Author: Anthony Stalter (Page 148 of 1503)

2011 NFL Mock Draft 3.0: The Rise of Cam Newton

Auburn Tigers Heisman Trophy wining quarterback Cam Newton warms up for the Tigers game against the Oregon Ducks at the BCS Championship game at University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, AZ, January 10,2011. UPI/Art Foxall

I’ll tell you what sports fans, I don’t know how anyone can compile a mock draft these days without wanting to slam his or her head on their desk about 25 times. I’ve made roughly 6,000 changes to this latest mock since the scouting combine wrapped up and I still hate it.

I hate it!

One thing I don’t hate is the addition John Paulsen has brought to Mock 3.0. He’s a statistical madman and recently thought of the idea to use players’ combine numbers to draw comparisons to prospects from previous years. He explains in more detail below.

More Draft Content: NFL Mock Draft 1.0 | NFL Mock Draft 2.0 | Ten Combine Winners | Ingram’s 40 Time an Issue? | Thoughts on QBs

John: I compared each prospect’s combine scores with players from the last six combines to determine the best athletic comparison. There are eight categories: height, weight, 40-yard dash, shuttle, 3-cone, vertical leap, broad jump and bench press. Not all prospects compete in all six tests, so certain comparisons are more confident than others.

Realize that we’re not suggesting that these players will turn into their comparisons – we’re simply saying that athletically, this is whom each prospect compares to based on their combine numbers.

All right, let’s rock out with our mocks out…what?

No. 1 Carolina Panthers: Cam Newton, QB, Auburn
I’m not going to run from the fact that this is now the sexy mock pick, but it does make sense. Ron Rivera attended Newton’s Pro Day recently and the Auburn QB looked sharp. Blaine Gabbert is still a possibility here and so is Patrick Peterson but at the end of the day, the Panthers might as well go big or go home. There isn’t a more polarizing player in this entire draft than Newton, who is the very definition of “boom or bust.”
Combine Comparisons: Vince Young; Tim Tebow.

Continue reading »

Owners, union agree to fix rookie wage scale

St. Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford throws the football under pressure in the first quarter against the Arizona Cardinals at the Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis on September 12, 2010. UPI/Bill Greenblatt

It seems that the NFL and NFLPA are starting to make some headway on important issues pertaining to the CBA.

According to Jason Cole of Yahoo Sports, the owners and players have agreed to install a rookie wage scale to replace the current, ridiculous rookie salary cap. Thus, the days of a No. 1 pick like Sam Bradford receiving $13 million a year appear to be over (assuming of course that the two sides can agree on everything else CBA-related).

Cole provides more details:

According to two sources familiar with the negotiations, the league and the union have reached a basic compromise on a rookie wage scale that will replace the current rookie salary cap. The owners backed off the idea of requiring first-round picks to sign five-year deals, instead limiting the contracts to four years before a player could become a free agent. The agreement is also expected to include a stipulation limiting the amount of guaranteed money and signing bonus offered to draft picks.

In addition, the league agreed that all players drafted after the first round would be limited to three-year deals, but teams would be allowed to put restricted free agent tags after the three years. That’s essentially similar to the current process where players can be tagged as restricted free agents after a three-year deal, although the existing rule allows players drafted after the first round to sign four-year pacts.

The union wanted to reduce the number of years teams can sign rookies because they want the players to get to free agency faster. That certainly makes sense, but something had to be done about the old rookie pay scale because players were making too much money. Teams had to invest a lot of dough in players that had never seen a down in the NFL, which made zero sense. On top of that, you had teams trying to trade out of the top 5 because they didn’t want to pay a player millions of dollars and have him turn out to be a bust. Yet, many times they couldn’t because other teams didn’t want to take on similar risks.

This is great news for two reasons. One, the old rookie pay structure was a joke and had to be changed. Two, it finally looks like the two sides are making some serious headway when it comes to the CBA.

A college football head coach cheated? Shocking!

I have to say, I’m shocked this morning. I’m shocked that so many people are shocked that the head coach of a major college football program would stoop so low as to lie or cheat in order to gain an advantage on the field.

As I wrote yesterday, the media loves to get on their high horse when it comes to scandals like Jim Tressel’s at Ohio State. For those unaware, the Buckeye head coach knew about “Tattoogate” eight months before the NCAA disciplined his players and on Tuesday, Ohio State suspended Tressel two games and fined him $250,000 for not coming forward about what he knew. (He received e-mails from an attorney in April 2010, which indicated that his players were receiving improper benefits.)

In other words, he cheated. He knew his players were violating rules and he did nothing about it. He kept quiet so that his season wouldn’t implode and he convinced the NCAA to allow Terrelle Pryor and the other suspended players to participate in the Sugar Bowl so he could finally get the SEC monkey off his back. (Thanks to Pryor, the Buckeyes beat Arkansas in a 31-26 thriller.)

But back to my point: Is any of this surprising? Because it’s “The Vest” we’re surprised that a college football coach in this day and age is capable of something like this? Everyone lies and cheats to get ahead in college football. Whether it’s Lane Kiffin, Bobby Petrino, Nick Saban, Rich Rodriguez or yes, even Tressel, we’ve reached a point where nothing should surprise anymore. I’m not saying that what Tressel did was right because it’s not. But you mean he withheld information that some of his star players were violating NCAA rules because he wanted to win in 2010? No way! There’s no way a college football head coach would do that!

The only thing that matters in college football is winning and if you don’t like that statement then don’t watch because it’s true. And speaking of the media getting on its high horse, I couldn’t help but scoff when I read the conclusion of Mark Schlabach’s article on Tressel this morning:

For the record, Michigan’s football team hasn’t beaten Ohio State in 2,663 days.

But the Wolverines won on Tuesday.

At least they had fired their cheating coach.

No, they fired a losing coach. That’s the difference.

Welcome to the present day world of college football. You’ll feel right at home if you lie, cheat and steal to get ahead because it’s almost become expected. Just make sure you win, baby.

Michael Strahan vs. Peter King: The Tiki Barber Twitter War has begun

Ever since the news broke that Tiki Barber was coming out of retirement to play football again, most fans and media members have taken it upon themselves to ridicule him via blogs, Twitter and carrier pigeons. (One writer even compiled a list of 10 reasons why Barber’s un-retirement is a great thing, although the 10 reasons were all cheap shots.)

But at least one prominent media member is in Barber’s corner and that’s SI.com’s Peter King. His Twitter page reads more like a Tiki Barber fan page than a NFL reporter.

New York Giants running back Tiki Barber carries the ball against the Dallas Cowboys in the third quarter of their NFL football game in Dallas, Texas in this October 23, 2006 file photo. The all-time leading rusher, took the first step towards returning to the NFL on Tuesday and ending a four-year retirement. Barber filed paperwork with the league to remove him from the reserve-retirement list, according to a report on Sports Illustrated magazine’s website, clearing the way for a return. REUTERS/Mike Stone/Files (UNITED STATES – Tags: SPORT FOOTBALL)

At start of 2011 season, Burress will be 34, Tiki 36. It’d be pretty interesting if the Giants bring Burress back but not Tiki.

One last thing on Tiki: If he wants to play, I think he still can. Retired healthy. No reason why he shouldn’t try. TB makes most sense.

RT @B_Frigo: Tiki did dirt when he retired, should have kept lips sealed … You’re wrong. At NBC, he was paid to call ’em as he sees ’em.

But it was this tweet that has drawn the most attention:

Strahan’s been critical of Giants on FOX. It’s like nobody hears that. Tiki criticized Eli’s leadership and Coughlin’s way. So what?

The Strahan that King is referring to is none other than Michael Strahan, a former teammate of Barber’s and someone who didn’t take kindly for King’s statements.

Strahan fired back via his own Twitter page:

@SI_PeterKing Why am I even in your conversation?? This isn’t about me so don’t make it so!!!

Regular readers know that I’m a big King fan, but I’ve got to side with Strahan on this one. When Barber criticized Eli Manning and Tom Coughlin, he was doing so because he wanted to make a name for himself in television. Barber wanted to be a TV star, which is one of the reasons he retired from football in 2007. He probably figured that he could cause a stir with his comments and thus, wasn’t shy about ripping his former quarterback and coach.

When Strahan has been critical of the Giants on FOX, it’s in a constructive manner. It’s not like he criticized Manning by saying his motivational pre-game speeches sounded “almost comical” like Barber did in an interview before the start of the ’07 season. Granted, I haven’t heard every single word that has ever come out of Strahan’s mouth about the Giants, but I’m under the impression that he keeps his comments related to the team as a whole and not about individual players.

In other words, I think King is reaching with his comparison between Barber and Strahan. One has fans’ respect, while the other has turned into the butt of jokes.

We Got Game: The MLB All-35+ Draft

If you’re anything like me, I hate it when my favorite team signs an aging veteran free agent. I’ve uttered the phrase, “Please God don’t let them sign that crusty old vet,” too many times to count.

But those “crusty old vets” hold a ton of importance to a team’s success, especially in baseball where World Series-winning rosters usually have a mixture of both youth and veteran experience. Take the World Champion Giants for example. They won because of their young pitching, but it wasn’t Tim Lincecum, Matt Cain or Madison Bumgarner who wound up holding the World Series MVP Trophy at the end. It was 35-year-old Edgar Renteria, who was cursed by the SF faithful for being yet another horrible Brian Sabean signing, but wound up being a Fall Classic hero.

Today’s media doesn’t pay enough homage to the older MLB players. In fact, when fellow TSR contributor David Medsker and I were brainstorming ideas for a new feature, the first thing I brought up was that we should do an all 24-and-younger MLB team comprised of…well the idea is pretty self explanatory.

It wasn’t until David and I exhausted that idea before he sent me an e-mail that simply read: “Has anyone done an all 35-and-over team?”

Perfect. The moment I read it I burst into laughter. Could you imagine compiling a team of players that were only 35 years or older when present day teams usually build around youth? I love it.

Unfortunately, the guys over at Off Base Percentage beat us to the punch by compiling their own 35-plus year old team, so David and I decided to actually hold a live draft in order to make two teams. (Take that OBP.)

Below is a round-by-round breakdown of our all 35-and-older MLB draft. We selected a player for every infield position, plus three outfield positions, four starting pitchers (we only had eight to choose from), three relievers, one DH and two bench spots. Once the draft started, David and I quickly developed different strategies for building our rosters, so it was interesting to see how the draft played out. Take a look and let us know if you would have gone a different route.

Continue reading »

« Older posts Newer posts »