That paper from Penn that you posted the other day (I'm still slogging through it -very complex stuff) made the point that talent evaluators sometimes go overboard on information. I believe the point is that the more evidence they have on a guy, the more reports etc., then the more likely they are to pick a guy. Something like that. Too much info is actually bad.
I watched Mac Jones Pro Day recently and it was more uneven than, say, the polished one put on by Zack Wilson. Jones was throwing on the run a fair bit with mixed results. I'm guessing that was by request, but it isn't really his game. Not that he was awful at it, but he wasn't tremendous as Wilson was at that particular skill. He also overthrew his "WRs" who looked dead slow to me. Is that reality or confirmation bias? I can't be sure, but I go with what my eyes tell me.
So, then I went back and watched Jones playing in real fooball games and I saw all the stuff that got me interested in him in the first place. The ball seemed to come out faster and was usually right on the money. I decided that I think I'm right and it's clear now that while the opinion on Jones is divided, there are a lot of NFL guys who see something unusual in his processing abilities. The point is, I'm sticking with my instincts on this one despite the man experts who think he is average in a lot of ways.
Mac Jones to the Pats. All the drills in shorts might just scare some people off and somehow allow a really good football player end up in the perfect spot for him to thrive. Right here.
www.barstoolsports.com
www.patspulpit.com
