Your logic is puzzling. If Eli Manning was as hyped as a once-in-a-generation type prospect, there would be articles. NFL.com, Sporting News, CBS Sportsline, Sports Illustrated - that by definition is hype. If the only people who think Eli Manning is a generation type prospect is the Oklahoma City Tribune, then it's not hype. I have found at least 5 articles discussing Eli Manning and the draft and none of them mention he is a once in a decade type player. The fact you cannot find one would by reason of induction, be non-existent. The fact Michael Vick articles are still out there, 3 years prior to the fact, is evidence that if hype exists, there are articles and can be found. If the major news outlets do not report as such, how much hype exists? Hype, publicity, whatever you want to call it. If you can't locate it, by definition it does not exist. I can show you 10 other articles about Reggie Bush and you still would deny that some, not all, but some believe he is a once in a decade prospect. I can show you articles that discuss Michael Vick as the most exciting prospect in a decade. I cannot show you a single shred of evidence that anybody thought Eli manning possess the same type talent despite articles written about Eli Manning. Is this a coincedence? The fact I can't convince you is irrelevant because nothing would convince you. I don't think a single reasonable person would define hype as something difficult to locate. Can something be both ubiquitous and difficult to find?
This is an actual quote from a scout (not writer). Was Eli manning drafted within the last 11 years? Was Eli manning evaluated in the last 11 years? Is Reggie Bush the perfect prospect? USC rusher can do it all, and insists he'll hold up as a feature back STAN OLSON solson@charlotteobserver.com So how good is Southern Cal running back Reggie Bush, really? "He's the highest rated player I've ever done in 11 years," said Carolina Panthers college scouting director Tony Softli. "He can do it all; return kicks and punts, you can split him out as a receiver, his abilities with the football are obvious. "He's a jack of all trades and master of all of them."
I've found at least five articles discussing Reggie Bush and the draft with none mentioning he is a once in a decade type player. The fact that you have found some contradicting that... really means nothing by comparison because your subject (Bush) is much more recent and easy to locate. Also, we haven't seen every article on those four sites you cited. No, if you have access to all that information and THEN you can't locate it, by definition it does not exist. If you quote me every article on each of those four sites containing the words "Eli Manning," then we might have a more representative sample. You'll find it's pretty hard to convince people of something when they've personally witnessed dozens of facts stating the contrary. Whether they can find those specific facts years afterward has no relevance. If you expect quick and superficial internet searches to override personal observatons, you'll be very disappointed in how your arguments turn out. I don't think a single reasonable person who watched the 2004 draft could come away from it not convinced that Eli Manning was one of the most hyped prospects they've ever seen. I guess we're both baffled, then.
Oh, so because 1 out of 32 teams says it, it stands as representative of what the other 31 teams think?
What does it matter what other teams SAY about a player ? Arent all NFL draft picks sort of a gamble ? The only sure things are the players that are already in the league.
Bottom line: I have my observations of the NFL draft with articles, scouting reports, and quotes as evidence on all 3 players- Eli Manning, Michael Vick, and Reggie Bush You have your observations with no evidence - zero. Dozens of Eli Manning as a once in a lifetime player and conveniently, none are available. Yeah. BS. Perhaps your observations are Walter Mitty-ish figments of your imagination. At least I know mine weren't made up.
You can't count your "evidence" on Eli Manning as such unless you count my similar evidence against Bush. You posted articles that didn't show Manning as a consensus #1. I showed similar articles and mock drafts regarding Bush. Perhaps most of your observations are figments of your imagination, because you haven't proven your point either. You should be attempting to establish a trend. You say your argument is what a majority of scouts believe. Well, out of hundreds of scouts and thousands of draft articles on the previously mentioned players, you've referred to less than five in each category. That's nowhere close to proving a majority or proving your point. Get 100 or so more, and then maybe you'll have something. When the evidence is as limited in the context of the overall picture as yours is, it effectively means nothing, and means your opinions of what the supposed "majority" thinks could be every bit as made up as mine.
You're assuming all evidence is the same. I have presented the major websites and news media which is a good barometer of the national sports scene. If those media outlets do not mention anything, then there is no hype. Name me 1 major newsworthy story or player which you cannot find within the past 3 years at a major news outlet. To say I have proved nothing because I have 5 articles while you have none is laughable. They are the MAJOR sports sites. You do not need 100 or 1000 sample sizes when discussing sports stories. Why? 1. Not every newspaper discusses national events in detail. Most will copy AP stories. After the Rosebowl, every newspaper carried a story about the Longhorns win. How many were actually written by a sports writer for that paper? 2. The NFL.com article was not his opinion but his opinion based on his discussions with NFL scouts. He spoke to numerous people so it's not just one source. Are you claiming your resource at a podunk Beaumont paper has the same connections and credibility as the writer on NFL.com? Based on your assessment, all sportswriters have equal prestige and pull. Sportswriting is often based on inside information and does not exist in an efficient market. 3. You say your negative articles about Bush is the same as Eli Manning's articles. No because the discussion about Bush varies from prospect of the decade to whether he is worthy of the #1 pick. The discussion about Manning is only whether he is worthy of the #1 pick. 4. My opinions are based on these articles which cite sources within. I also have 2 scouting reports, one for each player. This is the Biggest question: I found stories on Bush. You found stories on Bush with varying on opinions Why was I able to find stories and scouting reports about Eli Manning while you could not? If the articles are truly not accessible, I wouldn't be able to find them either. I can't remember why you were banned at one point. I assume it was because you were pulling crap out of your arse like you are now.
So SC's offense was more effective with LenDale and not the presumed best running back to ever come into the draft in there. Sure seems odd to me. And it wasn't just the Texas game. For 2 years against better comp and speedier defenses LenDale consistently got more carries than Reggie. Reggie is a great prospect and great open field player, but far, far, from an instant elite NFL running back.
NFL scouts also think Mario is mix between the greatest ends in the game. We already have a RB and no DE, so we went with DE. Great move if NFL scouts are right.
