"Rogue Scout" on the QBs...

[Giants34]

Found this on yahoo today...very interesting, Razzano is a former longtime NFL scout that basically has strong opinions and stands by them, and clearly does not like Gabbert or Newton, but puts on film and comes away impressed by Jake Locker...to the point of being giddy. Its interesting to note that he points out a defense made by people who actually watched Locker on a weekly basis...


http://m.yahoo.com/w/sports/nfl/news/article?urn=urn%3Anewsml%3Asports.yahoo%2Cyhoo%3A2 0050301%3Anfl%2Carticle%2Cms-silver_rogue_scout_enjoys_label_042511%3A1&.ts=1303795586&.intl=US&.lang=en&.tsrc=attnet

[the natural]

"Fired Scout" on the QBs. Isn't this the guy who got some gopher job because his father was a longtime NFL employee and got sent packing as soon as Pops retired? I really don't think he has much cred if it's the same guy.

[Giants34]

Read the article..it clearly explains who he is.

[the natural]

Read the article..it clearly explains who he is.

LOL, same guy. He is a moron who has SERIOUSLY embellished his credentials in that article. I think if you bother to check you'll find out. Well, at least he is "unencumbered" by a job these days so he has lots of spare time.

[Giants34]

....then don't read it. The guy has more credentials to analyze prospects than anyone on this board, Mel Kiper and Todd McShay put together. He did the job and clearly was right about guys like Alex Smith being a bust and Favre being a hidden gem. He was wrong about Rodgers but so were a lot of people or he wouldn't have fallen to GB. I don't realy carw what your opinion of the guy is. He got fired over an argument about Alex Smith..at least he was right and stuck to his guns.

[the natural]

That's his version of his history. Somehow I don't think people get fired in the business for being right most of the time. The only reason he got the job in the first place was through nepotism, and once his Dad was gone, he couldn't hold another.

[Giants34]

I'm not arguing with you about the source of the article. God forbid, he was right about Alex Smith. Nepotism is a fact of life too...at least the guy can turn on film and see what many of the employed scouts apparently fail to see.

[the natural]

Or turn on film and fail to see what EMPLOYED scouts do see. Which would seem to be the more likely proposition.

[Giants34]

Whatever you say...pardon me for finding it an interesting read. I've watched Locker for 3 or 4 years and have yet to see anyone in any scouting circle pick up on what I saw with my own eyes. And Babylon, whose watched him longer than I have, will vouch for it too. So if you think he's full of ****, he recognized what people saw in Locker and Washington in general over the the course of his career, rather than judging him on a few games.. People can be unemployed for many different reasons..some people just can't work with others...don't judge them for being unemployed.

[Wrathman]

Whatever you say...pardon me for finding it an interesting read. I've watched Locker for 3 or 4 years and have yet to see anyone in any scouting circle pick up on what I saw with my own eyes. And Babylon, whose watched him longer than I have, will vouch for it too. So if you think he's full of ****, he recognized what people saw in Locker and Washington in general over the the course of his career, rather than judging him on a few games.. People can be unemployed for many different reasons..some people just can't work with others...don't judge them for being unemployed.

But that's not what NFLN said...this can't be right.

:p

Yeah, this was a very good article. It's one of the best reads to come out of this draft period that started in December.

[Wrathman]

That's his version of his history. Somehow I don't think people get fired in the business for being right most of the time. The only reason he got the job in the first place was through nepotism, and once his Dad was gone, he couldn't hold another.

Some people are very good at their job but just can't work with other people for whatever reason. In a team environment, that's not going to work...no matter how often that person is right. You can tell in this article that he believes what he believes with extreme conviction which is good until it becomes bad and rubs others the wrong way. It was pretty obvious if you read the article.

[OzTitan]

Unrelated to the QB talk, but...

As another example of the evils of groupthink, Razzano cited Cardinals GM Rod Graves' mandate that scouts grade each player "for the league," rather than merely assessing his value for their specific needs.

"Everyone else makes you grade for the team," Razzano said. "But in Arizona, you're told to assign a value for the whole league, and it can come back to bite you. That's how we got [underachieving defensive tackle] Alan Branch (notes) in '07. He was projected as a first-round pick, and we're sitting there in our draft room saying, 'Oh [expletive], he's gonna slip,' and now he's up at the top of our board, and Rod trades up to get him [with the first pick] in the second round. And none of us [scouts] liked the guy."

I knew it! it always seemed the Cardinals had the mainstream media doing their drafts for a while there.

[DiG]

i thought it was a great read. i love seeing various opinions of people who really study the game that are backed up with more than just blanket statements.

[GaMeTiMe]

Unrelated to the QB talk, but...



I knew it! it always seemed the Cardinals had the mainstream media doing their drafts for a while there.

Patrick Peterson at 5?

[njx9]

"Fired Scout" on the QBs. Isn't this the guy who got some gopher job because his father was a longtime NFL employee and got sent packing as soon as Pops retired? I really don't think he has much cred if it's the same guy.

classic ad hom fallacy. let someone know when you actually have something to contribute?

[initial_flo]

Unrelated to the QB talk, but...



I knew it! it always seemed the Cardinals had the mainstream media doing their drafts for a while there.

I love it, the Cards would get A grades every single year. I wouldn't be surprised if the Mel Kiper big board was posted right along side their own lists.

I wish there were more interesting behind the scenes stuff like this floating around, it gets me hype to see the Parcells draft special thing later on tonight.

[JBCX]

I don't know about Jake Locker, but one thing this article strongly reinforces in my mind is that Blaine Gabbert will be a complete failure in the NFL and I pity the team that is forced to reach for him in the top-15.

[FUNBUNCHER]

....then don't read it. The guy has more credentials to analyze prospects than anyone on this board, Mel Kiper and Todd McShay put together. He did the job and clearly was right about guys like Alex Smith being a bust and Favre being a hidden gem. He was wrong about Rodgers but so were a lot of people or he wouldn't have fallen to GB. I don't realy carw what your opinion of the guy is. He got fired over an argument about Alex Smith..at least he was right and stuck to his guns.

Everyone's right in hindsight about prospects. Unless he was a scout for the 49ers and chose to pass on Smith, saying he was 'right' about the kid is BS.

Only the team drafting # 1 overall had a chance to be 'right' or 'wrong' about ALex Smith. Everyone else was saved the hassle.

Regardless, it's always good to read a different vantage point on prospects.

Too bad it's gonna take at least three years to get an accurate read about all these top QB prospects.

His comments about Gabbert are nothing new on this board IMO. Gabby has franchise QB tools, but when you watch his game film, there's no 'there' there.

Comparing Locker to Favre is a reach, IMO. I've never seen that level of playmaking ability from Jake, and Favre was throwing those off balance passes at SOuthern Miss too.

IMO he's totally right that a prospect on some basic level should jump out at you on film, maybe not on every single play, but enough times over a season for you to think, 'this guy is an unusual football player', in the best sense of the word.

From there is when you start breaking down their game.

I'd have liked it more if he broke down what he thought Newton's 'multiple red-flags' were, to see if he felt Cam had more question marks off the field, or on it.

Draft is still more art than science, schematic fit over raw athletic ability, 'pure football players' over 'great athletes',( awesome when they're both the SAME PLAYER!!).

[PossibleCabbage]

Or turn on film and fail to see what EMPLOYED scouts do see. Which would seem to be the more likely proposition.

Did you know that "film" as scouts term it generally consists of the 11-on-11s coaches tape? If you know where I can get some of that, please let me know. In fact, if you can make it so they broadcast college football games in that format, please do so so I can DVR them to review in the offseason.

But let's be honest. We can't get "tape". We can get highlight reels, and TV game tape... but none of that is what the scouts look at. The scouts don't look at what we can look at because what we can look at doesn't tell the whole story.

[Halsey]

So he's a former scout who watched player's for years and was right sometimes. Man, that's crazy...

[DiG]

Comparing Locker to Favre is a reach, IMO. I've never seen that level of playmaking ability from Jake, and Favre was throwing those off balance passes at SOuthern Miss too.


I don't agree that its a reach as a prospect. If your talking about Favre at his prime in the NFL than yes comparing any prospect to that would be a reach but comparing Locker coming out of school to a guy like Favre coming out of school to me is not a bad comparison at all.

[AntoinCD]

Good read. Im not taking everything he says word for word but it does show why some teams are always struggling and have a poor record in the draft. Teams with a strong core of guys will always do well. The Patriots for example have Belichick and Nick Caserio who are in charge on draft day(Scott pioli was there obviously as well) and they go by their own specific value chart. It's why they are more likely to trade down and take players higher than most would(see Devin McCourty and Sebastian Vollmer as recent examples). However there are too many teams who will take a high risk guy simply because he is falling further than they thought. It's all well and good to do this every now and then but making it a regular occurance is enough to kill a franchise for years

[initial_flo]

It all depends, you could go basically three ways in terms of comparisons. He can share his style of play, out right ability, or success and production.

You can have a sixth round guy that you can compare to Walter Payton in terms of style but no where in the league in terms of success or talent.

I'm guessing he's referring to Locker as a Farve type that could come out to be a tier or two less then Farve at his peak, which I also think is fair.

[BuddyCHRIST]

He does point out the most mind boggling thing to me about Gabbert, when you watch him on tape he looks like an average to below average major conference QB. How people rate him as a top 5 pick is insane.

[VAfy-ya]

I found it interesting that he said teams dont keep a track record or "grade out" scouts. As important a task as scouting is to a team's overall success, you would think it would be heavy scrinity involved in determing who is good at their job. Why would teams keep a scout who misses more than he hits? I understand is a collective thing as scouts from a team come together and hash out a collective grade on a propspect but there should still be some kind of system that identifies those who eye talent better than others.

[JoeJoeBrown]

So the natural joins NFLDC in January of 2011 and has been on a robust Gabbert campaign the entire time. He will denigrate every article, author, and source of info that in any way has something negative to say about Gabbert. He will denigrate other QBs that are threats to Gabbert's draft status.

So natural, are you related to Blaine, are friends with Blaine, work as his agent or for his agent, or are paid by anyone to post here?

It's not unheard of. Sorry for the suspicion, but your behavior indicates a vested interest in his success. You have one sole agenda and you have not deviated in the four months that you have been here. From the start of draft season up until the draft.

I won't be surprised when you disappear after the draft.

[Halsey]

Yeah, the NFL should employ scout scouts. They could follow scouts around and write down every one of their opinions and then review those opinions later. Scout scouts could watch tape of scouts watching tape and evaluate how those scouts are at watching tape. Each scout would then get a grade and NFL teams could start having a scout draft.

[JoeJoeBrown]

BTW, that was a great article. Fun read.

[Saints-Tigers]

Funny how he talks about the Cardinals and them grabbing the hot player on internet draft boards.

It's going to be even funnier when they grab Gabbert despite his turribleness, and reinforce everything he said, both about Gabbert, and the Cards.

[PossibleCabbage]

I found it interesting that he said teams dont keep a track record or "grade out" scouts. As important a task as scouting is to a team's overall success, you would think it would be heavy scrinity involved in determing who is good at their job. Why would teams keep a scout who misses more than he hits? I understand is a collective thing as scouts from a team come together and hash out a collective grade on a propspect but there should still be some kind of system that identifies those who eye talent better than others.

Being that he's only worked for a few teams, is he really in position to note that no teams grade out scouts? It's possible that some of the better drafting teams do grade scouts and keep quiet about it.

[Tom Servo]

Yeah, the NFL should employ scout scouts. They could follow scouts around and write down every one of their opinions and then review those opinions later. Scout scouts could watch tape of scouts watching tape and evaluate how those scouts are at watching tape. Each scout would then get a grade and NFL teams could start having a scout draft.

HAHA. Sad, but I'd probly watch the scout draft

[PossibleCabbage]

HAHA. Sad, but I'd probly watch the scout draft

You want to hear sad? I would watch the Scout Scouting Combine. That does raise the question, however, of who scouts the scouts.

[JHL6719]

You want to hear sad? I would watch the Scout Scouting Combine. That does raise the question, however, of who scouts the scouts.

Scouting scouts would obviously be scouting scouts scouting.

They would be evaluated on a few of the basics to get a general scouting scouts scouting report:


-thumb flexibility and reaction time on the stopwatch

-note pad time (broken into paragraph "splits" to guage wrist explosion)

-smooth transition in between scout scouting drills

-accuracy in transferring what they see on film via tweets

[the natural]

So the natural joins NFLDC in January of 2011 and has been on a robust Gabbert campaign the entire time. He will denigrate every article, author, and source of info that in any way has something negative to say about Gabbert. He will denigrate other QBs that are threats to Gabbert's draft status.

So natural, are you related to Blaine, are friends with Blaine, work as his agent or for his agent, or are paid by anyone to post here?

It's not unheard of. Sorry for the suspicion, but your behavior indicates a vested interest in his success. You have one sole agenda and you have not deviated in the four months that you have been here. From the start of draft season up until the draft.

I won't be surprised when you disappear after the draft.

I just started when I noticed Gabbert being trashed unmercifully on the forums here. It escalated. If you go back to some early threads around that time you'll see what I mean. "Third or fourth rounder" was the common theme. Since that time, I've been able to educate the blind to the point where at least he is acknowledged as a first round talent. But it wasn't easy.

[JoeJoeBrown]

I just started when I noticed Gabbert being trashed unmercifully on the forums here. It escalated. If you go back to some early threads around that time you'll see what I mean. "Third or fourth rounder" was the common theme. Since that time, I've been able to educate the blind to the point where at least he is acknowledged as a first round talent. But it wasn't easy.

Gabbert has been your one and only topic, directly or indirectly. That's it, no diversity of thought. You still haven't addressed my question.

[WCH]

I found it interesting that he said teams dont keep a track record or "grade out" scouts. As important a task as scouting is to a team's overall success, you would think it would be heavy scrinity involved in determing who is good at their job. Why would teams keep a scout who misses more than he hits? I understand is a collective thing as scouts from a team come together and hash out a collective grade on a propspect but there should still be some kind of system that identifies those who eye talent better than others.

This also stood out to me. I'm guessing that the better run organizations *do* have a system of evaluating their scouts. I know that if I were an owner or GM, I'd be interested in knowing if my scouts were incompetent. My guess is that they file away the scouting reports and review them periodically, and the scouts never know that they're being graded.

As for the Locker/Favre comparison...that's pretty close to the kiss of death. In 15 years following the Draft, Cutler has been the best QB I've seen draw the Favre comparison. Most of the others were complete and total busts. Brett was the Barry Sander's of QBs -- most guys just can't play the way that he plays and not suck. The Packers caught lightning in a bottle with Favre, and it didn't hurt that he was coached by Mike Holmgren, Steve Mariucci, Andy Reid, and Marty Mornhinweg. Locker probably won't have that sort of All-Star Team of QB coaches.

[DenverFan1974]

I just started when I noticed Gabbert being trashed unmercifully on the forums here. It escalated. If you go back to some early threads around that time you'll see what I mean. "Third or fourth rounder" was the common theme. Since that time, I've been able to educate the blind to the point where at least he is acknowledged as a first round talent. But it wasn't easy.

I'm here as a fan of the Broncos and Colin Kaepernick (alum of NEVADA). I have a similar agenda but you didn't answer the questions put forth.

In my opinion Gabbert looks the part but hasn't shown it on the field. I think he's more of a risk than Ponder, Dalton and Kaepernick. He seems to be a good kid and he's played well the few times I've seen him but I for one didn't understand his hype when looking at his numbers in the same offense Chase Daniels mastered. He could be an NFL star but I don't think he's proven to be the top QB prospect of this class nor a top 15 pick.

As for "rogue scout" he may be a malcontent or a revisionist but the article does make for an interesting read.

[Babylon]

This also stood out to me. I'm guessing that the better run organizations *do* have a system of evaluating their scouts. I know that if I were an owner or GM, I'd be interested in knowing if my scouts were incompetent. My guess is that they file away the scouting reports and review them periodically, and the scouts never know that they're being graded.

As for the Locker/Favre comparison...that's pretty close to the kiss of death. In 15 years following the Draft, Cutler has been the best QB I've seen draw the Favre comparison. Most of the others were complete and total busts. Brett was the Barry Sander's of QBs -- most guys just can't play the way that he plays and not suck. The Packers caught lightning in a bottle with Favre, and it didn't hurt that he was coached by Mike Holmgren, Steve Mariucci, Andy Reid, and Marty Mornhinweg. Locker probably won't have that sort of All-Star Team of QB coaches.


I think he's making a comparison to Favre based on what they two had to work with in college, their ability to improvise and move the chains in various ways etc. The passing percentages are pretty close too as they are with guys like Marino, Montana, Stafford and Cutler (not to compare Jake as a QB per se).

It's easy to see the interest and need from teams like the Titans, Skins and Vikings but i think on thursday that the Cards and Niners could get involved in the discussion too.

[the natural]

Gabbert has been your one and only topic, directly or indirectly. That's it, no diversity of thought. You still haven't addressed my question.

LOL, whether I'm related to him or representing him? No. Unfortunately. Never have spoken to the guy. I do think he would be great for the game. There is a bit of Pat Tillman in him, and the league needs more of that.

[Babylon]

LOL, whether I'm related to him or representing him? No. Unfortunately. Never have spoken to the guy. I do think he would be great for the game. There is a bit of Pat Tillman in him, and the league needs more of that.

In a long list of strange things you've uttered that may be the topper. Keep it coming the entertainment value is much needed.

[njx9]

There is a bit of Pat Tillman in him, and the league needs more of that.

wait, what? how, specifically?

[Babylon]

wait, what? how, specifically?

Can he justify anything he says?

[CashmoneyDrew]

wait, what? how, specifically?

Long, flowing hair is my guess. Either that or they were/are both white. That's about the only similarities they share.

[JoeJoeBrown]

LOL, whether I'm related to him or representing him? No. Unfortunately. Never have spoken to the guy. I do think he would be great for the game. There is a bit of Pat Tillman in him, and the league needs more of that.

I had to ask. You have only one subject matter on this entire site and it really seems as if you have a vested interest to "educate the blind" as you said earlier. That really smacks of something more than being a fan, since fans usually have more than one topic that they enjoy discussing.

[njx9]

Can he justify anything he says?

i'm really assuming there isn't any justification per se, but i think the explanation has a good chance of being really entertaining.

[ChiefMojo]

The natural is a one trick pony yes (defending/pimping Gabbert), but does he make any sense? The answer is no!

[batsandgats]

Did you seriously compare to Pat Tillman to Blaine Gabbert?

I really want to like Gabbert, but you make that hard to do. If your job was to make people dislike Gabbert then you have succeeded.

[armageddon]

I know this scout personally. Very good guy. When he was on the road, he would often times go to local high school games and ask around who the stars are and follow them. He is very dedicated and very knowledgable. Sure, he got his foot in the door because of his Dad, but that doesn't mean he isn't capable. I haven't kept in contact with him after he left St.Louis.

[FUNBUNCHER]

wait, what? how, specifically?


Does he have to spell it out???

Blaine Gabbert is AN AMERICAN HERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[descendency]

Gabbert's my number 1 QB in this draft in the 5th round

[the natural]

Gabbert has a similar combination of smarts and strong sense of patriotism that Tillman had. His best buddies are Army guys at West Point. He seems strong on brotherhood and is very competitive. A natural leader. But I said "a bit".

[njx9]

i knew it would be entertaining.

[BuddyCHRIST]

I think a strong sense of patriotism is an overlooked quality when scouting QBs. Its make or break imo.

[CashmoneyDrew]

I think a strong sense of patriotism is an overlooked quality when scouting QBs. Its make or break imo.

Even so, he's still second behind AmeriStanzi in that case.

[PossibleCabbage]

I think a strong sense of patriotism is an overlooked quality when scouting QBs. Its make or break imo.

So guys like Warren Moon and Doug Flutie were so successful in the CFL simply because somewhere deep down they really, really loved Canada?

[Giants34]

He does point out the most mind boggling thing to me about Gabbert, when you watch him on tape he looks like an average to below average major conference QB. How people rate him as a top 5 pick is insane.

I'm quoting this for truth. How Newton and Gabbert became top 5 picks is mind-boggling to me.

[Giants34]

I think a strong sense of patriotism is an overlooked quality when scouting QBs. Its make or break imo.

Ricky Dobbs for franchise QB?

[Saints-Tigers]

I'm quoting this for truth. How Newton and Gabbert became top 5 picks is mind-boggling to me.


Cam is easy, top notch physical tools, big time winner and record setter.

Gabbert's my number 1 QB in this draft in

Gabbert is my highest rated person at life.

[Giants34]

Cam is easy, top notch physical tools, big time winner and record setter.



Gabbert is my highest rated person at life.

Newton played 1 year in a gimmick offense, has unrefined mechanics, BOMBED the Combine and has major red flags. Any other year, he's a 2nd rounder on arm and physical ability as an ATHLETE. Carolina drank the Kool-Aid..that's all there is to that.

[PossibleCabbage]

I think no matter how bad the QB class is, the top guy is going to work his way into the top 10 just because teams are bad because they lack QBs and bad teams pick high. Generally, once one guy works his way into the top 10 a second comparable "alternate" guy follows him up there.

I think this is what happened with Newton and Gabbert. I think if Luck had came out, neither Gabbert nor Newton would be top 10 picks. Now they likely both go in the top 5.

[Giants34]

I think no matter how bad the QB class is, the top guy is going to work his way into the top 10 just because teams are bad because they lack QBs and bad teams pick high. Generally, once one guy works his way into the top 10 a second comparable "alternate" guy follows him up there.

I think this is what happened with Newton and Gabbert. I think if Luck had came out, neither Gabbert nor Newton would be top 10 picks. Now they likely both go in the top 5.

You nailed it. I recall Leinart staying in school bumping a guy named Alex Smith from a "decent prospect" to suddenly in the limelight. Not that Leinart turned out to be anything but he clearly would have gone #1 and devalued Smith. Luck being in this draft would have pushed every guy down a notch. Newton and Gabbert would like ugly ducklings held in comparisaon to Luck side by side. Luck would eat up the attention

[BlindSite]

Fair enough with Luck coming out everyone would've been shuffled but no matter what anyone says Alex Smith would've been a hell of a lot better if he didn't have 4 OCs in his first four years in the league and was given a year or two in the one offense to develop.

[Giants34]

There's no telling how far he would have dropped if Leinart had come out. No one needed QBs..Rodgers was a luxury pick for GB. Your #1 overall pick could have been a 2nd rounder had Leinart declared. Luck being in the scouts eyes would have exposed Newton and Gabbert and they likely would have dropped, and everyone else right along with them.

[BlindSite]

I don't know if wholly agree, even if Luck came out, or hell if Clausen appeared to be second coming and QB wasn't an area of need, the Panthers are one team and there are four or five Qbs some are talking about in the first round.

[Giants34]

.but Luck was head and shoulders above them all.

[BlindSite]

I agree wholeheartedly, but it doesn't change the point I'm making. Realistically Cam Newton might not be the pick, Newton, Gabbert, Mallett, Locker and either Ponder/Stanzi are being linked to first round picks in one way or another.

[Giants34]

...how do you know that would be the case with Luck in this draft? Buffalo and Arizona would be more worried about trying to obtain that pick and grab Luck...much more than settling on Newton and Gabbert. Luck would change the entire outlook of the QB class. Everyone else would be downgraded to projects and Luck the one franchise guy.

[BlindSite]

It'd be a non-issue because Luck would be a Panther, they wouldn't be able to trade into the top spot, so their choices would be the same.