NFL Mock Draft with trades

[oubb05]

How's everyone doing... I recently created an NFL Mock Draft site and was looking for some feedback on what people think about it. It includes player rankings by position (which will be updated soon) and a mock draft including some trades...

http://bigdsnflmock.blogspot.com

Feedback would be much appreciated...

Thanks

[TSE]

Player rankings are pretty bad on how they start off.

You only have 2 QBs with a 1st round grade, and there is a chance that 5-6 could go in Rd 1. Locker and Mallet have legit shots to go in the top half of Rd 1, so for me your site loses instant credibility when the first bits of information I see are rankings that aren't consistent with what I expect to see happen on draft day.

The repetitive graphics on the right as you scroll through the mock are pretty blinding and distracting. I'm curious to see the picks and the writeups, and that info takes up half the screen, while your collage of graphics takes up the other half. Makes me not want to wander off the first page.

Are there more pages? I don't see anything, so the site seems pretty limited. There are tons of draft sites out there, tons, what do you have to offer that we can't get anywhere else? You just offer the same that every site does, but less of it. And not really interested in seeing a giant Obama legislature ad or story or whatever that is that takes up half of the top of the front page.

Your mock was pretty decent though and interesting, but you don't provide a strong reason for me to want to keep your site in mind for the future.

[cochiseuofm]

If this is your first blog, it is an OK start but there are definite areas of improvement.

1. TSE is right, the background is simply terrible. It is distracting and kind of pointless. If you're going for a professional looking site, you need to use solid colors only. I would suggest making the site background a solid blue, switching the post background color from black to red, and keeping the font white. That way you have NFL colors without looking hokey.

2. There isn't enough content on the right side...it really doesn't look good to have your post on the left side go so much longer than the right side.

On a side note for TSE, giving a player a first round grade is not the same as projecting a player to go in the first round. What the blog starter is basically saying is he doesn't consider Locker or Mallett to be first-round talent, but he does have Locker going in the first round if you read his mock draft. I think you'll find that a lot of people agree with that outlook on the two QBs, they aren't clear-cut first round talent but they may get drafted there because of quarterback need.

Work on making the site more visually appealing and balanced, and you might have something. But honestly the NFL draft is overcovered and unless you have personal exposure to scouts or teams, you probably won't find much success with a blog. I would choose a different topic for a blog, especially if you're trying to make AdSense money (which seems to be pretty obviously your goal.)

[TheOUTLAW]

I don't see the Browns moving down and getting nothing this year to show for it. Especially since they really could use Peterson opposite Haden. Last years CB play was pretty atrocious outside of Haden.

[TSE]

Coachiseuofm-

That's just semantic differences on 1st round grade. To me, the grades are determined by who has credibility to be picked in Rd 1, and every year there are different dynamics and the market of team needs as it combines with talent per position mesh to create what the value of each player is. If 6 QBs are selected in Rd 1, it's because they were 1st round prospects to me, and the NFL teams that picked them in the first round validate that distinction. If you think the value is weak on those last few QBs, well to me, a first round grade isn't about just looking at how good that player is at being good for his position, otherwise the top FG kickers and P's should have a 1st round grade relative to the weaker FGs and Ps. If a kicker is super stud in college, he'll never be considered for the top overall pick, that's not fair to that person, but that's the nature of the position of STs, is that those players just aren't valuable or worth having, and that affects their draft value and ranking, i.e. Ks and Ps can't typically ever be first rounders even when they are the clear cut best kicker in college football, yet you can have a half dozen guys from single other positions fit in the first round. This particular year, with this particular set of players, I see more first round QBs than in typical years. That's partly because I think that beyond a few positions of strength, there are a LOT of weak positions and very weak positions in this draft, and QBs are always going to rank higher than most positions in terms of what they are worth as prospects. I just don't agree with the blogger's philosophy on how he graded out the QBs, there should be 4 IMO with a 1st round grade.

[Chanse503]

Vikings draft a QB at 12 IMO...
If Locker is available they draft him period, I will be disappointed if they somehow dont get either Gabbert or Locker.

[TSE]

Vikings draft a QB at 12 IMO...
If Locker is available they draft him period, I will be disappointed if they somehow dont get either Gabbert or Locker.

What's wrong with Mallett? Or trading up for Newton if you want them to trade up for Gabbert?

[derekhunter]

As a UW guy, I love Locker in Minnesota. As for the site, I like you energy, clean it up a bit, make it more visually appealing.

[Icness]

Vikings draft a QB at 12 IMO...
If Locker is available they draft him period, I will be disappointed if they somehow dont get either Gabbert or Locker.

Get used to disappointment

[cochiseuofm]

Coachiseuofm-

That's just semantic differences on 1st round grade. To me, the grades are determined by who has credibility to be picked in Rd 1, and every year there are different dynamics and the market of team needs as it combines with talent per position mesh to create what the value of each player is. If 6 QBs are selected in Rd 1, it's because they were 1st round prospects to me, and the NFL teams that picked them in the first round validate that distinction. If you think the value is weak on those last few QBs, well to me, a first round grade isn't about just looking at how good that player is at being good for his position, otherwise the top FG kickers and P's should have a 1st round grade relative to the weaker FGs and Ps. If a kicker is super stud in college, he'll never be considered for the top overall pick, that's not fair to that person, but that's the nature of the position of STs, is that those players just aren't valuable or worth having, and that affects their draft value and ranking, i.e. Ks and Ps can't typically ever be first rounders even when they are the clear cut best kicker in college football, yet you can have a half dozen guys from single other positions fit in the first round. This particular year, with this particular set of players, I see more first round QBs than in typical years. That's partly because I think that beyond a few positions of strength, there are a LOT of weak positions and very weak positions in this draft, and QBs are always going to rank higher than most positions in terms of what they are worth as prospects. I just don't agree with the blogger's philosophy on how he graded out the QBs, there should be 4 IMO with a 1st round grade.

What are you talking about? Ks and Ps should have first round grades? Teams will rank all players, all positions, from 1-200, probably even more players. The players which rank 1-32 will be first-round grade players. It has nothing to do with being the best at your position, as certain positions the best will never be considered first-round talent, like a kicker or punter.

[TSE]

What are you talking about? Ks and Ps should have first round grades? Teams will rank all players, all positions, from 1-200, probably even more players. The players which rank 1-32 will be first-round grade players. It has nothing to do with being the best at your position, as certain positions the best will never be considered first-round talent, like a kicker or punter.

First question, I don't understand your question. I'm talking about what I was talking about in that post, it seems pretty straightforward.

Question two, no, not typically, unless it's a freak year where one is that good and the rest of the positions are weak enough that the kicker is worth more than them.

And your last comment makes no sense, that's not true to say that, in fact Sebastian Janikowski was selected in Rd 1, and it's just a matter of time before it happens again, but it will happen some day, as it should, when it should, which it eventually will.

[cochiseuofm]

You obviously don't understand the distinction between first round grade and actually being picked in the first round, so I'm not going to keep running in circles to try and get you to see my point. Just another thread where I have reached my exasporation point with you and have lost interest in posting...

[TSE]

Hmm, not sure how you reach that conclusion. I disagree and feel I have a solid feel for the difference between being the two. A grade is merely a projection before the draft, and actually being picked happens on draft day and is a statement of a factual actual event whereas the grade is just an opinion-based prediction. They seem to be very clear constructs to perceive and determine where the contrast is.

One is a factual event and one is an opinionated guess as to what event should unfold. Do you see it differently, and how you would come to that conclusion that I don't understand that is the mesmerizing thing. I'm stating my opinions but I'm also explaining background behind them, whereas you just said a bunch of crazy off the wall statements that don't seem to be logical.