• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Kramer dishes out some opinions on NFL draft The NFL draft is the least exciting “event” in sports. Nothing really happens. A few big guys around our age sit in a big ballroom and wait to have their names called. It’s like high school graduation, but with 10 minutes of prognostication between the announcement of valedictorian and salutatorian. The draft is televised because many Americans will watch virtually anything about football, as evidenced by the success of Craig T. Nelson’s Coach. But the draft is not without its merits. It’s an utterly optimistic event; every fan thinks his/her team will improve through the draft, and it’s hard to fault their logic. Adding a talented young player should have only positive repercussions. But in the highly-monetized world of professional football, top draft picks demand exorbitant salaries based purely on perceived potential. JaMarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf, Charles Rogers, Courtney Brown, Joey Harrington, Robert Gallery, David Carr, etc. have all proven that if teams aren’t careful, they can waste millions of dollars and countless hours of time developing a player who just isn’t talented or hard-working enough to make it in the League. But a track record of exalting failures like the schlubs listed above doesn’t stop the so-called experts from offering their opinion at every possible stage of the draft, including literally 364 days before. Draft experts release their asinine, make-believe mock drafts into the internet to poison the sports fan’s reading enjoyment of both the NFL and college seasons, like so many syringes being dumped into a pit of syringes, a la Saw II. Except not as gross—anybody who accuses football or hockey of being “violence porn” might first examine cinema’s obsession with torturous death. But anyway, draft commentators are wrong as much as they’re right because they don’t have access to the resources of every team’s front office and they don’t know any team’s exact plan. They don’t know if a team most values defense or offense, what positions are considered the most pressing, if the coach wants the most NFL-ready prospect or the one with the most potential, or a myriad of other things that affect a draft pick, but they keep trying, bless ‘em. All 32 franchises have a unique approach to the draft, and thus there is no such thing as a “best available” prospect at any given point in the draft. Nor is it yet possible to grade any team’s draft and say whether they succeeded or failed. That article can be written in like four years, when we actually know if Tim Tebow is the quarterback of the future for the Denver Broncos or the youth leader of the future at some megachurch. I trust each team’s front office to make better decisions than a guy with hair like mine or Mel Kiper’s, so I’m not going to denigrate any team’s selections based on my incredibly limited knowledge. Instead, here are, in my opinion, the best and riskiest moves of the draft. Best: Sam Bradford and Ndumakong Suh as the top two picks St. Louis and Detroit both did a nice job of not overthinking their positions atop the draft board and took players who filled obvious needs and who have gobs of talent exhibited both in college ball and in combine measurables. The Rams filled their most glaring need, a quarterback, by drafting Oklahoma’s Heisman-winning signal caller, Sam Bradford. Bradford is a smart pick not just because he has made opposing defenses look silly (50 touchdowns, eight interceptions, and a 180.84 passer rating in 2008) and had a flawless pro day which alleviated any concerns about his injured throwing shoulder. Bradford also showed in three seasons under the microscope of a power program that he’s mature enough to be a franchise quarterback. Sam Bradford will spend his spare time learning how to assault defenses, not women, and that’s going to give him a competitive edge over less mature rookies and will rightfully make him a very marketable face of the franchise. Suh, unlike Bradford, is almost sure to be a success on the field. He joins the Lions, a franchise that already has a marketable face in QB Matthew Stafford, so the weight of being the team savior does not fall on his burly shoulders. Instead of worrying about the hopes of a fan base on life support like Bradford and Stafford, Suh will be able to focus all of his energy on preparing for his rookie season. I think Suh will have the most impact of any rookie this season, stepping into the starting position from day one of training camp and spending so much time in the opposing backfield they’ll start to think he’s a fullback. Most scouts rate Suh as the most NFL-ready prospect in the draft, and his potential to make an immediate impact as a pass-rushing DT is clear from his stellar Senior season in which he recorded 12 sacks. Now that the Lions’ offense is finally back on track, look for their defense to improve markedly with the boy (OK, man) named Suh. Riskiest: Denver Broncos draft Tim Tebow in the first round Denver coach Josh McDaniels may take home the Gob Bluth Annual “I’ve Made a Huge Mistake” Award. Taking Tebow with the 25th pick was a huge gamble for the Broncos. Tebow is a proven winner and has exhibited truly once-in-a-generation leadership abilities. His Florida teams lived up to quite considerable hype, but for once Tebow is in a different position. Nobody expects anything from him after his throwing motion has been picked apart and his ability to play quarterback in the NFL has been not just questioned but openly mocked (by esteemed drunk and Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, no less). Making Tebow an NFL quarterback is a project, but we know he will dedicate himself to learning as much as he can and I feel that, in a few years, Tebow will supplant Kyle Orton in Denver only to be the same kind of barely competent game managing quarterback that Orton is. Or hey, maybe by that time he’ll be head coach at the University of Florida and Urban Meyer’s cardiologist will finally be able to relax. Kramer explains allure of baseball and golf Ah, spring. The air is warm, the grass is fresh, the trees are newly green and the squirrels are less standoffish. Yes, it’s a wonderful time—especially for sports fans, who are treated to several entertaining spectacles. This month is for many athletics enthusiasts what a “Designing Women” marathon is to your divorced great-aunt—what shark week is for Tracy Morgan—what panda porn is for pandas. In college, we get the championship tournaments of men’s and women’s basketball and men’s hockey. In the professional realm, we get the Masters Tournament, MLB Opening Day, the NFL draft and the start of both NBA and NHL playoffs. But I approach April’s sporting smorgasbord skeptically. Sure, these events have a lot of fans, but I fear I will derive less enjoyment from this month. See, I’m willfully oblivious to professional baseball and, apologies to fellow S&B Sports columnist and ace golfer Kunal Bansal, but I would sooner watch grapes turn into raisins/a Major League Soccer (MLS) game than professional golf. I’ll begin with why I don’t care a lick about the start of “America’s Pastime,” Major League Baseball (MLB). The number one reason, of course, is steroids. Performance-enhancing substances have tainted this entire era of baseball. The greatest players of our generation like Alex Rodriguez, Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds, Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz, Gary Sheffield, Roger Clemens, etc. have been implicated in steroid use. At this point, if Albert Pujols or Derek Jeter is exposed as a user, the sport loses all credibility. There’s a part of me that loves the offense-driven play of the Steroid Era, but I can’t see records like Babe Ruth’s and Hank Aaron’s broken by cheaters. Besides, it’s a slippery slope from steroid use to more outlandish performance enhancements like, say, bionics. And nobody wants a bunch of buff, ill-tempered robots out there capable of taking control of our major cities. So unlike Lil Wayne, I do not support allowing all substances into baseball. My other grievances with MLB are more fixable. I’m originally from Kansas City, so I’m a Royals fan. In recent history, this has meant that baseball has nothing to offer me. I needn’t pay any attention because the Royals will inevitably come in last in their division and near last in the league (if they don’t set a record for losses in a season). American League Cy Young Award Winner Zack Greinke has gotten my attention, but last year the Royals faded like it was their job after a great start. It would be one thing if the Royals were terrible because they were mismanaged, but I blame most of the Royals’ woes on their inability to keep the talent they scout and draft because of baseball’s lack of a salary cap. Teams from small markets like Kansas City simply don’t make the revenue from TV and marketing that teams from New York, Boston, and Los Angeles. So while there are some small-market success stories—the Devil Rays, Tigers, and Cardinals, come to mind—such teams are holographic Charizards amongst the multitude of Energy Card Yankees or BoSox that buy the best roster.

Load more

  20

Copy Link