What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Why Does the Fantasy Community Love Corey Davis So Much? (1 Viewer)

Ilov80s said:
Matt Kelly at playerprofiler.com uses that stat (calls it dominator rating). Corey Davis share is in the 96th percentile, Mike Williams is 39th percentile. 
Click to expand...
I think this can say a few things about the differences in these two players.

Mike Williams was the receiving leader in a high powered offense that likely had more competition than the receivers on W. Michigan.

Mike Williams was only a part of a much larger offense, while Corey Davis was most of the W. Michigan offense.

Opposing defenses surely game planned for Davis more than they would for Mike Williams, but they could not stop him.

More pro players will be drafted from Clemson and teams that were on their schedule than will be drafted from W. Michigan and the teams that were on their schedule. Therefore the stats that Mike Williams earned may be closer to the competition he will have at the NFL level than it has been for Corey Davis.

I don't really see this as an advantage for either player, it is just meant to highlight some of the differences of their college careers.

Davis may have more to adjust to than Williams as far as the level of competition of other players on their team being good, as well as the level of competition faced.

You should expect a great player to dominate against a lower level of competition. If they don't that would be more of a warning sign I think  than a player not having a large market share of yards or targets on a better team, that does have more competition for opportunity.

Those stats and percentiles are pretty useless without context. 

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Well not for nothing, but WMU's QB Zach Terrell was a 4-year starter who is rated the #21 QB prospect out of 159 QBs this year and is a projected 4th-5th round pick in the NFL draft.

So what's more of an advantage, a 1st round QB talent playing against quite a few 1st round DB talents or a 4th round QB talent playing against a bunch of D2 scrubs that aren't even going to enter the draft?  I think you could pretty easily make the argument that the gap between defense and QB is larger with a D2 defense next to an NFL backup QB than elite D1 defenses next to an NFL starting QB.
Click to expand...
I agree that the whole adjustment for level of competition arguments are a bit chicken and egg and usually doesn't lead to anything certain enough either way.

 
Biabreakable said:
I think this can say a few things about the differences in these two players.

Mike Williams was the receiving leader in a high powered offense that likely had more competition than the receivers on W. Michigan.

Mike Williams was only a part of a much larger offense, while Corey Davis was most of the W. Michigan offense.

Opposing defenses surely game planned for Davis more than they would for Mike Williams, but they could not stop him.

More pro players will be drafted from Clemson and teams that were on their schedule than will be drafted from W. Michigan and the teams that were on their schedule. Therefore the stats that Mike Williams earned may be closer to the competition he will have at the NFL level than it has been for Corey Davis.

I don't really see this as an advantage for either player, it is just meant to highlight some of the differences of their college careers.

Davis may have more to adjust to than Williams as far as the level of competition of other players on their team being good, as well as the level of competition faced.

You should expect a great player to dominate against a lower level of competition. If they don't that would be more of a warning sign I think  than a player not having a large market share of yards or targets on a better team, that does have more competition for opportunity.

Those stats and percentiles are pretty useless without context. 
Click to expand...
Love the analysis. What do you make of a guy I like, Josh Malone? He's at Tennessee and was 66th percentile when it came to down share of the passing game. Does that mean anything? Or just a sign of a problematic passing game?

 
Ilov80s said:
Love the analysis. What do you make of a guy I like, Josh Malone? He's at Tennessee and was 66th percentile when it came to down share of the passing game. Does that mean anything? Or just a sign of a problematic passing game?
Click to expand...
I haven't watched Josh Malone so I am not familiar with the player at all. There are some Vols fans here who could tell you a lot more about him than I can. I have watched some of Kamara but Malone (or anyone else) did not stand out to me watching Kamara cut ups.

What percentile the players fall in is pretty random noise without further context in my opinion. 

Josh Malones stats show that he made progress each season and he put up pretty good numbers in his 3rd year 2016.

At the same time his best season of 50 receptions is not particularly impressive. He does have great yards per reception numbers, but on a small sample size, this is less impressive. A lot of college players have their best year in their last college season, when they are more mature than the other players on their team as well as more experienced than a lot of the newer competition.

Another consideration worth talking about is the breakout age of the college players.

Malones freshman and softmore seasons were not particularly good from a stats perspective.

Corey Davis had close (more receptions fewer TD) to the same numbers in 2013 as a freshman (18 years old) to what Malone did in 2016 as a junior (20 years old) and Davis improved each year from there. Malone is 10 months younger than Davis is right now, but his career trajectory from a stats perspective is not nearly as impressive.

The Vols threw for 3100 yards and Malones 972 receiving yards was 31% of that. Not a particularly good passing offense.

 
I've been high on Davis and low on Williams since before this season. Davis has had great production along with prototypical size, and he also seems to be getting a thumbs up from NFL folks who have him as a first rounder. He has checked all the boxes that he can, with the one gap being the lack of workout numbers. But nfldraftscout has him estimated at 4.48 speed, and Xue also estimated him as having good speed based on counting frames in game videos, so he seems unlikely to be slow.

Mike Williams's production wasn't that special, so I'm staying away from him (at least in the top 5). College production has been a pretty strong predictor of NFL success for WRs, even after controlling for draft pick. And McCaffrey & Mixon both have a strong enough profile for me to be happy with them early in the draft.

 
Biabreakable said:
Well we can look at the percentage of yards generated for their team. 

In this case Clemson threw for 5009 yards in 2016 Mike Williams had 1361 yards receiving, no rushing stats.

He had 27% of Clemsons receiving yards.

Western Michigan threw for 3533 yards in 2016 Corey Davis had 1500 yards receiving, one rush zero yards.

He had 42% of Western Michigans receiving yards.
Click to expand...
I've posted anti-market share rants in the past (mainly arguing for Michael Thomas over Leonte Carroo last year at this time), but I'll do a quick one again here. 

Without context, I don't see how this stat has any meaning. Clemson also had Jordan Leggett, who is a top-5 tight end prospect in this draft (and basically a big receiver). They had Deon Cain, who is a top 5 WR prospect for the 2018 draft. They had a pair of very good college slot receivers and a highly-regarded gadget guy in McCloud. The fact that Williams had basically double the production of Cain and Leggett is actually a very good indicator of his pro future. 

You can go back and look at the market share of DeAndre Hopkins, Sammy Watkins, Martavis Bryant, when they were at Clemson and see the same thing. 

Any legit NFL prospect playing in the MAC should be dominating the market share. It would be news if Davis wasn't. I don't get why the fact he did moves the needle at all. The leaders in receiving market share are almost always small school guys. 

 
One other thing I want to say in regards to the question about the level of competition.

This does matter to NFL GMs. I have heard Rick Spielman talk about that if all things are equal, he would prefer to take a player from a big school, because it is easier to trust the level of competition will be similar in the NFL, compared to players from smaller schools, whos film may not translate as well to the pros.

So if GMs care about it, it will influence the players draft position.

What I don't like about this is that there is a lot of cronyism involved.It becomes somewhat of a self fulfilling prophecy that the highest graded high school recruits, go to the bigger schools with better recruiting, have better supporting casts around them, and more likely to be selected by the NFL teams than players from smaller schools because of that.

This is similar to what Connskins talking about how the devy community will be invested in players over time. Scouts get invested in players from their high school evaluations of them during the recruiting process. It is just safer to go with the bigger school players who they are already invested in becoming successful NFL players. Their jobs and reputations somewhat depend on those players becoming successful. So they have reason to be biased towards the players from the bigger schools by default.

 
Dan Hindery said:
I've posted anti-market share rants in the past (mainly arguing for Michael Thomas over Leonte Carroo last year at this time), but I'll do a quick one again here. 

Without context, I don't see how this stat has any meaning. Clemson also had Jordan Leggett, who is a top-5 tight end prospect in this draft (and basically a big receiver). They had Deon Cain, who is a top 5 WR prospect for the 2018 draft. They had a pair of very good college slot receivers and a highly-regarded gadget guy in McCloud. The fact that Williams had basically double the production of Cain and Leggett is actually a very good indicator of his pro future. 

You can go back and look at the market share of DeAndre Hopkins, Sammy Watkins, Martavis Bryant, when they were at Clemson and see the same thing. 

Any legit NFL prospect playing in the MAC should be dominating the market share. It would be news if Davis wasn't. I don't get why the fact he did moves the needle at all. The leaders in receiving market share are almost always small school guys. 
Click to expand...
Just making conversation Dan. 

I think Mike Thomas is a great example of a player who was doubted based on market share who turned out to be a great NFL WR.

 
@Biabreakable Watch Davis against Central Michigan. Complete defensive breakdowns lead to at least 1 or his TDs. These kids are bad (in NFL terms). They constantly get caught staring down the QB, help over the top bites down on the routes, their safeties are way too slow, etc. There's a few times when Davis looks very covered too. Not enough speed to separate down the field, he tries to shake a DB that's sitting on his route and it doesn't work. He makes the catch but it's contested by a slower, smaller, weaker athlete. 

People like to think it's a "no win" situation for small school guys because "everyone expects them too" but it's a "win" because if they don't dominate then they liking aren't in the discussion. 

 
Biabreakable said:
Well we can look at the percentage of yards generated for their team. 

In this case Clemson threw for 5009 yards in 2016 Mike Williams had 1361 yards receiving, no rushing stats.

He had 27% of Clemsons receiving yards.

Western Michigan threw for 3533 yards in 2016 Corey Davis had 1500 yards receiving, one rush zero yards.

He had 42% of Western Michigans receiving yards.
Click to expand...
Is that a sign of davis' dominance or that Clemson also had leggett, renfro, scott, Cain and mccloud to throw to as well?

 
Borden said:
@Biabreakable Watch Davis against Central Michigan. Complete defensive breakdowns lead to at least 1 or his TDs. These kids are bad (in NFL terms). They constantly get caught staring down the QB, help over the top bites down on the routes, their safeties are way too slow, etc. There's a few times when Davis looks very covered too. Not enough speed to separate down the field, he tries to shake a DB that's sitting on his route and it doesn't work. He makes the catch but it's contested by a slower, smaller, weaker athlete. 

People like to think it's a "no win" situation for small school guys because "everyone expects them too" but it's a "win" because if they don't dominate then they liking aren't in the discussion. 
Click to expand...
Most college defenders look bad to me. That is one of the reasons I don't like watching college football as much as pro football.

I will try to watch the game you mention again though. Not saying Davis is perfect, but he is the only WR I have watched that I can see being a NFL WR 1 for his team, which is pretty much a prerequisite for a WR to become a top 12 WR in fantasy.

Granted I could watch all of these players more than I have, but I did watch all of Davis games on DBD. I didn't do so with the context of the defenders he is facing being of a much lower quality than average, if that is the case however.

 
Dan Hindery said:
I've posted anti-market share rants in the past (mainly arguing for Michael Thomas over Leonte Carroo last year at this time), but I'll do a quick one again here. 

Without context, I don't see how this stat has any meaning. Clemson also had Jordan Leggett, who is a top-5 tight end prospect in this draft (and basically a big receiver). They had Deon Cain, who is a top 5 WR prospect for the 2018 draft. They had a pair of very good college slot receivers and a highly-regarded gadget guy in McCloud. The fact that Williams had basically double the production of Cain and Leggett is actually a very good indicator of his pro future. 

You can go back and look at the market share of DeAndre Hopkins, Sammy Watkins, Martavis Bryant, when they were at Clemson and see the same thing. 

Any legit NFL prospect playing in the MAC should be dominating the market share. It would be news if Davis wasn't. I don't get why the fact he did moves the needle at all. The leaders in receiving market share are almost always small school guys. 
Click to expand...
I think it's notable that Davis had both a high market share and a high yards per target, which is a hard combo to hit unless you play for a weird run-heavy offense like Air Force or Georgia Tech. For example, here are all the seasons since 2014 when a WR had at least 10 yards per target and 40% of his team's receiving yards (pro-rated or limited to the games he played in):

Code: 
Year   Player            Team        Yd      TD    YPT      MS (Yd)
2014   Rashard Higgins   CSU         1750    17    13.55    45%
2014   Amari Cooper      Alabama     1728    16    10.77    44%
2014   Tyler Lockett     Kansas St   1515    11    10.56    41%
2016   Corey Davis       W Mich      1499    19    10.87    42%
2014   Corey Davis       W Mich      1408    15    12.44    44%
2016   Tanner Gentry     Wyoming     1326    14    10.13    41%
2016   Michael Gallup    CSU         1271    14    10.78    40%
2014   Tyler Boyd        Pittsburgh  1261     8    11.05    52%
2014   John Harris       Texas       1050     7    10.25    40%
2014   Titus Davis       C Mich       980    13    10.16    40%
2014   Sterling Shepard  Oklahoma     970     5    12.27    40%
2016   Jalen Robinette   Air Force    959     6    14.58    55%
2014   DeVante Parker    Louisville   855     5    12.76    57%
2015   Leonte Carroo     Rutgers      809    10    13.83    50%
2014   Jalen Robinette   Air Force    806     4    10.90    43%
2014   DeAndre Smelter   Ga Tech      715     7    11.53    44%
I've sorted by total receiving yards, so you can choose to ignore the guys at the bottom who either missed time or played for one of those weird offenses. 4 other small school WRs make the cut (Higgins, Gentry, Gallup, and Titus Davis), but Corey Davis shows up twice, had better stats than all but 1 of those other WRs, and has a prototypical build than any of the 4 (or many of the other WRs on the list).

 
In regards to central Michigans defense I found that they were 54th out of 128 teams in total yardage given up in 2016, So slightly above average against. They gave up slightly less than the average rushing and passing yards. 

The MAC does not have any highly regarded teams in it really. However Davis has played against Michigan State twice, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio State. His schedule was not just weaker teams in this conference. He has come up big in some of these games (Michigan State) and not done very well in others (Ohio State, Iowa).

Looking at this Central Michigan has actually done pretty well against Davis in a relative sense, at least better than most of the teams he has played. He has scored on them the last 3 seasons, but he has more yards in a lot of his other games than he does against CMichigan

 
Biabreakable said:
The level of competition argument is always one that is hard to account for. I don't watch enough college football to have a good sense of how to adjust for strength of schedule and quality of competition.
Click to expand...
But I know you pay attention to the NFL draft and the last two teams Williams faced, in massive high pressure situations no less, he faced  likely 3 first round CB's and one first round S just in this draft.  I know Alabama gave up some yards to WR's this season but Williams had second best day of any WR against Ohio St last year and even more impressive because they won in a blow out, no garbage time production.

Davis is hard to account for however, negatively and positively.  For sure the MAC comp is another level easier but he might get knocked to much for his performance against the better comp because when he faces those teams he's at a huge disadvantage since his team is outclassed and he was fairly productive in those games, just not dominant or a difference maker.

I also think Mike Williams play in those two playoff games goes a long way towards answering the question why Williams stock seems to be falling in fantasy community but not Davis. I would say the longer we get away from on the field production the more we minimize it and get to wrapped up in workout metrics . Of course the other side of that argument is when we see a guy like Williams have strong games on a big time stage against elite comp we might overreact and get carried away and the farther we get away from that the more rational we examine it.

 
Biabreakable said:
Scouts get invested in players from their high school evaluations of them during the recruiting process. It is just safer to go with the bigger school players who they are already invested in becoming successful NFL players.
Click to expand...


I don't think NFL scouts are involved in the recruiting process/ranking of high school recruits at all. Area scouts are tasked with keeping an eye on underclassmen throughout their careers and creating a relationship with team personnel to gain info later, but they don't usually truly scout and grade guys until they're draft eligible. I doubt most NFL scouts/FO people have many thoughts at all about incoming HS recruits unless they're the top, hyped guys whose names you just can't avoid if you follow the process.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ConnSKINS26 said:
I don't think NFL scouts are involved in the recruiting process/ranking of high school recruits at all. Area scouts are tasked with keeping an eye on underclassmen throughout their careers and creating a relationship with team personnel to gain info later, but they don't usually truly scout and grade guys until they're draft eligible. I doubt most NFL scouts/FO people have many thoughts at all about incoming HS recruits unless they're the top, hyped guys whose names you just can't avoid if you follow the process.
Click to expand...
Could be I am using the term scouts to loosely. Or which scouts are we talking about? I didn't mean the ones currently working for NFL teams.

I am just referring to how players are graded as 5 star, 4 star, 3 star recruits and so on coming out of high school. Not sure about the connections between the college teams who are recruiting and who assigns those grades?

I mostly hear about this second hand that player X was a 4 star recruit out of where ever. I do think that whoever assigns those grades is likely held accountable to them during self scouting and internal evaluations, as well as by the college teams that use this information to inform their recruiting priorities.

Whoever is assigning those grades does have a vested interest in the players proving their evaluation right, and those players do get recruited to the best teams more often than not. It is something that will come up about a player who didn't pan out with the big school, but was a highly regarded player prior to that.

For example Isiah Crowell was a 5 star recruit coming out of high school.

It isn't clear to me who assigns those grades for the high school players, or what their connections are to the college football teams. How much of this influences their recruiting priorities or do they rely more on their own scouts evaluations?

Regardless I think all of these folks talk to each other and share opinions on the players. So yeah being highly graded out of high school leads to better offers from better college teams, more exposure to a national audience and more likely to be drafted by NFL teams because they went to a big school. 

There are some pretty highly ranked 2017 college defensive players (being talked about as 2nd round pick in the 2017 draft) who I have watched and do not look near worth that high of a draft pick. So it goes. 

 
@Borden

I watched the game you mentioned. I see what you mean in regards to him not getting as open in this game as in most of his games you can watch.

As the announcers point out, CMich is using a lot of help with a safety over the top and using some double and at times triple coverage to stop Davis. This is forcing Davis to use more stop and come back routes and yeah I saw that play where he tries some shake but the defender isn't fooled.

To me they do not look good, but they also do not look noticably worse than a lot of other college secondaries. CMichigan is getting blown out in this game as WMich has some big runs for TD. Likely in part because of focusing too much to covering Davis. WMich does not need Davis to have a big game to win this one.

You see this on the first TD he catches over the safety who did have good position on the throw as you mention. However the throw is clearly behind Davis, who had more than just a step of separation on the guy in the end zone and he has to come back for.the ball which was underthrown. He executes the play that was not a good throw.

On the hitch and go route, he clearly beats the corner who does have help over the top, but he holds Davis and gets called for it. The announcer calls this a good penalty because Davis did have the corner beat down the sideline and may have been able to score if the safety isn't quick enough.

On his second TD the announcer calls it, a inside out route in the end zone executed flawlessly. Great separation on that one in close quarters.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dan Hindery said:
I've posted anti-market share rants in the past (mainly arguing for Michael Thomas over Leonte Carroo last year at this time), but I'll do a quick one again here. 

Without context, I don't see how this stat has any meaning. Clemson also had Jordan Leggett, who is a top-5 tight end prospect in this draft (and basically a big receiver). They had Deon Cain, who is a top 5 WR prospect for the 2018 draft. They had a pair of very good college slot receivers and a highly-regarded gadget guy in McCloud. The fact that Williams had basically double the production of Cain and Leggett is actually a very good indicator of his pro future. 

You can go back and look at the market share of DeAndre Hopkins, Sammy Watkins, Martavis Bryant, when they were at Clemson and see the same thing. 

Any legit NFL prospect playing in the MAC should be dominating the market share. It would be news if Davis wasn't. I don't get why the fact he did moves the needle at all. The leaders in receiving market share are almost always small school guys. 
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

Was going to post something similar, particularly on the bolded point.

 
ZWK said:
I think it's notable that Davis had both a high market share and a high yards per target, which is a hard combo to hit unless you play for a weird run-heavy offense like Air Force or Georgia Tech. For example, here are all the seasons since 2014 when a WR had at least 10 yards per target and 40% of his team's receiving yards (pro-rated or limited to the games he played in):

Code: 
Year   Player            Team        Yd      TD    YPT      MS (Yd)
2014   Rashard Higgins   CSU         1750    17    13.55    45%
2014   Amari Cooper      Alabama     1728    16    10.77    44%
2014   Tyler Lockett     Kansas St   1515    11    10.56    41%
2016   Corey Davis       W Mich      1499    19    10.87    42%
2014   Corey Davis       W Mich      1408    15    12.44    44%
2016   Tanner Gentry     Wyoming     1326    14    10.13    41%
2016   Michael Gallup    CSU         1271    14    10.78    40%
2014   Tyler Boyd        Pittsburgh  1261     8    11.05    52%
2014   John Harris       Texas       1050     7    10.25    40%
2014   Titus Davis       C Mich       980    13    10.16    40%
2014   Sterling Shepard  Oklahoma     970     5    12.27    40%
2016   Jalen Robinette   Air Force    959     6    14.58    55%
2014   DeVante Parker    Louisville   855     5    12.76    57%
2015   Leonte Carroo     Rutgers      809    10    13.83    50%
2014   Jalen Robinette   Air Force    806     4    10.90    43%
2014   DeAndre Smelter   Ga Tech      715     7    11.53    44%
I've sorted by total receiving yards, so you can choose to ignore the guys at the bottom who either missed time or played for one of those weird offenses. 4 other small school WRs make the cut (Higgins, Gentry, Gallup, and Titus Davis), but Corey Davis shows up twice, had better stats than all but 1 of those other WRs, and has a prototypical build than any of the 4 (or many of the other WRs on the list).
Click to expand...
OK, but exactly how impressive is this group? I realize it is a small sample size, and recent, so jury is out, but I don't look at this list and think, wow, that is some good company for Davis.

 
I don't listen to announcers or sound when I watch games. So I can't comment on what they said. 

The first TD is a good play by Davis and not the one I'm talking about. The defender is bad (way out of position, never finds the ball, slow to get there) but that's a good play by Davis. The hitch and go is a horrible play by a DB (#7). I don't know what he's doing. He's just casually coming back to Davis then Davis takes just turns and runs past him. WTF man? On the last play/TD, the corner(#14) waits for Davis to get to him then the HE pushes off Davis and jumps towards the line. Even the LB (the one the corner runs into) recognized Davis/the throw before that corner does. I'm guessing he is thinks it's a run but as a corner against by far the best WR in your conference and you're bailing from coverage to play the run and there was no play action.

I'm not saying that Davis isn't good or that other receivers don't get production from defensive breakdowns but you definitely have to account for the difference between a Clemson schedule and a WMU schedule. Davis's tape is going to show traits that may or may not be accurate. 

 
Borden said:
I don't listen to announcers or sound when I watch games. So I can't comment on what they said. 

The first TD is a good play by Davis and not the one I'm talking about. The defender is bad (way out of position, never finds the ball, slow to get there) but that's a good play by Davis. The hitch and go is a horrible play by a DB (#7). I don't know what he's doing. He's just casually coming back to Davis then Davis takes just turns and runs past him. WTF man? On the last play/TD, the corner(#14) waits for Davis to get to him then the HE pushes off Davis and jumps towards the line. Even the LB (the one the corner runs into) recognized Davis/the throw before that corner does. I'm guessing he is thinks it's a run but as a corner against by far the best WR in your conference and you're bailing from coverage to play the run and there was no play action.

I'm not saying that Davis isn't good or that other receivers don't get production from defensive breakdowns but you definitely have to account for the difference between a Clemson schedule and a WMU schedule. Davis's tape is going to show traits that may or may not be accurate. 
Click to expand...
On that last TD it does look like Davis is making a fake to run a post or corner route. It is 3rd down and 5 or 6 yards to go.

They look like they are in a 4-3 and the safeties have the outside gaps, the LB who reads the QB is playing middle zone and there for run defense.

I cannot really explain to you why 14 decides to crash down after the contact with Davis, who fakes that he is running inside at the same time as the slot receiver, who is also running a route inside and picks up the safety after he passes the LBers zone.

So I looked to see if the QB pump faked a throw to inside that 14 may be reacting to? I didn;t see any pump fake. The QB does keep his head somewhat centered until just before he throws it, so perhaps not giving to out route away too early, but I don't see any action to the inside that 14 is reacting to, unless it is the slot WR who does not seem to be his assignment. 

I think Davis gets a decent push before he cuts outside, but its not so flagarant as to call a penalty. The corner seems intent on defending his spot on the field and looking at the QB rather than trying to cover Davis. Perhaps he was trying to watch the QB and Davis's push disrupted his view, so he kind of pushes closer to the QB as Davis is giving him a bump inside.

I say Davis executed this flawlessly, because even if the corner did try to follow him after he broke outside, he had already established position to box him inside before his break, even a good corner would get beat to the outside after that positioning unless they could get away with a hold or something to prevent him breaking to the outside. They would already be in a trail position and no other help outside.

14 likely should have lined up wider than he did as well. It is the end of the game. Maybe his focus was off. I tend to agree he kind of looks like he is playing against the run, but there is no run threat to cause him to react like that.

 
Biabreakable said:
I say Davis executed this flawlessly, because even if the corner did try to follow him after he broke outside, he had already established position to box him inside before his break, even a good corner would get beat to the outside after that positioning unless they could get away with a hold or something to prevent him breaking to the outside. They would already be in a trail position and no other help outside.
Click to expand...
This is kind of the point I'm making. If that DB uses proper technique the route that Davis runs doesn't look nearly as nice. 

If the DB plays just to the outside shade so that when Davis runs up to his stem break (in this case it's actually to contact) the DB has outside leverage. The DB doesn't know the route (obviously) so this would protect against a Out or a Fade. 

On an inside breaking route the DB doesn't have to make any cuts or turns, he should be able to just drive into pursue. Now the DB is right on Davis's hip as he's running basically a Drag but this the most vulnerable route for the DB. However, in order for this to be completed the QB has to perfectly lead the WR and has to throw a low pass through a mess of defenders in the middle of the field. 

In this example though, if the DB properly plays the WR then when Davis goes to cut back to the outside he has to run through the trailing DB.

 
I think the fantasy community loves Corey Davis because he is an extremely talented, dominant WR with good size and speed.

...but maybe I'm missing something.  :shrug:

 
Ramblin Wreck said:
So is Williams?
Click to expand...
True.

Despite all the blah, blah, blah here, it's a coin toss between the two.

As the owner of pick #5 in my main league, I'm kind of happy with the idea thst one of them may fall to me, and the choice between them will already be made by someone else.

If I did have my choice, it would likely be whichever one goes to the team with the better QB/offense/situation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
For anyone interested I tried to learn a bit about how the college recruit ratings are determined, and by whom.

How are recruiting rankings determined? ESPN, Rivals, Scout and 247 break out the process

Some interesting bits from this article.

Rivals.com puts the most emphasis on camps and combines out of the four major recruiting services. It's not hard to see why given the company has made a major investment in developing its Rivals camp series and Rivals Five-Star Challenge. Detractors of the camp and combine circuit derisively refer to them as underwear camps, but Rivals' national recruiting director Mike Farrell believes those camps, along with the all-star games, are "the best you can get" for senior evaluations.
Click to expand...
I am curious if the estimates that you see on draftscout are derived from these camps? Or perhaps the measurements are taken at some point during the players college career?

We don't have anybody on our staff, including myself, that is allowed to make player evaluation assessments that hasn't been in the coaching profession at, at least the college or professional level," Luginbill says. "We don't have any writers, bloggers or journalists making assessments on football players."

Luginbill, who played college football at three different schools including Georgia Tech, coached professionally at the XFL, NFL Europe and Arena Football League level. He believes you need to be professionally trained to break down film and know what to look for in order to be an effective talent evaluator.
Click to expand...
At Scout.com Huffman has the final call on the rankings, but takes into account all of the regionally based analysts the network employs. The network tries to meet in-person a few times each year, plus conference calls, to debate player rankings. Typically a regionally based analyst will make his pitch for a player in his region and then the group will try to come to a consensus. The different Scout.com recruiting analysts all have varying levels of football experience.

It is a similar situation at Rivals where Farrell is king.

"We go based on feel and experience," the Rivals expert says. "I've been doing this for forever. I can compare players now to players a few years ago and 10 years ago and 15 years ago and get a feel on their ability based on what I've seen in the past."

Each network has its own system for when and how it updates its rankings. 247Sports updates the most frequently of the four, frequently tweaking its player rankings when new film or information becomes available. The other three have a more traditional approach of updating the rankings on a set schedule, with the last rankings come out after the all-star games.
Click to expand...
I find it amusing that ESPNs Luginbill goes out of his way to say they do not have writers, bloggers or journalists making player grades. When clearly this is the primary business that ESPN is in.

This article claims that the teams who have more blue chip players win more championships.

Every BCS champion since recruiting rankings could be accurately tracked (2005, or four classes after Scout joined Rivals in rating players) has met a benchmark: it's recruited more blue-chips (four- and five-star players) than lesser-rated players over its four previous signing classes.

And since those blue-chips are rare -- roughly 300 of them per year, with more than 10,000 scholarships to fill nationwide at the FBS level -- the teams that get blue-chips crush those who sign a lower-rated level of recruits.
Click to expand...
The whole recruiting process is pretty complicated and I have a lot more to learn about it.

I was reading that most college teams do not have funding for their own scouting departments, so they are likely relying on information produced from these services to help fill those gaps. 

Rivals, Scout, ESPN, 247: Star rating systems explained

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
Is the 2024 RB Class really that bad?
2 3
Replies
113
Views
4K
BigTex
BigTex
T
Travdogg's positional rankings from week 14 onward (last update)
Replies
24
Views
1K
N Zone
N Zone
T
Travdogg's pre-combine mock draft
2
Replies
52
Views
2K
(HULK)
(HULK)

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top