The Anchor’s Desk with Scott Reister: The Absurity of the NFL Draft

The lengths that NFL Personnel men go to evaluate talent is mind-boggling. Entire staffs study year-round to figure out who the next Tony Romo is. And that’s not the half of it. One of this year’s prospects gave me an insider’s view of the combine and draft process.

Central Washington quarterback Mike Reilly, projected to go in the mid-to-late rounds, went through all the drills at the combine, but the hardest part may have been the medical exam.

“You get in a room and you’re practically naked,” he said. “You have multiple doctors hanging on each limb looking at you.”

The funny thing is, Reilly was perfectly healthy. “Imagine the guys that had injuries,” he said. It’s the NFL’s version of the old board game Operation: How many doctors and trainers can all get their hands on a player at once? That’s pretty much what it is.

I can see why a team would want to make sure their investment is healthy. I can see why they test the 40 yard dash, and do interviews, and look at height and weight. What I can’t see is why they don’t put more stock in actual performance. Actual stats from college. Do those matter anymore?

Looking at draft websites, they don’t even mention stats next to each players name, they just mention their time in the shuttle and cone drills, plus their broad jump.

Has a guy stayed healthy and produced every time he’s played? He’ll probably do better than the guy who you’ve never heard of before Mel Kiper Jr. mentioned his quick feet and “upside.”

Everyone always talks about the draft being an inexact science. Memo to G.M.s: make it an exact science by taking the players with the best stats. Compare the stats with the few tangibles that matter and you might fare better.

Don’t draft on hype or upside alone. That’s why the Oakland Raiders are stuck paying JaMarcus Russell $60 million dollars after seeing him play one season at LSU. That’s why someone will pay KSU QB Josh Freeman a ton of money and draft him in the top half of the first round this weekend. Freeman wasn’t one of the best five QBs in the Big 12, let alone the country. But he’s tall and strong and had a few good games this year. If ESPN says he’ll be good, then we must believe it. Huh?

Something to chew on: UT coach Mack Brown once told me on signing day that he takes the top high school players who have produced. Some prep players have a lot of hype, but Brown always signs the players who have won, have big stats, and who look great on film. Those are high school players. Why that logic isn’t applied on the next level up is beyond me.

Sure there will be some hits and misses, but there’d be far fewer misses if you put less stock in combine nonsense and relied more on the main question: Who was better in college?

The NBA is far worse when it comes to hype-drafting. How many great college players get left waiting by the phone each year, watching no-name European teenagers and skinny freshmen take their spot?

This weekend at the NFL Draft, I’ll be hoping my favorite teams prescribe to logic and past results, and ignore that dangerous hyped-up word “potential.” More often that not, a player who is drafted on potential alone is a “potential” bust.

Scott Reister is a featured contributor to Midwest Sports Fans. He is a Sports Anchor for the NBC affiliate in the Tri-Cities and Spokane, WA. To learn more about Scott, visit the Scott Reister bio page on Midwest Sports Fans or check out the Scott Reister bio page on Midwest Sports Fans or check out the Scott Reister bio page on Midwest Sports Fans or check out the Scott Reister bio page on Midwest Sports Fans or check out the Local Sports page on KNDU.com.

To contact Scott: sreister@hotmail.com

Tags: 2009 nfl draft, NFL

---------------

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing with your friends: