ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Saccopoo Memorial Draft Forum (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   Greg Cossel's Mock (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=258765)

Quesadilla Joe 04-23-2012 12:32 PM

Greg Cossel's Mock
 
http://nflfilms.nfl.com/2012/04/23/c...ks-mock-draft/

Here it is – my first mock draft. A moment I will savor forever. Here’s how I am doing it: I will choose players based on my film study and my sense of team needs. I have no idea what different teams draft boards look like, nor will I try to speculate what a team might be thinking. The main objective of my mock is to further discuss the top players by putting them in a draft format. One other caveat: I am disregarding documented off-field problems, character issues, anything that is not a function of on-field play. I understand that teams significantly factor that into the equation, but I am solely basing my player evaluations on what’s on the tape. That’s what I do. I watch tape.

Drum roll please . . . . .



Spoiler!

Quesadilla Joe 04-23-2012 12:33 PM

The rest of the mock, his mock actually was over 20,000 characters. :eek:

30. San Francisco: The 49ers team profile will not likely change in 2012. Run the ball, play outstanding defense and special teams and win with fundamental execution as opposed to occasional splash. While it might not be sexy, the pick here is Peter Konz from Wisconsin. Konz played center for the Badgers but could easily slide to guard in the NFL. Another highly disciplined Wisconsin offensive lineman, Konz played with an excellent combination of movement and strength. He was not a road grader but in tandem with his active and constantly moving feet he was effective moving defensive linemen. The other attribute that stood out: Competitiveness.


31. New England: This is where Michael Brockers comes off the board. Brockers is a development player with great size, long arms and natural power. When he stayed low and played with leverage he could be dominating. He also flashed quick and violent hands. Are there similarities down the road to Richard Seymour, clearly a better player coming out of college than Brockers? Will Brockers have the explosive strength and leverage to win the battle for the neutral zone? Will he establish a new line of scrimmage? The key for Bill Belichick is how impactful that kind of player is for other defenders. I can see Belichick looking at Brockers and seeing a raw, less refined Seymour; a piece of fresh clay that he can mold.

32. Giants: Tom Coughlin still wants to run the ball. Never forget that. Boise State’s Doug Martin is the pick. Martin has a feature back mentality. He attacked downhill with decisiveness, determination, toughness and competitiveness. There was a blue collar, workingman element to his game that was more appealing and captivating with each tape I watched. He ran with velocity, and that translated into natural power. There were some elements of Ray Rice in Martin’s running style. Martin was one of the last players I re-watched late in the process, and I liked him more each time I saw him.

Direckshun 04-23-2012 12:34 PM

Well.

Ain't that ballsy.

buddha 04-23-2012 12:35 PM

KC would pass on Kalil if he was still there? NFW!

DJ's left nut 04-23-2012 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8560737)
Well.

Ain't that ballsy.

You can't make a bunch of stupid picks and call it ballsy.

That's all that draft was - a whole shitload of stupid.

tredadda 04-23-2012 01:00 PM

This dude officially has the worst mock I have ever seen. Kalil at #13? Gilmore and Jenkins gone before Claiborne? I stopped after about the top 15. Jenkins is 1st round talent, but 7th round mind. No team will take a chance on him with a first rounder.

ChiefMojo 04-23-2012 01:06 PM

What he says is true about Kuechly but it is a major disagreement to those that haven't liked Kuechly or the Chiefs taking him. I agree with him but I seem to be in the minority.

This is what Greg Cossel said about the Chiefs pick Luke Kuechly (for those that don't want to hit the link)...

11. Kansas City: The Chiefs under Romeo Crennel are quietly building an excellent defense. Focus on linebacker: It’s a very good group that features Tamba Hali and Justin Houston on the outside, and Derrick Johnson inside. You add Luke Kuechly to the mix, and you may well have the best 3-4 linebacking unit in the NFL. I’m tired of hearing about Kuechly’s average athleticism. I watched game after game after game and he played fast with urgent reaction speed. He played with his eyes better than any linebacker I can remember evaluating. His so-called inability to play physically? Watch the NFL as extensively as I do, and you’ll know that very few linebackers take on blocks. That’s a time-worn cliché that really has little practical application.

My Take: School has taken over my life, so I've been absent most of the offseason. That being said, I have done my research on a few guys, and I've finally set my heart on Kuechly. KC needs. Guard, but I think that can be had in RD2. Kuechly is a much needed piece for a Defense that will face 3 pass heavy teams, twice a year. Adding one more speed playmaker would go a long way to getting the defense from top 15 to top 5.

BigChiefFan 04-23-2012 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tredadda (Post 8560808)
This dude officially has the worst mock I have ever seen. Kalil at #13? Gilmore and Jenkins gone before Claiborne? I stopped after about the top 15. Jenkins is 1st round talent, but 7th round mind. No team will take a chance on him with a first rounder.

I tend to agree. He's got some players rated too low and some players rated way too high. I agree Jenkins falls out of the first round.

buddha 04-23-2012 01:15 PM

Actually, Cosell completely confused the Kuechly strengths/weaknesses.

Who says Kuechly is average athletically? Is that code for, "beware of the white LBer?" Kuechly has very good athletic ability. His work out numbers are excellent. I think he plays fast too...no problems there. What he doesn't do is step up into an open hole and crack people. I've watched three full BC games and he didn't do it once. He tackles to the side and pulls guys down. Yes, he can run sideline to sideline and drag guys down. If that's what you want, great. But at best, he's a Will backer...he is not a Sam or a Mike at the NFL level. I know that they have different names in a 3-4, but you get the idea.

Unless there is a GREAT Mike backer sitting there (there isn't this year), you stick with Belcher and rotate in safeties as needed. Most of the time, NFL defenses play base nickle against Manning anyway. Kuechly is okay in coverage, but he's not great. The scouting reports say that he does this very well, I understand that. However, he is slow to rotate his hips, even when the TE releases right next to him. I'd rather have Belcher or Hightower later, and just rotate in cover guys.

Any LB is going to be situational at this point. Why waste an 11th pick on that?

KevB 04-24-2012 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8560750)
You can't make a bunch of stupid picks and call it ballsy.

That's all that draft was - a whole shitload of stupid.

He said all along that he was only "mocking" based on the game film he'd watched. Also that the mock was really just a vehicle to talk about the prospects. No off the field concerns were included. I'm sure putting Jenkins high is drawing a roll of the eyes, but there's now a survey done by Yahoo Sports of 18 personnel guys saying Jenkins is the most talented corner in the draft.

I thought it was an interesting read. The draft won't go down that way, but some good observations.

KevB 04-24-2012 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buddha (Post 8560848)
Actually, Cosell completely confused the Kuechly strengths/weaknesses.

Who says Kuechly is average athletically?

That was the talk from some before the combine.

KevB 04-24-2012 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tredadda (Post 8560808)
This dude officially has the worst mock I have ever seen. Kalil at #13? Gilmore and Jenkins gone before Claiborne? I stopped after about the top 15. Jenkins is 1st round talent, but 7th round mind. No team will take a chance on him with a first rounder.

He's said all along on Twitter that there'd be some different spots for some guys and that he's not really concerned about mock accuracy. He's going off the tape he watched only, with no concern for off the field or workout stuff. He's been interesting to follow on Twitter; I appreciate his thoughts leading up to the draft.

Sorter 04-24-2012 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buddha (Post 8560746)
KC would pass on Kalil if he was still there? NFW!

Could totally move Albert to guard...;)

Direckshun 04-24-2012 09:22 PM

I'll say that last year, I was confident the Chiefs wanted Gabe Carimi and I had my expectations totally upset.

I'm so confident the Chiefs will take Kuechly this year. But the Chiefs could always surprise me.

Sorter 04-24-2012 09:24 PM

About the mock though, I like it. Its a different perspective. Think of it more as a big board based on field performance and then applied to each teams needs.

RealSNR 04-24-2012 09:26 PM

LMAO I actually have Reuben Randle going to Cleveland at 22 as well.

Everything else in this mock is insanity. Sure, you can add in all the disclaimers all you want, but that doesn't excuse you from putting out an abortion of a mock

KevB 04-24-2012 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR (Post 8564196)
Everything else in this mock is insanity. Sure, you can add in all the disclaimers all you want, but that doesn't excuse you from putting out an abortion of a mock

A couple of tweets from him before putting out his mock:

"I am not keeping score in my mock. Not looking to win a contest. In fact, my explanations will be more important than my picks."

"Main goal of my mock will be to further eval players by placing them in draft format. Based solely on film study + my sense of team needs"

I'd guess he would prefer not to do a mock, but you almost have to in order for your opinions to be read. I certainly don't agree with some of his stuff, but reading the evaluations is pretty useful. Other than Jenkins and Gilmore being that high and Kalil too low, I don't think anything else was out of the realm of possibility.

Dmello12 04-24-2012 09:44 PM

this was a waste of time

Sorter 04-24-2012 09:55 PM

I definitely agree with Gilmore/Jenkins being high (although, not the 3rd best player based off of film analysis), due to this becoming a passing league. Having an above avg secondary e having an excellent pass rush is crucial now.

Reaper16 04-24-2012 11:23 PM

It's the "talent"/BPA mock. So keep that in mind.

That said, he's a ****ing idiot for thinking that Gilmore and Jenkins are better CBs than Claiborne.

RealSNR 04-25-2012 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper16 (Post 8564409)
It's the "talent"/BPA mock. So keep that in mind.

That said, he's a ****ing idiot for thinking that Gilmore and Jenkins are better CBs than Claiborne.

Quote:

Here’s how I am doing it: I will choose players based on my film study and my sense of team needs.
His sense of team needs sucks ass.

The Rick 04-25-2012 09:33 AM

Reading that makes me realize that we're in a really good position right now. We don't really have any glaring needs (other than QB), so we can just sit back and see what happens.

If Tannehill falls to us, we can take him and we (hopefully) get our QB of the future.

If we take someone like Kalil (if he falls) or DeCastro, our offensive line suddenly has the potential to be very, very good...one of the best.

If we take Kuechly, as this guy says, may well have the best 3-4 linebacking unit in the NFL.

We have the luxury of really going in a lot of different directions based on who's available when we pick.

Chiefnj2 04-25-2012 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tredadda (Post 8560808)
This dude officially has the worst mock I have ever seen. Kalil at #13? Gilmore and Jenkins gone before Claiborne? I stopped after about the top 15. Jenkins is 1st round talent, but 7th round mind. No team will take a chance on him with a first rounder.

You didn't read the introduction.

Mr. Laz 04-25-2012 09:53 AM

having two Derrick Johnson's on the team isn't necessarily a bad thing ... Kuechly and Johnson can both cover and stay on the field all the time.

potentially we could walk Houston up to the LOS and go with a 5-2-4 look.

Hali/Houston coming off the edge
Kuechly/Johnson splitting the fielding at LB's
Flowers/Routt bump and run
Berry playing shallow on the strongside
Lewis playing centerfield(because that's the only thing he does well)

L.A. Chieffan 04-25-2012 10:03 AM

Anybody can spit out the same top twenty guys going to the same top twenty teams, he's just trying to be different.

KevB 04-25-2012 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 8564793)
having two Derrick Johnson's on the team isn't necessarily a bad thing ... Kuechly and Johnson can both cover and stay on the field all the time.

potentially we could walk Houston up to the LOS and go with a 5-2-4 look.

Hali/Houston coming off the edge
Kuechly/Johnson splitting the fielding at LB's
Flowers/Routt bump and run
Berry playing shallow on the strongside
Lewis playing centerfield(because that's the only thing he does well)

Another point on Kuechly that I heard yesterday and I thought was a good point. You have an ILB that can cover, and that helps your red zone defense immensely. He and DJ in coverage in the red zone would be about as good as you're going to get most likely.

KevB 04-25-2012 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Rick (Post 8564747)
Reading that makes me realize that we're in a really good position right now. We don't really have any glaring needs (other than QB), so we can just sit back and see what happens.

If Tannehill falls to us, we can take him and we (hopefully) get our QB of the future.

If we take someone like Kalil (if he falls) or DeCastro, our offensive line suddenly has the potential to be very, very good...one of the best.

If we take Kuechly, as this guy says, may well have the best 3-4 linebacking unit in the NFL.

We have the luxury of really going in a lot of different directions based on who's available when we pick.

That's exactly where I'm at with this 1st round pick. Even if someone exciting doesn't fall to us and we end up with a DeCastro or Kuechly, we still upgrade a position with a guy who's considered the best at his position in this draft. If we throw a curve and go with a Melvin Ingram, great, we got a pass rusher and you can't have too many of those. I'd even be ok with Poe considering he'll be tutored by Crennell and company. Position of need, more than capable physically, etc.

DJ's left nut 04-25-2012 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 8564793)
having two Derrick Johnson's on the team isn't necessarily a bad thing ... Kuechly and Johnson can both cover and stay on the field all the time.

potentially we could walk Houston up to the LOS and go with a 5-2-4 look.

Hali/Houston coming off the edge
Kuechly/Johnson splitting the fielding at LB's
Flowers/Routt bump and run
Berry playing shallow on the strongside
Lewis playing centerfield(because that's the only thing he does well)

And if the QB audibles into an inside run, you're one missed assignment inside from having a guy split your defense for 20 yards.

It's not a formation I'd be real excited about running on 1st or 2nd down. And I am once again not a fan of taking a 'sub package' player with a 1st round pick - hence my reluctance to get excited about Ingram or Mercilus.

I just hate the idea of taking Kuechly when I think a guy like Hightower can give you 90% of what Kuechly can do in space and do a much better job with 'Ted backer things' like sticking his nose up into the gap or re-routing a TE over the middle. Further, I think you can get Hightower 10 spots lower (or perhaps more).

Mr. Laz 04-25-2012 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8564838)
And if the QB audibles into an inside run, you're one missed assignment inside from having a guy split your defense for 20 yards.

You can say the same thing about any blitz or aggressive defense package.

Quote:

It's not a formation I'd be real excited about running on 1st or 2nd down.
it would be more of a passing down formation


Quote:

And I am once again not a fan of taking a 'sub package' player with a 1st round pick - hence my reluctance to get excited about Ingram or Mercilus.

I just hate the idea of taking Kuechly when I think a guy like Hightower can give you 90% of what Kuechly can do in space and do a much better job with 'Ted backer things' like sticking his nose up into the gap or re-routing a TE over the middle. Further, I think you can get Hightower 10 spots lower (or perhaps more).
once again we are looking at the options

DeCastro - too high for a guard
Kuechly - too high for a ILB
Barron - too high for a SS

:shrug:

if we can't trade down then what are we going to do? Take a 2nd round player at another position just to avoid taking a position not normally ranked high?

DJ's left nut 04-25-2012 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 8564925)
You can say the same thing about any blitz or aggressive defense package.

it would be more of a passing down formation



once again we are looking at the options

DeCastro - too high for a guard
Kuechly - too high for a ILB
Barron - too high for a SS

:shrug:

if we can't trade down then what are we going to do? Take a 2nd round player at another position just to avoid taking a position not normally ranked high?

Brockers or DeCastro.

I disagree with the consensus that 11 is 'too high for a guard'. With short passing being so popular now, more and more teams are going to look to collapsing the middle to deal with that. I think the guard position is now close to RT in terms of overall importance.

But even assuming you believe 11 to be too high for a guard - He's going to go in the top 16(ish). Is there really a massive gulf between 11 and 16? If you think a guy is good enough to take at 16 or even 18 and you can't engineer a trade-back...well shit happens, take him at 11.

If you're looking at a whole bunch of positions that are all positions of slightly lesser importance, then give me the one that's going to spend the most time on the field. That's going to be Brockers or DeCastro.

buddha 04-25-2012 12:07 PM

DJ...you and I have seen eye to eye on this since all along.

What are the arguments against Brockers? He's from LSU...5-techs aren't worthy of 11th pick...???

What are the arguments against DeCastro? He's from a brainy school, guards aren't worthy of 11th pick, guards don't matter in "today's football", you can get people off the street to play guard.

None of the arguments against either guy are valid. DeCastro is one of the surest things on the board at any position. There is not one NFL exec who would honestly tell you that 11 is too high for a guy who should be a Pro Bowler for a decade AT ANY POSITION (every down positions). Brockers has more risk, but he also has enough production value, when added to his enormous ceiling, produces a guy who could be dominant, not just productive.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.