelling wannabe GMs who think anyone cares about their "latest mock".
To be honest I've always said that I don't really care which prospects *might* go to which team, but I do care which prospects *did* go to which team. My favorite draft articles always come after the draft.
The mock draft simulator is right out of old-school Page 2 or Kissing Suzy Kolber, just great work.
How about focusing on team needs and the past tendencies of various GMs / front offices? What approach (can they really evaluate, pure bpa, needs,trades etc.) have they used in the past, their results, and why some do better than others. That's something that can be analyzed with certainty based on past results and then can be tied into draft picks as they come in. Definitely sentence 1 BTW.
“Hence, draft simulators: it’s more fun to think about your team’s seventh-round pick than some other team’s second-rounder.”
A thousand times this! Though, selfishly, this Eagles fan wishes most other writers covering the Eagles would be replaced by you.
I like mock drafts articles. They’re frivolous reading material while I eat my lunch or enjoy a burger or other dining meal and when I’m snacking. They work fine for my interests. Regarding what you choose to write, Mike, I’ll paraphrase the old Greyhound Bus slogan: I’ll leave the driving to you.
Mims looks good in the video. Drops his hips well, maintains a forward lean, engages with his appropriately long arms. Able to pancake much small opponents.
I think the Packers trade up a few spots to grab their tackle of choice. I do enjoy watching YouTube draft simulations, but only for the Packers and done by hardcore Packer fans. I get a few different views of a variety of players and each YouTuber is concentrating on the Packers' positions of need. I'll enjoy the draft more with a little extended knowledge aforehand.
Can't wait until the 2025 draft to be held in Green Bay. We'll never host a Super Bowl, so this will be our one shot at a huge league event. I'll be 65 by then, but I'll be down at the Lambeau / Titletown complex every day for that.
It has always been my assumption that terms like “twitch” and “fluid hips” were invented by an imaginative writer who was attempting to give the readers something more than just a block of stats. Unfortunately, that devolved into the jargon-filled nonsense paragraphs we get these days.
The other major issue, from my point of view, is the basic assumption that college football is such a different monster from the NFL that the film is meaningless and we must instead deconstruct the players to try to translate college production into NFL estimations.
All of that to say, While I enjoy the draft process and am, admittedly, a sucker for the occasional mock draft, I totally agree that a novel sized report on 1200 prospects whose names I will immediately forget and never hear from again is not something I would read. I am looking forward to your articles over the next three weeks. :)
Only you!!