Great Article about GMs and Sportwriters

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Some-writers-think-they-know-more-about-prospects-than-GMs.html

Just some bio on the scout is due:

Greg Gabriel is a veteran of 29 NFL seasons. He started as a part time scout with the Buffalo Bills in 1981. In 1984 he became an area scout for National Football Scouting and then was hired by the New York Giants in January of 1985. Gabriel was with the Giants for 16 seasons and worked with some all time great NFL coaches and personnel people including George Young, Bill Parcells, Bill Belichick, Dan Reeves, Tom Coughlin and Ernie Accorsi. While in New York, the Giants won three NFC Championships and two Super Bowls (XXI and XXI). Also, 12 first round draft picks came from Gabriel's main areas of responsibility. In June of 2001, Gabriel left New York to become Director of College Scouting for the Chicago Bears. During his nine seasons with Chicago, the Bears went on to win three Division Championships, one NFC Championship and were an NFC wildcard team twice. Six of the Bears draft picks went on to the Pro Bowl under Gabriel's direction. He also spent six years on the NFL College Advisory Committee. The purpose of the committee is to advise college underclassman on their potential NFL ability and draft status. Prior to entering the NFL, Gabriel was an account executive with Prudential Bache and later with Dean Witter. Gabriel has a Bachelor of Science degree from Canisius College in Buffalo, New York. He was also a three-year starter at running back on the Canisius football team. He then played eight seasons as a running back for the Twin City Geminis, a semi-pro team in the Buffalo area where he also coached running backs and special teams for one season. Gabriel and his wife Robin have six children and four grandchildren.

nice read, good find, I agree. I am an aspiring "sports writer" I put in "" because I do not take myself that seriously. Those who do act like that they know more than the ones in charge crack me up.

Obviously draftniks aren't as up to par as actual scouts and GMs. But it would also be a mistake to think GMs/scouts are always right and draftniks are always wrong.

I don't get why people get so upset about draftniks saying their opinion. God forbid people make opinions about stuff they enjoy. If you disagree with them, move on with your life instead of getting all upset over it....

It's a general concept about people not knowing something, and attacking those that know orders of magnitude more about the subject than they do. If you want to have an opinion, that's fine, this is in reference to a poster saying that a GM is an idiot for having an opinion that doesn't match theirs. Even though the GM's opinion is based on more facts and a deeper understanding of the subject. It's a matter of being overly confident in ignorance.

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
It's a general concept about people not knowing something, and attacking those that know orders of magnitude more about the subject than they do. If you want to have an opinion, that's fine, this is in reference to a poster saying that a GM is an idiot for having an opinion that doesn't match theirs. Even though the GM's opinion is based on more facts and a deeper understanding of the subject. It's a matter of being overly confident in ignorance.

Okay, so you've never thought a coach made a dumb decisions or a QB made a dumb throw?

Edit:

Or what if the Colts draft Ryan Tannehill with the 1st overall pick. Your telling me your opinion would just be "GM knows more than me thus it is not a dumb draft"

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
It's a general concept about people not knowing something, and attacking those that know orders of magnitude more about the subject than they do. If you want to have an opinion, that's fine, this is in reference to a poster saying that a GM is an idiot for having an opinion that doesn't match theirs. Even though the GM's opinion is based on more facts and a deeper understanding of the subject. It's a matter of being overly confident in ignorance.

Okay, so you've never thought a coach made a dumb decisions or a QB made a dumb throw?

Edit:

Or what if the Colts draft Ryan Tannehill with the 1st overall pick. Your telling me your opinion would just be "GM knows more than me thus it is not a dumb draft"

Coaches make bad decisions, but no, I don't think I know better than they do. Now if a team is down by 4, and there's one play left and the coach chooses to go for a field goal, clearly this is dumb, but I don't know of an instance when that happened. And there are truly bad coaches...but bad compared to good coaches, not newspaper writers. Could any of the niner beat writers actually draft better than a GM or coach better than even a bad coach? Want an example? Matt Millen. The guy had no scouting experience. He became a GM directly from being an announcer. The difference is, no other GM go the job from being in the media! He consistently criticized draft choices. Well now we see what happens when he actually got a shot.

As for your example, it's extreme. I don't think things like that happen often, and if they do, they turn out right as often as they turn out wrong. Mario Williams over Reggie Bush? Aldon Smith over Blaine Gabbert? Baalke got killed for that in the media! If a GM of a team, a man who has been a scout, has watched every play that Andrew Luck and Ryan Tannehill have participated in several times, interviewed both of them, worked both of them out, and has evaluated quarterbacks for 20 or so years decides that Tannehill is a better prospect, I'm not sure why my opinion, based mostly on media hype, is more valid. Again, this extreme example won't happen, and isn't relevant until it does, but 99.99999% of the time the media does not know more than GMs and coaches. To have opinions and disagree is fine, but to say a GM is insane if he would take one highly ranked prospect over another is just stupid. (note: this only applies to non Mike Singletary coaches)

Let me ask you, what is your trade? What do you specialize in?

Even though the GM's opinion is based on more facts and a deeper understanding of the subject. It's a matter of being overly confident in ignorance.

Originally posted by ifines:
Even though the GM's opinion is based on more facts and a deeper understanding of the subject. It's a matter of being overly confident in ignorance.

What is that a picture of? It didn't load

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
It's a general concept about people not knowing something, and attacking those that know orders of magnitude more about the subject than they do. If you want to have an opinion, that's fine, this is in reference to a poster saying that a GM is an idiot for having an opinion that doesn't match theirs. Even though the GM's opinion is based on more facts and a deeper understanding of the subject. It's a matter of being overly confident in ignorance.

Okay, so you've never thought a coach made a dumb decisions or a QB made a dumb throw?

Edit:

Or what if the Colts draft Ryan Tannehill with the 1st overall pick. Your telling me your opinion would just be "GM knows more than me thus it is not a dumb draft"

Coaches make bad decisions, but no, I don't think I know better than they do. Now if a team is down by 4, and there's one play left and the coach chooses to go for a field goal, clearly this is dumb, but I don't know of an instance when that happened. And there are truly bad coaches...but bad compared to good coaches, not newspaper writers. Could any of the niner beat writers actually draft better than a GM or coach better than even a bad coach? Want an example? Matt Millen. The guy had no scouting experience. He became a GM directly from being an announcer. The difference is, no other GM go the job from being in the media! He consistently criticized draft choices. Well now we see what happens when he actually got a shot.

As for your example, it's extreme. I don't think things like that happen often, and if they do, they turn out right as often as they turn out wrong. Mario Williams over Reggie Bush? Aldon Smith over Blaine Gabbert? Baalke got killed for that in the media! If a GM of a team, a man who has been a scout, has watched every play that Andrew Luck and Ryan Tannehill have participated in several times, interviewed both of them, worked both of them out, and has evaluated quarterbacks for 20 or so years decides that Tannehill is a better prospect, I'm not sure why my opinion, based mostly on media hype, is more valid. Again, this extreme example won't happen, and isn't relevant until it does, but 99.99999% of the time the media does not know more than GMs and coaches. To have opinions and disagree is fine, but to say a GM is insane if he would take one highly ranked prospect over another is just stupid. (note: this only applies to non Mike Singletary coaches)

Let me ask you, what is your trade? What do you specialize in?

I'm an attorney, lol.

And I NEVER stop hearing from the media or non-lawyers their opinion on the law, or how it should work.

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:
I'm an attorney, lol.

And I NEVER stop hearing from the media or non-lawyers their opinion on the law, or how it should work.

They often right?

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:
I'm an attorney, lol.

And I NEVER stop hearing from the media or non-lawyers their opinion on the law, or how it should work.

They often right?

They usually have the basic ideas right, but have all the details wrong and misunderstand how it all works. But the average person I'd say is very capable of understanding the basic concepts, and if they are willing to spend the time to discuss the matter with an open mind I've always been able to explain it all to them and then they understand. Most misunderstandings about my job and the law is becuase people form strong opinions but spend very little time understanding it or have very little exposure to law.

Talk to someone on a jury of say a murder case, and they could probably give a pretty decent summary of the law becasue they were exposed to the law. But someone on the street with no exposure to the law can't give a very good explanation, because they just aren't exposed to that info in their regular lives.

Same thing with football. The fan or sportswriter may not know all the details of the proffession, but they are still able to form an opinion and say something is stupid. At least the casual sports fan/sportswriter spends TONS of hours watching the game (although not as much time a pro, still a lot more time watching football and reading about it then the average person spends reading about the law. No sane person goes home and reads a book on law for the hell of it).

And hell, football is entertainment. To a large chunk of fans, half the fun is making an opinion about sports (sports betting/fantasy sports/ draftniks ect., all just want to test their knowledge of the game).

So again, I don't understand at all why people get upset because someone voices their opinion on a draft. If you want to enjoy the sport by just reading what happens, then just read what happens. If you want to enjoy a sport by making predictions and judgement calls, more power to you.

Edit: But there seem to be a sizeable amount of fans that get all pissy about draftniks and people expressing opinions on drafts. Why do you care? If you don't think their opinion is credible, why do you read it? It just doesn't make any sense.

2nd Edit: And ultimately, our legal system is completely based on letting outsiders judge a case. We have juries, made up of people outside the legal world, make final decision (well unless there are appeals). That would be similar to a GM letting himself be judged by the fans (which he ultimately is through the owner's happiness).

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:

I'm an attorney, lol.

And I NEVER stop hearing from the media or non-lawyers their opinion on the law, or how it should work.

They often right?

They usually have the basic ideas right, but have all the details wrong and misunderstand how it all works. But the average person I'd say is very capable of understanding the basic concepts, and if they are willing to spend the time to discuss the matter with an open mind I've always been able to explain it all to them and then they understand. Most misunderstandings about my job and the law is becuase people form strong opinions but spend very little time understanding it or have very little exposure to law.

Talk to someone on a jury of say a murder case, and they could probably give a pretty decent summary of the law becasue they were exposed to the law. But someone on the street with no exposure to the law can't give a very good explanation, because they just aren't exposed to that info in their regular lives.

Same thing with football. The fan or sportswriter may not know all the details of the proffession, but they are still able to form an opinion and say something is stupid. At least the casual sports fan/sportswriter spends TONS of hours watching the game (although not as much time a pro, still a lot more time watching football and reading about it then the average person spends reading about the law. No sane person goes home and reads a book on law for the hell of it).

And hell, football is entertainment. To a large chunk of fans, half the fun is making an opinion about sports (sports betting/fantasy sports/ draftniks ect., all just want to test their knowledge of the game).

So again, I don't understand at all why people get upset because someone voices their opinion on a draft. If you want to enjoy the sport by just reading what happens, then just read what happens. If you want to enjoy a sport by making predictions and judgement calls, more power to you.

Edit: But there seem to be a sizeable amount of fans that get all pissy about draftniks and people expressing opinions on drafts. Why do you care? If you don't think their opinion is credible, why do you read it? It just doesn't make any sense.

2nd Edit: And ultimately, our legal system is completely based on letting outsiders judge a case. We have juries, made up of people outside the legal world, make final decision (well unless there are appeals). That would be similar to a GM letting himself be judged by the fans (which he ultimately is through the owner's happiness).

I don't think it's true that the jury really understands the case and the law behind the case all that well. You have to be crazy to believe that! In fact, I totally disagree with your assessment of how people understand the law.

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
I don't think it's true that the jury really understands the case and the law behind the case all that well. You have to be crazy to believe that! In fact, I totally disagree with your assessment of how people understand the law.

Are you an attorney or work in the legal field?

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

I don't think it's true that the jury really understands the case and the law behind the case all that well. You have to be crazy to believe that! In fact, I totally disagree with your assessment of how people understand the law.

Are you an attorney or work in the legal field?

No, why?

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:

Originally posted by RollinWith21n52:
I don't think it's true that the jury really understands the case and the law behind the case all that well. You have to be crazy to believe that! In fact, I totally disagree with your assessment of how people understand the law.

Are you an attorney or work in the legal field?

No, why?

So you're outside the professional field forming a layperson's opinion on the validity of another layperson's opinion. Yet you disregard what a pro says.

hmmmm....You don't see the irony?