(order has no particular meaning)
-40 yard dash
Every season all I can hear from so called Draft experts like Mel Kiper, "this guy ran a 4.4 40" or "this guy ran a 4.8 40". I spend a lot of my free time on NFL forums and see that talent seems to be perceived by how fast you run a 40-yard dash by a lot of people. After going through just 4 drafts seeing the 40 times and looking how well they have done in the NFL, I've come to a conclusion that the 40 times do matter for the general population of the draft (I will post a more detailed report later). This is why a players stock can rise so rapidly after a good 40 yard dash time. However like any "rule of thumb" there are exceptions. It seems to me that the only way of getting picked high in the draft is to run a good 40. For example WR Anquan Boldin from the Arizona Cardinals dropped to the 2nd round of the draft after running a 4.8 40 even though he caught 21 TD's in just 23 games as a Florida State Seminole. Just by watching him on tape you could tell he had remarkable athleticism however a bad 40 time hurt his draft stock tremendously. Well I think we all know how good of a player Anquan Boldin is. There are many players just like him who slip in the draft because of a bad 40 yard dash time. There are also many players out there that don't pan out that do run great 40 times. For example Troy Williamson from the Minnesota Vikings (who's now a Jaguar) was selected 7th in the 2005 draft just because he ran a 4.3 40 yard dash. Also he is just one example of a player that runs a great 40 yard dash time that doesn't pan out. So in my opinion the 40 yard dash time should be used just to see if the player can run. So really there's no difference to me between a 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6. Then you watch tape on the player to see if that speed translates onto the field. And of course there's more to football than just speed however it is a very important part that is why scouts value speed more than anything else.
-Picking "big name" players
To me this is one of the hardest things to evaluate when it comes to picking in the top 5. There is so much invested into one player when a team is picking that high. Just ask the 49ers about Alex Smith and Vernon Davis, who are one of highest paid players at their respective positions. This is why it's important to not pick college football players based on reputation. Meaning throw all that media hype, Heisman winner, celebrity gossip out the window. You need to evaluate just the football player and see whether or not you wanna make him one of highest paid players at their position in the NFL (I will make a rant about this later). For example Reggie Bush was getting a lot of hype during the 2006 NFL Draft, and why not Reggie Bush was one of the most electric players in college football. However when evaluating talent you need to make sure that a players skill set will translate well into the NFL. During the 2006 NFL Draft I felt like Reggie Bush was not a top 10 talent however I believe the New Orleans Saints fell into the trap of media hype. They couldn't believe that Reggie Bush was there even though they already had Deuce McAllister, a pro bowl running back, and a solid backup Aaron Stecker. I remember a lot of people laughing at the Houston Texans for not drafting Reggie Bush or Vince Young and going with Mario Williams instead with their number one pick. Now in retrospect it seems as though the Texans made the right decision on at least not drafting Reggie Bush, the jury is still out on Vince Young at this point. I also remember listening to ESPN radio one day before the 2006 draft and seriously one of the coaches, I think it was from Seattle, called Matt Leinart a sure fire franchise quarterback. I couldn't help but laugh. Thank goodness the Seattle Seahawks didn't have a top 5 pick. Again these are just examples of "big name" players and of course "big name" players can turn out to be terrific NFL players. Just to reiterate, if your going to draft a player do so on their combine and college film alone (I know no NFL GM is reading this sadly).
-Drafting for need vs Drafting best player available
This is a topic that can get a little hazy at times. I feel as though a team should always draft the best player available unless one they have two or more players rated about the same or two they have an All-Pro Caliber player at that position already. Only then should they draft for need. And if you don't like the talent sitting there where your drafting, trade your pick. You see drafting in the NFL is much like buying stocks in the stock market, it's a gamble. So you should always give yourself the best chance at "hitting", if you will, on a draft pick. In the NFL a team's depth could change in just a couple of injuries, so thinking you don't need a position is very dangerous I believe.
Well these are just a few things I can think of at the moment that come up during an NFL Draft. Now I know I'm not a NFL scout, or General Manager or something like that. But these simple rules that I've made I feel aren't always followed by NFL teams and the consequences come to bite them in the head.
