<![CDATA[Football Gameplan's 2014 NFL Draft Video - Big Board]]>http://footballgameplan.com/2014-nfl-draft-big-board-rankings/

Good morning Browns fans! Here's my '14 NFL Draft Big Board rankings

Enjoy!

Em

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/28820/football-gameplan-s-2014-nfl-draft-video-big-boardRSS for NodeThu, 01 Oct 2026 02:51:40 GMTThu, 27 Mar 2014 12:16:00 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Football Gameplan's 2014 NFL Draft Video - Big Board on Sun, 30 Mar 2014 23:38:27 GMT]]>

@comeonman said:

I'll have to go back in a year or two and look at it again. This is completely insane, or ingenious. I'm leaning toward insane

@emdiggy said:

http://footballgameplan.com/2014-nfl-draft-big-board-rankings/

Good morning Browns fans! Here's my '14 NFL Draft Big Board rankings

Enjoy!

Em

I enjoy this. I think that you are going to see a lot of people from here and from other team boards saying that you have no idea what your doing, but lets be honest, not every teams board is representative of what we see in the media. I'm sure most teams boards look a lot like yours, where they have alot of people that the media thinks is 3/4 round talent with 1st round grades and several guys who have 1st round grades in the media setting there with mid to late round grades. The reason we normally see selections come out along what we see in the medias big board is because every teams big board is different.

There ARE teams out there that have Bortles as a third round pick, while I am also sure that there are still teams out there that have Bridgewater as the #1 overall play in the draft. But at the same time I am also just as certain that there are teams that have those players reversed. Or teams who don't have a first round grade on ANY QB. Its going to be different team by team and I think emdiggy's big board is representative of this.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/396233https://brownsboard.com/post/396233Sun, 30 Mar 2014 23:38:27 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Football Gameplan's 2014 NFL Draft Video - Big Board on Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:50:01 GMT]]>

@emdiggy said:

Physical Development isn't the same as Skill/Talent development. Also, honing is different than developing. Skills get honed while technique gets developed

Why because its original thoughts that's not the same parroted info that you'll find out there?

It definetly is original. Jackson as the number two player in the draft? That's about as original as it gets. And it's much less parroted info than it is my personal preference, I do watch college football quite a bit (possibly not as much as you). I see players on your board in the 25 range I would have in the top ten. But hey, like I said, I will definitely look back at this in a couple of years]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/395988https://brownsboard.com/post/395988Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:50:01 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Football Gameplan's 2014 NFL Draft Video - Big Board on Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:09:11 GMT]]>

@tour2ma said:

Agree on first point, but think "honing/ developing" and "skill/ talent" differences are really just semantics at best separated by degree.

On my physical development comment what I was going for (poorly) was that physical development can permit technique to come out, e.g., more likely for an OT to fend off a rusher off with added upper body development.

List-wise... I was pleased to see so many of my sleepers so prominent on your list. As mentioned I love Larsen just surprised to see someone else love him even more than I.

Thanks! Big fan of Larsen's game! I do see your point about an early entry prospect still having room for development, albeit a short window but still can grow a little

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/395981https://brownsboard.com/post/395981Fri, 28 Mar 2014 18:09:11 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Football Gameplan's 2014 NFL Draft Video - Big Board on Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:29:44 GMT]]>

@emdiggy said:

Physical Development isn't the same as Skill/Talent development. Also, honing is different than developing. Skills get honed while technique gets developed

Agree on first point, but think "honing/ developing" and "skill/ talent" differences are really just semantics at best separated by degree.

On my physical development comment what I was going for (poorly) was that physical development can permit technique to come out, e.g., more likely for an OT to fend off a rusher off with added upper body development.

List-wise... I was pleased to see so many of my sleepers so prominent on your list. As mentioned I love Larsen just surprised to see someone else love him even more than I.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/395933https://brownsboard.com/post/395933Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:29:44 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Football Gameplan's 2014 NFL Draft Video - Big Board on Fri, 28 Mar 2014 12:47:37 GMT]]>

@tour2ma said:

Opening comment: Development done at college; when go to pros "you are what you are".

While I do think that play habits are engrained deeply, the comment is too general to withstand scrutiny.

First, there is physical development. While any rookie can mature physically, get stronger in his first couple years as a pro, this is especially true of underclassmen in the draft, position players and players from smaller schools that tend to lack the strength and conditioning staffs of the larger schools.

Second, the attention to detail and sheer number of reps at the pro level offer the opportunity to enhance techniques at all positions albeit, IMO, more in the less skilled O and D-line positions than in the highly skilled positions headed by QB.

Top 36 list:

To say that this list is Em's own is an understatement.

My eyes popped seeing Gabe Jackson at #2, then fell out upon spying my 5th round sleeper, Tyler Lawson (C, Utah) at #16.

Then there are the 1st Round omissions... no Xavier Su'a, no Eric Ebron and no Bortles, who is on his 3rd round list.

Physical Development isn't the same as Skill/Talent development. Also, honing is different than developing. Skills get honed while technique gets developed

@comeonman said:

I'll have to go back in a year or two and look at it again. This is completely insane, or ingenious. I'm leaning toward insane

Why because its original thoughts that's not the same parroted info that you'll find out there?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/395915https://brownsboard.com/post/395915Fri, 28 Mar 2014 12:47:37 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Football Gameplan's 2014 NFL Draft Video - Big Board on Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:45:50 GMT]]>I'll have to go back in a year or two and look at it again. This is completely insane, or ingenious. I'm leaning toward insane

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/395906https://brownsboard.com/post/395906Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:45:50 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Football Gameplan's 2014 NFL Draft Video - Big Board on Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:51:45 GMT]]>Opening comment: Development done at college; when go to pros "you are what you are".
While I do think that play habits are engrained deeply, the comment is too general to withstand scrutiny.
First, there is physical development. While any rookie can mature physically, get stronger in his first couple years as a pro, this is especially true of underclassmen in the draft, position players and players from smaller schools that tend to lack the strength and conditioning staffs of the larger schools.
Second, the attention to detail and sheer number of reps at the pro level offer the opportunity to enhance techniques at all positions albeit, IMO, more in the less skilled O and D-line positions than in the highly skilled positions headed by QB.

Top 36 list:
To say that this list is Em's own is an understatement.
My eyes popped seeing Gabe Jackson at #2, then fell out upon spying my 5th round sleeper, Tyler Lawson (C, Utah) at #16.
Then there are the 1st Round omissions... no Xavier Su'a, no Eric Ebron and no Bortles, who is on his 3rd round list.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/395761https://brownsboard.com/post/395761Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:51:45 GMT