1. Every evaluator has their strengths and weaknesses. For a person like Kiper, he is brilliant at identifying small school sleepers way ahead of the crowd, like Joe Flacco and Mike Iupati. However, at the same time, his draft projections are usually sub-standard.
2. As for Mayock, he is really good at breaking down players, showing the strengths and weaknesses of their skills. However, on the flip side, he tends to become too emotionally attached to certain players, and often downplays their weaknesses. Whenever you say, "my guy", which he does often, you tend to lose objectivity.
3. OTC probably watched more football than anyone in America, so he should be taken seriously when he makes a statement, regardless of whether he is a paid professional or an amateur.
4. As for myself, I am very mediocre at hitting first round players in the correct spot, but smoke the paid pros in the amount of overall guys drafted out of the 253, 255 or whatever number is listed each year. I am better at gauging what teams are looking for in prospects in pulling the trigger.
With each draft analyst, paid or amateur, you have to take each with a grain of salt. The draft is like witchcraft, and those who think they know what they are doing are routinely humbled. In the end, it is all a speculated guess on how players will perform, and each individual has to create their own mental matrix to figure out how to grade each prospect. In some cases, it simply boils down to hunches, a gut level feeling.
In relation to the original post, I think the term tape means many things to many different people. Old schoolers, such as myself, are used to videotaping games, workouts, practices, anything, to analyze. The term, DVR, is somewhat new to many people. At the same time, it is true that for some positions on the field (especially the secondary positions), having real tape that isolates on the player pre-snap through whistle is invaluable. ESPN coverage will not provide that information.
[ Edited by MadDog49er on Mar 2, 2012 at 8:53 PM ]