Big Ten Draftageddon: Informative Portion Comment Count

Seth
Four_Horsemen_by_MarkWilkinson[1]

What the hell was this? Draftageddon is the MGo-version of those preseason all Big Ten articles it is mandatory that sports site generate. If we had titled it "Top 100 players in the B1G" and written one line about each guy it would be great clickbait and nobody would learn anything. So instead we activated our competitive natures, had the MGoStaff draft four 26-man teams, and learned waaaay too much.

Full details are in the first post. This is the "what have we learned" post.

PREVIOUSLY ON DRAFTAGEDDON (two rounds/post)
  1. Devin Gardner, plus Braxton Miller, Brandon Scherff, Randy Gregory, Michael Bennett, Joey Bosa, Shilique Calhoun, Carl Davis, Stefon Diggs
  2. Devin Funchess and Jake Ryan, plus Kurtis Drummond, Venric Mark, Jason Spriggs, Chi Chi Ariguzo, Melvin Gordon, Trae Waynes
  3. Frank Clark, plus Ameer Abdullah, Kenny Bell, Taiwan Jones, Christian Jones, Noah Spence, Maxx Williams, Rob Havenstein
  4. Blake Countess, plus Andre Monroe, Donovan Smith, Taylor Decker, Sojourn Shelton, Desmond King, Darius Hamilton, Theiren Cockran
  5. Darius Kilgo, Shane Wynn, Brandon Vitabile, Jack Allen, Austin Blythe, Kaleb Johnson, Kyle Costigan, Dallas Lewallen
  6. Matt Robinson, Mike Hull, Corey Cooper, Devin Smith, Jeremy Langford, John Lowdermilk, Jordan Lucas, Christian Hackenberg
  7. Jabrill Peppers, Desmond Morgan, and James Ross III, plus Connor Cook,  Adrian Amos, Steve Longa, Jack Conklin, Tyler Marz
  8. Dontre Wilson, Louis Trinca-Pasat, Nate Sudfeld, Tre Roberson, Tevin Coleman, Earnest Thomas III, Jeff Heuerman, Ibraheim Campbell
  9. Jarrod Wilson, plus Adolphus Washington, Deon Long, Marcus Rush, Eric Murray, Sean Davis, Josh Ferguson, Tony Lippett
  10. Levern Jacobs, Pat Elflein, Jake Cotton, Warren Herring, Zac Epping, Chad Lindsay, Doran Grant, Michael Rose
  11. Darian Hicks, Tyler Kroft, Michael Caputo, Corey Clement, Kevin Snyder, Jordan Walsh, Michael Geiger, Traveon Henry
  12. Willie Henry and Matt Wile, plus Tony Jones, Ed Davis, RJ Williamson, Brad Craddock, Dan Voltz, Andrew Donnal
  13. Joe Bolden, plus Dan Voltz, Andrew Donnal, William Likely, Mike Sadler, Jesse James, Macgarrett Kings Jr., Cameron Johnston, Quinton Alston, Kyle Prater, C.J. Brown
  14. BiSB won the vote, Seth won the photoshop contest

Supplemental Left Behind series by BiSB: offense (defense not posted yet)

GUYS WE DRAFTED (VISUALIZED)

I thought you might appreciate seeing who did and didn't get drafted from among each teams' starters.

MichiganOhio StateMichigan State

Click any to access the giant PDF of all 14 teams plus ND.

It doesn't tell you when they were drafted or by whom, or how big of a hole the non-draftees are, e.g. Maryland's defense looks like Michigan's at a glance, but Michigan has tons of quality LBs while Maryland has one of moderate value. Ohio State is strongest up front on both sides of the ball. Iowa is strong down the middle.

[Jump for are we homers, overrated rivals, deep positions, most overrated dudes, and answers to pretty much every other clickbait thing this offseason because we're nothing if not a thorough bunch]

THINGS WE LEARNED

Other than we're very serious when it comes to defending our selections, we discovered some important lessons about Michigan's conference rivals and former rivals and somebodies we used to know. I did a little Q&A with Brian, Ace, BiSB and myself which follows:

We took two Michigan offensive players in the first three rounds, and 8/11 starters (Morgan/Bolden counted once) on defense (plus the kicker). Which Wolverines, if any, were on the bubble, or would have been as good or better picks than people taken? So…Is Michigan better than we realized or are we homers?

Ace: Neither, really. I don't think any of the Michigan selections were major reaches; it's distinctly possible Desmond Morgan ends up being the most regretted pick among the Wolverines taken, and he's definitely better than a few of the other linebackers we drafted. So we're not homers. I think we went in thinking the defense is going to be quite good—something I think we've all been saying—and the offense has two outstanding skill players and a five-very-large-men-sized question mark up front; the picks reflected this.

DSC_2723
Brady approves of us taking more Michigan guys, also approves of how Brian prefaced his answer.

BiSB: I think the number of Michigan players was a fair representation of the talent on the team. Truth be told, you actually could have made a case for Raymon Taylor over Will Likely or Darien Hicks, Freddy Canteen over Macgarrett Kings, or Jake Butt over Jesse James. Desmond Morgan and Jabrill Peppers were stretches for where they were taken in the draft, but both deserved to be taken somewhere (Morgan for his production, Peppers for EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE plus he can fill in at ANY OTHER POSITION in case of injury). Willie Henry was the 8th DT taken, so I stand by that one over, for example, This-Is-The-Year-He-Breaks-Out-No-Really-We’re-Serious-This-Time Lawrence Thomas.

Michigan is going to be really good defensively this year, and they have some very strong offensive pieces. Embrace the optimism, folks. It’s way more fun than the alternative.

Brian: Well, we took zero OL and no one else on offense; I think it's pretty easy to make a case that ten Michigan players would reasonably be all Big Ten if those teams went four deep. I didn't see any Michigan players go off the board and think "boy, that's a reach." So we're not homers.

But that doesn't mean Michigan is better than we realized. We didn't just avoid Michigan OL, we ran away from them. Maybe Glasgow was on someone's board. No one else even approached it. Michigan has a lot of nice pieces and then the biggest problem area in the conference that doesn't belong to Purdue.

Guys on the bubble: Taylor, Lewis, Norfleet, Glasgow, Butt. Taylor probably gets picked but we're worried that Jourdan Lewis steals his job, and Norfleet probably gets picked except for the surfeit of Norfleet types in the league this year—Norfleet types who have actually been used. I did think about Glasgow, because he was relatively good for a sophomore a year ago.

Seth: I think it's more about this team being sound in areas the conference is generally weak. Funchess and Gardner were taken high because they're blue chips at respective positions with just two full-fledged stars available. You also wouldn't expect position-switching Jake Ryan to be the first LB off the board, or for Ross and Morgan to join him so soon after. Countess isn't the 2nd best CB in the conference in a normal year, and in that normal year Peppers happens late in the draft as nickel pickup, not when we're still fitting out our starting kits. Jarrod Wilson was taken 7th among safeties, but that's after Brian, BiSB, and Ace all shot themselves in the face with worse ones. Matt Wile is a good bet because the kickers suck.

The only Michigan players not drafted from relatively weak fields were the two DL; Frank Clark was one among many very good DE options, and the way the DTs played out Willie Henry in the 23rd round was the first that was any kind of risk. So Michigan isn't MICHIGAN but the Big Ten is worse than those MICHIGAN's faced even in the recent past.

2. Are we overrating rivals (16 Spartans, 13 Buckeyes) or is this correct?

Ace: This seems correct to me. There's good reason the top teams get a ton of dudes drafted: even if they weren't impact players last year, they're probably going to be better than their positional counterparts on non-contenders, save for the occasional Ra'Shede Hageman. Both Ohio State's offense and Michigan State's defense have proven good enough that they can simply fill in the gaps and proceed as planned.

School Offense Defense ST Total
Michigan State 6 8 2 16
Ohio State 7 5 1 13
Michigan 2 9 1 12
Maryland 4 5 1 10
Wisconsin 7 3 - 10
Iowa 4 5 - 9
Northwestern 5 3 - 8
Nebraska 3 3 - 6
Penn State 3 3 - 6
Indiana 5 - - 5
Rutgers 2 3 - 5
Minnesota 2 2 - 4
Illinois 1 1 - 2
Purdue - - - 0

BiSB: If you look at the reason so many Sparties went, it was because (a) people took fliers on MSU defenders late (Ed Davis, Darian Hicks, RJ Williamson), which is pretty understandable given what we’ve all witnessed, (2) they had both a kicker and a punter taken, both of whom are really good, and (d) they’re the reigning Big Ten champs. As for Ohio State, they have skill players coming out the Buckeye on offense and a defensive line from which EVERYONE was going to be picked.

Brian: It is correct-ish. Collectively I think we overrated MSU's offense, but at this point they are plug and play on D.

Seth: Theiren Cockran is Will Gholston minus the hype and Brian took him in the 9th round, but I was surprised Eric Murray fell to me after the run on corners, and that the manballicious among us kept skipping Epping until late, so if anything we've been underrating the only rival who comes with hardware (not counting cabin schlock).

3. What's the conference's weakest/deepest position?

Brian: Weakest: safety. There was very little I was excited about at any point after Drummond went. For a guy like Campbell to slip so far after his career and then for people to be like "eh" when he got drafted was 1) correct and 2) demonstrative of the lack of impact at the position.

Position Avg Rd (/26)
Defensive End 6th
Running Back 11th
Defensive Tackle 12th
Quarterback 12th
Offensive Line 13th
Cornerback 13th
Wide Receiver 14th
Linebacker 15th
Safety 16th
Tight End 17th
Punters/Kickers 24th

Strongest: defensive end. Those guys absolutely flew off the board early and I still got a second team ABT player from a year ago and a guy with 7.5 sacks and NFL upside.

Seth: Safety, but less obviously, linebacker had a cliff after Jake Ryan, and that's a Jake Ryan trying out a new position that mitigates some of his greatness. I went in thinking Hull was good too until the PSU folk started hand-waving on him. Also quarterbacks; the reason I tried to pull an Indiana is 2nd tier QB options were Hackenberg (Henne '05), and Cook (Griese '96).

Defensive end was the obvs in strengths, so I'll mention tight end. Weapons like Jake Butt and Connor Cook's binky Josiah Price didn't sniff a pick because we only got through 1/3 of the dangerous Nittany Lions. One of us (probably Ace) might have gone with 2TEs instead of plumbing the depths of Maryland's roster to fill our spreads.

Ace: The weakest has to be safety. Brian drafted both Northwestern safeties and it wasn't batshit, even if his made-up stat to justify it was. QED.

The strongest also seems pretty clear: defensive end. Seth got Marcus Rush, a guy he drafted in the 7th round two years ago without getting widely mocked, in the 17th round, and that made sense. Since everybody is going to answer DE, I'll throw this out there: I think there's more talent at corner, especially in the sophomore class, than we thought (or at least I thought) heading into this.

BiSB: The deepest position is either DE or RB. We left CJ Olaniyan on the bench, along with David Cobb and Ezekiel Elliot. There are also a ridiculous number of good centers this year, which is less exciting because… centers.

The weakest position is probably offensive tackle. I guess quick-footed 6’7” 320 pound smash-ballerinas don’t grow on trees. There MAY have been 8 quality starters (if you want to include Donnal, which I don’t, and then you’re probably down Erik Magnuson and worse. Kicker is also hilariously weak; Sam Ficken is the third best kicker in the conference, which NOPE. Originally I thought defensive tackle would be shallower, but there are some solid if uninspiring next-tier guys like Keith Bowers, Willie Henry, Warren Herring, Cameron Botticelli, Vincent Valentine, and Chris Carter.

4. Where do the two new members fit in the Big Ten pantheon?

Seth: Maryland right now is a little scarier than where I think they'll wind up; they've got talented receivers but the guy passing to them was Mr. Irrelevant and you'll note we fled from their OL faster than ours. Eventually they'll settle into a (historically) Michigan State-like punctuated mediocrity. Rutgers comes in like a.... (have we used up this meme yet? No. No we haven't) ... WRRRREREEECKING BAAAAALLL!!!

BiSB: Maryland is a real team, but not a great one. They have holes on the offensive line and in the secondary, but they also have some really nice pieces, especially at receiver and along the defensive line. I see them fitting in about where Penn State was last year; too incomplete to compete for a conference title, but with enough talent to make things interesting in any given game. Rutgers sucks. We knew this. We continue to know it.

Ace: I'm a little more worried about Maryland, which has that scary receiving corps and a solid front seven. They've got their fair share of issues, but they also have more high-level talent than I expected. Rutgers fits snugly into the basement, like everyone expected.

Brian: Maryland seems to have some quality players, as does Rutgers. But as discussed above, their holes are pretty big. Gary Nova, you guys. And Maryland is waving around at various holes.

5. (Most underrated dudes) Who was your biggest steal? What picks made by the other guys really impressed you/screwed with your plans?

Ace: I still can't believe Ameer Abdullah, a legit Heisman candidate, dropped into my lap in the fifth round. Thanks, Seth. I also thought Andre Monroe and Matt Robinson dropped further than they would've if we'd seen them in the Big Ten last year.

Brian made one of the better picks of the early rounds by recognizing the gap between Trae Waynes and everyone else at corner. He was going to be my next pick, but I was stupid enough to get cute and grab Ariguzo—whom I really like, but in retrospect I doubt Brian would've drafted that early—first before Brian's back-to-back picks. The other "DAMN YOU" moment for me came when BiSB picked up Louis Trinca-Passat, an underrated cog in Iowa's great run defense, just as I was readying to pick a three-tech; I guess I'll settle for former five-star Adolphus Washington.

Brian: Having Trae Waynes and Melvin Gordon drop to me in the fourth and fifth was a totally lolwut moment. Thanks, Seth! Other than that, Jeff Heuerman was terrific value late. Ditto Josh Ferguson. 50 catches last year! 50!

2013-10-12 PSU vs UM, Donovan Smith lines up for what would be the final play against Michigan; photo by Mike Pettigano
We're impressed with Donovan Smith, mostly from one video, sure, but when it's bloggers trying to speak intelligently about other peoples' offensive linemen… [photo: Mike Pettigano/WE ARE! 2014]

There were a number of picks that I was sure I was going to get to make before they were snaked out from under me; I'll go with PSU OT Donovan Smith, who I watched annihilate Randy Gregory on film only to see BISB swoop in. I'll also give a shout for Caputo again. He's that S/LB hybrid that you love to have at the nickel.

BiSB: If you ask me, I won this draft in rounds 15-17, where I stole Louis Trinca-Pasat, Tevin Coleman, and Deon Long. I also really liked Donovan Smith in the 7th round; the kid is going to be a star. Same with Sojourn Shelton in the 8th. I LOVE MY TEAM.

As for others who foiled my plans, Seth got a steal with Adrian Amos in the 13th round. I also gambled that one of Ameer Abdullah or Melvin Gordon would fall to me in the 5th, and I was mistaken.

Seth: I screwed up some early picks but I was kicking ass late. In a draft weak on safeties and linebackers I got Amos and Longa right after BiSB took Peppers. Caputo and Murray were around far too long. And waiting to the end to take a TE paid off. But I'm going with Amos, because he's at least very good and potentially a star, and look what happened at safety after that.

What killed me was the three immediately preceding my worst pick. I'd hoped that Bennett/Gregory would force Calhoun to go next and then a run on DL. But Stefon Diggs, Devin Funchess, and Kurtis Drummond disappeared instead; that's when I talked myself into Venric Mark.

6. Who's the crappiest player we drafted (kickers not included)?

Ace: I remain completely unconvinced that Michael Rose is going to be get so much better than he was when I ripped him in the Nebraska FFFF that he was worth a pick. Rose got plenty of playing time before Nebraska's defensive statistical improvement, which came against Michigan's woeful running game, MSU's uninspiring one, Zach Zwinak, Mark Weisman, and a Georgia team with approximately 37 injured starters. Perhaps I'm too focused on this...

...but, man, he's got a long way to go from there. [S: Ace wrote this hours before Rose's injury was announced]

Seth: Things got ugly at the end. The right side of Brian's OL is gonna get torched against the edge rushers we picked, but there's some potential non-starters all over the place, and among the starters there's Michael Rose and Macgarrett Kings.

BiSB: If we’re talking crappiest player, sorry Brian, but Andrew Donnal and Traveon Henry are duking it out for that title. CJ Brown is also not great, but for a compensatory 27th rounder, meh. But if we’re talking biggest stretch, I’d say Darian Hicks or Ed Davis, who haven’t done much of anything and were selected almost exclusively on their school’s reputation. Guys like Jabrill Peppers and Quinton Alston were also drafted solely on reputation, I suppose, but I worry we’ve placed a little too much faith in the magical powers of Pat Narduzzi.

Brian: Will Gholston.

I'm not quite sure who but I feel like one of the Maryland defenders is going to be ruthlessly exposed by the Big Ten. Macgarrett Kings is so mediocre as a slot receiver, and I wouldn't be surprised if Chad Lindsay didn't even play for OSU. Yeah, four games at Alabama. Also chased off by Saban. If he was any good he would still be at Alabama. Michigan was desperate for him because of their situation.

7. Who's the best player nobody drafted?

Ace: At least one of us is going to realllllly regret not taking Ezekiel Elliott. We were smart enough to take Wisconsin's backup running back, but not to take Ohio State's starter?

Brian: Probably Graham Glasgow. I couldn't take him for political reasons but I honestly feel like he's going to be an ABT quality lineman this year. Also: various remaindered PSU TEs, Jourdan Lewis.

Seth: C.J. Olaniyan. They shoved Anthony Zettel to 3-tech to make room for Olaniyan at SDE, and if they had any kind of DTs they'd have C.J. their rush end. DE is just so stacked in this conference right now; only one drafted I'd consider Olaniyan over is Cockran.

BiSB: Besides the obvious (NORFLEEEEEEEEET), I’d say it’d be CJ Olaniyan or Robert Kugler. I’m surprised a guy with a quality nose tackle (like Brian with Carl Davis or Seth with Michael Bennett) didn’t take Olaniyan as a potential hybrid DE/OLB, giving themselves some flexibility to go to a 3-man front. And I know Purdue is Purdue, which is 100% Purdue than you want in a draft pick, but Robert Kugler is a really good interior lineman who (sorry, Ace) I would have taken over Chad Lindsey or Jordan Walsh in a heartbeat. I’m actually regretting not taking him myself.

8. Who's got the best offense? Defense? Overall? I mean, obviously your team is running the table. So among the rest of the field, who's going to the Rose, who to the Citrus, who to the Outback?

BiSB: For offense, Rose: Brian – Cohesion problems aside, he’s got the highest talent level overall. Plus, Kyle Prater. Citrus: Ace – His receiving corps scares the hell out of me, but he’s weak on the interior line, and I’m not sold on Connor Cook. Outback: Seth – He took a shot at a cohesive group, but while the strategy may have been good, the execution was his downfall. He could have grabbed Mark or Spriggs several rounds later.

And defense, Rose: Seth – Best back seven in the group, and his defense is sound overall. Every position group has reliable playmaking talent. Citrus: Ace – Solid front seven (especially along the line), but that secondary is rather uninspiring. Outback: Brian – As I discussed above, the middle of his defense is pillow-soft. Trae Waynes does not a back seven make.

BUizUlfCMAEWP9m
Chicago's mediocre Big Ten safety.

Overall, Rose: Ace – The most complete team overall on both sides of the ball, with no glaring weakenesses. Citrus: Brian – Northwestern safeties, man. Outback: Seth – The problems with the offense outweigh the talent on the defense.

Brian: I rate Ace's offense the best of the competitors for second place. Funchess, Abdullah, and Scherff are a cut above what the others offer, and while I think Gardner is the most dynamic player on these teams I don't really like the rest of BISB's skill guys. On D, clear edge to BISB: Bosa/Spence at DE, plus Jake Ryan, plus Mike Hull, plus Shelton/Peppers/Drummond. Seth is second; Ace got the Gholston booby trap and has a really undersized DT spot; I think Chi Chi Ariguzo, a really high pick for Ace, is just a guy. Overall: 1. BISB, 2. Ace, 3. Seth

Ace: Brian is the clear choice on offense; given BiSB's and Seth's respective sets of skill players, that could be based on the Miller/Gordon backfield alone and it'd be justified, and Brian also has the best receiver among those three. I don't think his O-line is as good as he thinks it is—again, these are all-star teams, so just going "Wisconsin" doesn't mean an automatic win—but in this case I don't think it matters. BiSB's in second, Seth third.

On defense, I'll go with BiSB despite his secondary not being as good as he thinks it is. That front seven is excellent, and nabbing Williamson late was a great way to salvage taking Sean Davis over Jarrod Wilson (dude, Kurtis Drummond THA GAWD can totally play strong safety). Seth beats out Brian for second because of a better pass rush and not having Northwestern's safeties.

Overall, it's BiSB to the Rose Bowl, Brian to the Citrus Bowl, and Seth to the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl.

Seth: Offense: You guys pay way too much attention to skill players. Brian's on offense are indeed really good (I loved the Ferguson pick), and manball blocking in spreads do work, but he got too into Wisconsin and wound up with just 60% of what you think a typical Wisconsin mauling line is. The book on Braxton Miller is get a pass rush in his face. BiSB's skill guys are almost as good, and his offensive line, while mixed and a bit young, will crush by mid-season. Ace's offense is half-good and too disjointed to tap the talent spikes. 1. BiSB. 2. Brian. 4. Ace.

On defense I'd make fun of Brian's Wildcat safeties more if his cornerbacks ever needed them to do more than hang around the box all day, and Michael Rose more if he was ever going to be on the field. BiSB's defense has holes in the secondary but his pass rush is two OSU DE's and Jake Ryan so he can cover for that. Ace's front four is good but after that it oscillates between "just a guy" and "crap" except Desmond King. 2. BiSB, 3. Brian. 4. Ace

The Garden Supply Rose Bowl Presented by Comcast-Time Warner: BiSB (boo expansion. Bring back Heiko!) Lloyd Carr Underperformance Memorial Citrus Bowl: Brian. Ace ain't going to no bowl.

Comments

JClay

August 26th, 2014 at 10:46 AM ^

Fantasy teams are one of those things that are, in my experience, super interesting to the person involved but - respectfully - absolutely no one else on Earth cares about. 

Seth

August 26th, 2014 at 11:06 AM ^

IT'S NOT A....

Screw it. If you don't care about other teams at all that's fine, but portraying this as a series about fantasy teams is so wrong and SO GORRAM IRRITATING to those of us who spent all the time and effort to put it together.

It says right on the cover it's about previewing the best players of the Big Ten. It said it right on the top every time. And with this one there is hardly a mention of who's on what team until the very bottom.

This wrap-up was literally written with the people who didn't want to read the entire series in mind. And still you complain with a complaint that demonstrates you couldn't read or completely ignored the FIRST SENTENCE of the article you're commenting on.

I don't get irritated very often with readers, but your remark is just bullshit. Things like the fact that there aren't many good linebackers in the Big Ten are things most readers will find useful in their converstations about football this season. If you just don't want to know about any team but Michigan and who Michigan plays this week that is totally cool and I commend you for finding your limit.

Just please stop barging in with your "hey guys nobody cares" shit because it's insulting to the time we put toward it for the sake of providing really in depth information on relevant things for free.

JClay

August 26th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^

I'm sorry you don't seem to like any feedback from readers. Despite the "its free," you all do ask for money to keep the site running. You put out a for-sale magazine. How ridiculous of me to think you might want to know what we thought of a series of front-page articles, of which I've commented on exactly once.

I'm absolutely certain you did a great job highlighting different players. And you're absolutely correct that stuff like "there aren't that many good linebackers" is good to know. What I'm saying is, I am so turned off by the format - and the sheer overwhelming size of however many front page posts there have been about this vs a "top 100 players list - that I haven't been able to endure reading much of it. Your "fantasy football style draft" made this series extremely hard for me to read, as apparently it did the multiple other people sharing my sentiments. 

If you want to consider my opinion on the matter, great. If not, also great. But don't insult people with the false equivalency that because I wasn't invested in which of four guys from a website drafted who, and nuck-nucked it up about your hilarious photoshops of so-and-so in a Michigan State/Ohio State hybrid jersey that I somehow "don't care about other teams in the Big Ten." No, actually I do; I just don't care about your pretend fantasy football team.

Seth

August 26th, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^

"Don't like feedback"? Find anyone in blogging/media who likes feedback more than me.

Your feedback just sucks, is all. This site won't ever be a "Top Ten Reasons Brady Hoke's Job is On the Line" place, and nuck-nucking has been part of its id since its inception. It's also free, so if you don't like something, you can move on, and if you don't like an image you can move onto the paragraph beneath it.

Criticism implies you know something about the thing you're critiquing. You can't even accept the premise that the "pretend fantasy team" was just a vehicle, and now you're bitching about a graphic that a lot of people did like, which occurred after a jump, which article started with "If this isn't your bag skip this article."

I considered your criticsm; I find the premise of it so wholly disproved that I've chalked up your defense of it to stubborn whininess.

JClay

August 26th, 2014 at 11:46 AM ^

You continue to just make these really dumb false dillema fallacies like "if you didn't like Draftageddon, then you must want bleacher report style 'ten reasons hoke is on the hot seat' articles," or "if you didn't like Draftageddon, you must not be smart enough to understand the stylistic decision we made use the vehicle of fantasy football."

Come on, man, you're smarter than that.

BiSB

August 26th, 2014 at 11:49 AM ^

that there is no practical way to provide the kind of insanely in-depth analysis we did on every player, including the differing opinions held by the four of us on those players, and their styles of play and the nuances of their fits at various positions, that wouldn't look an awful lot like the way we did it.

MCalibur

August 26th, 2014 at 11:45 AM ^

The criticism of the format itself I think is fair (for whatever my opinion on the matter is worth) but also think the tone and delivery of that criticism could have been expressed in a more productive way at least to begin with. 

I know I can get carried away in some (probably most) of my diaries because, though I like reaserching and writing them, good God it gets tedious and boring trying to make it interesting and entertaining for anyone who isn't already in my head (i.e. me)... That's the precise reason I chose not to do the QB notes thing in 2011 and 2012 but I missed it so I chose to do it again for me and anyone else who seemed to like it. I like the reseaerch, I like *trying* to write informative and entertaining things about what I've found, and I like the feedback I get though I wish there were more of that. But its not easy especially at the volumes we enjoy here and during the offseason.

I think you made your point and the message was received. Continuing to double down is just unnecessary.

MGoRob

August 26th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^

Seth, I will say I hate "fantasy football", but I actually do enjoy the site's draftgeddon. As you mentioned, it's more of a top 100 type thing and I do believe your combined work helps me understand our opponents better. So thank you. Before each game I actually recognize the names now and know who to fear or cackle with glee as we make said player look silly.

Hardware Sushi

August 26th, 2014 at 11:42 AM ^

But it's in a draft format.

It's literally exactly how a fantasy league would work, organizationally.

I think we were just suggesting maybe doing the same concept (discussing merit of players amongst yourselves) in a way that is easier to follow along. It's not organized by position, by ranking, by anything except filling out a team...exactly how you would fill out a team in a fantasy league.

That's why you're getting this feedback from a lot of us. This isn't the same as the soccer 'blergh this is Amurrica what is soccer' we don't care; it's 'I can't follow along and don't understand how to follow along' is making it tough to care (and you're clearly putting a lot of work in).

 

Hardware Sushi

August 26th, 2014 at 10:55 AM ^

"If we had titled it "Top 100 players in the B1G" and written one line about each guy it would be great clickbait and nobody would learn anything."

I don't know about anyone else (although it looks like Carlos and JClay agree), but I can't make it through a paragraph of these things, so I don't learn anything anyway. I would MUCH prefer a top 100 players in the Big Ten, or a top players by position, or pretty much anything.

I honestly feel like the only people that enjoy these posts are you guys who are playing. It's your perogative, but if you think you're doing this for us you might as well save yourselves the time and not do a write-up; just go out one night at a bar, have a Big Ten fantasy draft, and play your league.

JClay hit it on the head - nobody is really that interested in somebody else's fantasy league. Especially not 10+ really long front page posts. 

Just my humble suggestion.

JClay

August 26th, 2014 at 11:03 AM ^

I don't even think they're "playing." Unless I missed something, there's no "league" or scoring, they just made teams for the heck of it and debated who had made the best. I tried reading through these to learn what players to watch for this season but I really would've enjoyed a more concise "top 100" style thing as was thrown out there as an alternative.

Admittedly, that would probably be less fun for those 4 guys...

BiSB

August 26th, 2014 at 11:13 AM ^

If we just list 100 players, you'll just read the list. And it'll be the same list you can read on any of a dozen sites with a simple Google search. And it would probably look pretty similar, all things considered. I'd bet you good money that Bleacher Report has six of those articles available.

But we want to analyze WHY a player is #17 and why another player is #37.  And we want to challenge the arguments about why a player is or isn't good. We disagree on some players, and there are good reasons to disagree about those players. If you can find a more in-depth discussion of Michael Rose and Nebraska's linebacking situation from any non-Nebraska site out there, I'd be shocked.

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the series. But if you want a ranked list of who we think are the top 65 or so offensive players, give this a read. There is also a hyperlink to an in-depth discussion of every Big Ten player we think was really worth discussing.

Hardware Sushi

August 26th, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^

I tried to not come off as a dick; maybe I did. I understand you guys are trying to put out good content. I'm not aiming to criticize, just provide honest feedback.

The reason I read this site (beside the fact that it's about Michigan) is because you guys have good opinions and good writing. If you guys write a top-100 list with your opinions, and put in your standard snarky/sarcastic/humorous spin on it, I would love it!

You're right, I don't want to read a top-100 list from Adam Rittenberg on ESPN or Pat Forde on Yahoo (or anything Bleacher Report). That's mainly because I think they're both douches who toe the company line, don't know much about football, don't have a functional sense of humor, or are generally just hack writers.

To make sure I'm not just complaining but offering potential ideas - how about doing the same conversational-style writeup about the top Big Ten players at their positions, but argue why each of you would move someone higher or lower on the list? Then you get the chance to give solid opinion, but is much easier (and interesting) for the audience to follow along

As it is, I can't seem to get any sort of organization to it.

BiSB

August 26th, 2014 at 11:37 AM ^

And your complaints are legitimate. I was just trying to explain why we did it in this INSANELY LONG format.

If we just put a list out there and say "We put Shilique Calhoun at #7 because be think he's a little overrated," that's not terribly helpful. But to do a really deep dive into all of these players, it takes a lot of time and research, and it really takes all four of us to write everything up with the video links, article links, stats, and analysis. I agree that the articles are incredibly dense on each player, which is why we interspersed some (okay, a metric shit-ton of) snark.

Wolv1984

August 26th, 2014 at 11:20 AM ^

I would definitely agree with this.  These pieces derailed off into, even if they aren't strictly draft pieces, featuring way too much snark and insider type humor coupled with being dense.  It's the marriage of the worst parts of sitting around listening to people draft for a league you're not part of and long form journalism.  On top of that it really lacks any kind of useful breakdown at times.  For example do I care that Wisconsin has a Good X?  Kind of, but at the same time since we only play once a decade these days, not really.  Plenty of low value data in a format that isn't really accessible and not worth unpacking.   I'd much rather see a piece structured to provide more words on people we face as opposed to play in that mythical western division I hear rumors of.  

The blog does plenty of good stuff, but when you have a miss with content, at least admit it.  

Sopwith

August 26th, 2014 at 11:19 AM ^

How much are we going to have to raise on Kickstarter to bribe Brian into never having another Draftgeddon post again?

Seriously, I absorb just about every word of every post on this site as long as I have time... except Draftgeddon, which I skip compulsively, except this time because I now suspect that this thing is never going to end, ever.

I'd actually appreciate hearing from someone who is enjoying this series to hear that point of view.  Maybe I just never gave it a chance to hook me?  I dunno.  I'd personally love a "Top XX B1G List" esp. if organized position-by-position instead of Top 100 overall, with comments from the staff.

EDIT: ok, I made myself read through it.  I appreciated the visualization of each team and associated discussion.  I do kinda wish the draft had been conducted offline and this was the only post that resulted. Preferably without sections 5-8, which analyze teams that don't exist.  Arrrrrrrgh, Draftgeddon!!  Arrrrrgh!!

EDIT 2: sorry Seth, I know you guys put a lot of work into this. I just think there's a disconnect with a chunk of the audience here.

GrowBlue

August 26th, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^

Fwiw - I liked Draftgeddon. I think it's a fun way to preview the season. The length didn't bother me either. This is my favorite website - so during the long offseason this is a welcome piece of meaty content.

Jon06

August 26th, 2014 at 12:01 PM ^

I'm with some previous commenters on two things: the graphics are awesome, and the discussion is hard to follow.

Graphics: the only improvement I can think of would be to merge all the images into one giant pdf so I can click it and zoom in on it and scroll around, without having to hit 'back' to find the next image whenever I want to compare something. (I could just open all of them in tabs, but I'm lazy.)

Discussion: one thing that's made the Draftageddon posts harder for me to read as the series went on is that you guys are now writing kind of like professors who have forgotten what your students don't know. I read most of the Draftageddon posts, but I still don't remember who Michael Rose or Theiren Cockran are. It'd be much easier to read if guys got long titles like "Nebraska MLB Michael Rose (0th rd, Tom VH)" or "Minnesota DE Theiren Cockran (32nd rd, Heiko)" or whatever for their first mention in each post. [NB: good thing I Googled Theiren Cockran just now, because I assumed he played for MSU until I checked.] There were definitely diminishing rewards for me as time went on with this series because each time somebody forgets to put a name on who's drafting or snarking or whatever, I'm lost, and I don't want to put in the effort to scroll up and figure out which team this must be, given that it has DG at QB, etc. There's just a *lot* to track and that requires a *lot* of signposting.

Anyway, it's a hell of a service to go through all this, and I hope you keep doing it one way or another for that mythical future offseason where I have enough free time to process everything.

ETA: Can all the information you've created be compiled on a team-by-team basis, so we can read everything you've got to say about the individual players on, say, Michigan State, perhaps as that game approaches? I know you'll repackage the information in the preview, but maybe there could be an additional post that just chronologically collects a significant amount of what you've said about each player on any given team. That might be a way for us to follow the snarking about any individual guy through the series, as you refer back to earlier episodes of snark that are, for most of us, pretty vague memories.

MCalibur

August 26th, 2014 at 12:13 PM ^

Not sure how this works with all of your schedules or whatever but I bet it'd be easier to do this (as opinion generators) and follow it (as opinion absorbers) if it were in audible rather than written. The jokes would probably land better too.

Danny Bonaduce

August 26th, 2014 at 12:06 PM ^

I, for one, have really enjoyed this series and much prefer this to "top 100" lists.  Hopefully the negative comments by some will not lead to the demise of this series.

On an unrelated note, and I'm sure this has been mentioned here before, Iowa OL Andrew Donnal is the older brother of UM basketball player Mark Donnal.  Here is an article I read in the spring that I thought was a pretty good read.

http://thegazette.com/subject/sports/donnal-brothers-bond-tight-20140413

 

kingmoose

August 26th, 2014 at 12:53 PM ^

another thought could be to do a Big Ten positional analysis in the form of who you would draft for your team. 

The end summary did help to see what the end game was, thanks for the work

 

m1jjb00

August 26th, 2014 at 3:16 PM ^

As for positions,

I think the fact that two MSU receivers went in the draft speaks to the rather sharp gradient in talent in the B1G at that position after a small set of quality players.

For the d-line, I think the conference has leftover quality at nose tackle, less so of 3-tech sorts.

QB has a steep gradient also.  I think most people would have Stave the next QB, and he ain't startin'.

A few guys that Phil Steele had on his list that weren't taken include Corey Smith (OSU, WR), Derek Landisch (WI, LB) and the two trucks for running backs Weisman (IA) and Zwinkak (PSU).  But, then again he also had Kyle Prater on his All Big 2nd team, so what does he know :)?

I've already professed my like for Latham (IU, DL) and Cobb(MN, RB).  One guy that I think will benefit from a position switch is Joshua Perry (OSU, LB).