It's pro day time in the NFL which, based on the Scouting Combine aftermath, means we are about to hear more comments that need to be scrutinized and more draft experts doing exactly what they say teams don't or shouldn’t do.
This phase of the draft process really started with the physical testing numbers that were generated at the Combine in Indianapolis. Those results weren’t supposed to heavily determine an NFL prospect’s fate. The Combine, in theory, was really more about the meetings and the physicals.
Evidently that’s wrong.
That's the only conclusion to be drawn after listening to the latest round of comments and seeing the draft board movement following the events that took place in Indy. Just look at the offensive tackles as an example. Many draft gurus moved Auburn's Greg Robinson ahead of Texas A&M's Jake Matthews because of Robinson’s freakish size, strength and speed. Conversely, USC receiver Marqise Lee ran a slower than expected 40-yard-dash time and was leapfrogged by A&M’s Mike Evans, who ran faster than anticipated.
This movement up and down mock draft boards will only continue through the pro days. The pro days take place on college campuses across the country and give prospects another opportunity to improve on their numbers from the Combine.
But what do the results really mean? If someone like Evans runs “faster than expected,” it means only that the prognosticators saw him as a slower player based on the way he plays on the field. Which begs the question, is it really a good thing to run "faster than expected?"
On the surface the answer, of course, is yes. The faster the time the better. But when you dig a little deeper it becomes a little more concerning. Maybe the player does not play to his timed speed. It tells you that there was (is?) some legitimate angst about how fast he is.
What matters in football is not how fast you are when running 40 yards in a straight line in a T-shirt and shorts out of a sprinter's stance. What actually matters is how fast you are when you are on the field with shoulder pads and a helmet on inside the white lines. You know, the way the game is actually played when it is on TV and there are people in the stands.
The inverse of course is true as well. Electric college playmakers like Lee and Oregon's De'Anthony Thomas ran disappointing times and it hurt their draft stock in a lot of people's minds. They were "slower than anticipated."
What does that mean? It means they are lightning fast on the field with pads on when defenders are chasing them. Isn't that much more important? Shouldn't that be the only thing that matters?
It is to me. I don't need the times to justify what I see. The film and my eyes don't lie.
On some level the draft experts — and teams for that matter if they follow suit — don't trust their eyes. They don't believe what they've seen on the film. There's clearly some level of insecurity about their evaluations.
In fairness to the NFL scouts and analysts, the desire to make data driven decisions is understandable and should be respected. That's how most good businesses work, or at least should. I run a high school athletic recruiting business and I try to make as many decisions as possible based on what the data is telling me.
In this case, however, the data is flawed.
Nobody in the NFL, especially the skill positions where speed is at a premium, gets into a sprinter's stance and comes out of a start on a football field. Doesn't exist.
That start that prospects attempt to perfect usually makes a huge difference and can often make as much as a tenth of a second difference. That tenth of a second can totally change the perception of how fast a guy's time was, yet it is based on something totally unnatural to the position.
I suppose the argument could be made that at least if a guy runs a fast time then you know he has it in him and I can buy that on some level, but what good does that do if you can't translate that onto the field of play?
By far the most important "data" that needs to drive the decisions of these teams is the data they derive from actually watching these guys play football. The problem is that it is inherently subjective when all of the data from the physical testing is objective.
And that's why teams and experts alike will continue to move prospects up and down based on the pro days that take place over the next two months.
Even if they shouldn't.