Originally Posted by Lucky
OK in a span of a week, Mike Mayock takes McClellin from the #5 to the #2 OLB in the draft. Then states that after watching "more tape" he likes McClellin more. My question: What were you basing your original rankings off of? How do we know whether you've watched equal amounts of tape on all of the OLB prospects?
To me, it seems disingenuous. I firmly believe that Mayock (like Mel Kiper) gathers information on prospects from NFL contacts, and re-packages the information as his own. Sure, Mayock complies the lists and makes decisions on which information to trust. But that's not what he's selling.
From my perspective, there's been only one draft guru who wasn't a suckerfish and scouted for himself. The late Joel Buchsbaum (mistakenly called Buschbaum) of Pro Football Weekly. One of the fathers of draftnik industry, you may not have agreed with Joel, and he wasn't always right. But when Buchsbaum opined on a prospect, you knew that opinion was his own, developed in the film room.
There was a quote last year from an unnamed GM about Mayock stating that he was one of the only Draftniks that actually studies coaches tape, and that he had some measure of respect throughout the league. This GM mentioned that other so called draft gurus were "less respected". If I can find it later I'll try to post it.
Regarding changing opinions, if Mayock does indeed study tape, consider this, if he focuses on the top 100 prospects and there is 11 games worth of footage per prospect, thats 1,100 games to watch. If some of these games have multiple prospects, that would require multiple screenings of the same game to properly evaluate each guy. That's a lot of football to watch. I don't have a problem with him changing opinions throughout the process as he studies film more. I would expect his rankings to change as time progresses and he gathers more info.
For the record, I also REALLY liked JB. He was awesome. Personally, I think Mayock is as close to JB as it gets for the current generation of draft gurus.