Quote:
Originally Posted by B_Ambuehl
I'm convinced the large fail ratio among scouts/Gms is due to overanalysis. The problem is the teams have too much info and too much time. The more info you receive the more likely you are to overvalue things that have nothing to do with football. Hackoli was great at doing this, as are alot of other GMs.
The game is played on the field - and what happens on the field is all that matters.
It doesn't take much info or observation to identify a player - But when it's your fulltime job maybe you start assigning too much value to things that have nothing to do with football.
The concept of thin-slicing comes to mind:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin-slicing
Someone with only a few minutes to perform an evaluation has a much more intuitive view of things. |
Thin slicing is definitely going on here, but Groupthink, or rather Genothink here is just a textbook example of that phenomenon.
For the most part, you have a completely cohesive group here which all has the same thought. Of course, the longer discussion goes on, the more the pre-existing belief is reinforced. Those who may not hold the same opinion are quickly labeled, stereotyped, ridiculed, and ostracized. Most of the "ink" around here could be characterized as pressure to conform, or to leave.
Of particular interest is the fallacy of recent draft failures. Nothing about Geno Smith is related to the Chiefs' past draft failures. He is only seen as worthy of the #1 overall simply because the old strategy failed, it's got little to do at its root with his virtue as a player. You can easily see this by looking at how sources outside this forum rate him as a middle or late first round pick (or possibly not one) in most (other seasons') drafts.
The groupthink here is reinforcing the fallacious idea that "We need a new plan because we sucked at executing the previous plan"