NFL Draft

Now that the NFL draft is well behind us, maybe it's time I commented. I don't get much into the draft. Why? Teams spend millions of dollars and hundreds of hours preparing for it, and in the end what does all preparation get them? Not much. A sixth round draft pick, someone no one really cares about, is just as likely to make a huge impact as the #1 overall pick. Just ask New England, where throw away pick Tom Brady replaced #1 overall pick Drew Bledsoe, and has won three Super Bowls and counting. Who is the last first round draft pick quarterback to win a Super Bowl? John Elway, drafted back in 1983. The last six Super Bowls have been won by quarterbacks chosen in the 6th round or later. History is replete with examples of misfires in the draft. Joe Montana and Dan Marino where considered bad choices, Ryan Leaf was a sure thing. Brett Favre was passed over by every team in the league and then mocked by the Falcons' head coach for even having the thought of being able to play in the league.

Why is it so hard to draft a player? Part of the problem is that NFL personnel people look at the wrong things. Performance at the combine, with tests like 40 yard dash and bench pressing 235 pounds, is huge. But is that what makes a good football player? Not really. Here is Sports Illustrated's report on Tom Brady after the 2000 draft, before anyone had heard of him:

Two-year starter. Very tall with a thin build. Needs to upgrade his overall strength. Pocket passer with average quickness. Can slide from pressure, but is not very elusive. Doesn't look to run. Holds the ball a bit low, but has a fairly quick release. Lacks a strong arm. Doesn't rifle the long outs, but he's an accurate passer with a good feel for touch. Sails some throws and hangs some deep balls. Leader. Eyeballs his primary target at times, but shows the ability to come off and find alternates. Generally makes good decisions. Had a good Orange Bowl.

(emphasis mine) So, he didn't have great arm strength or quickness, but he was a good leader who made good decisions. Contrast this with the report on Giovanni Carmazzi, the second quarterback taken that year (Chad Pennington was the first, and he turned out pretty well so I won't use him as an example):

Transfer from Pacific. Division 1-AA standout in a short passing game offense. Sturdy. Intelligent. Good athlete. Has a strong arm. Average in his setup quickness. Not nifty to avoid but is a strong runner who can get yardage once he gets outside the pocket. Has an over-the-top delivery with good wrist action. Can throw tight spirals -- loses some effectiveness when throwing from non-set positions. Shows touch, but can be hesitant and late with his passes. Is inconsistent with his overall accuracy. Rough around the edges but has good tools.

When evaluating quarterbacks, what criteria do we hear about over and over? Height, speed, arm strength. Poise, leadership, and the like are not highly valued. Brady had one of these, height. Carmazzi had two, speed and strength, the two most sought. Therefore, Carmazzi went in the third round, second quarterback picked overall, whereas Brady goes in the sixth round, the seventh quarterback overall. (Of the six who went before Brady, only Pennington and Marc Bulger, another sixth rounder, have amounted to much.)

Today, Brady is one of the best deep ball passers in the game, whereas Carmazzi is in the Arena League. After arriving in New England, Brady began working on his strength with the trainers and put on some muscle. The defining characteristics of his first season were his poise and leadership. Look at his performance in that last drive in the Super Bowl against the heavily favored Rams, where with the whole season on the line, Brady, effectively a rookie, flawlessly marched his team down to field goal range against a supposedly vastly superior team with the clock ticking and the world watching. You see, a player can develop his strength. What he cannot really develop is intelligence, leadership, and poise. So the draftniks go for traits that can be developed, and devalue traits that are much more important and intangible.

The other huge problem is that there is quite a difference in the caliber of college play and professional play. I once wrote,

[T]he gap between the caliber of college football and professional football is wide and growing. A player who shows great ability against college caliber opposition may be quite overwhelmed against the pros. Similarly, a player may underwhelm in the restrictive and simplistic college game but excel at the professional level. It's obvious, but many still miss it. Being good in college does not mean you will be good in the pros, does it Steve Spurrier?

Brian Baldinger, calling the draft a "crapshoot," writes,

So teams have all this data, more than ever before, yet they're not drafting better. It's a tough job. Even if teams can avoid being blinded by measurables, they must project how well college talent translates to pro talent and how much impact a player's character and desire will have on the skills God gave him. We try to make it a science, but it's really an art, which is why one team can take Peyton Manning, the next can take Ryan Leaf and both can feel great about it -- until they get on the field.

There is just no way to know how any college player will react to the vastly superior caliber of play in the NFL. Some players will step up to the challenge, others will wilt. Part of that also goes to the ability of a team to develop players. Many have attributed the repeated failure of the Bengals' quarterback choices on an inept system of development.

So, my conclusion is, look at the list of 32 young chosen in the first round. For most, that list will be the last you ever hear of them while players chosen much later and who no one paid attention to will be superstars in five years. Now, stop with the hype already.