Mailbag: How the 2011 draft provides lessons for 2015 – ESPN
The 2015 NFL draft may not have the same impact as the 2011 draft did, but there are some interesting comparisons that can be made between them.
Twelve of the top 16 players in the 2011 draft have been to the Pro Bowl. It was loaded on defense, with J.J. Watt and Robert Quinn at end, Marcell Dareus at tackle, linebackers Von Miller, Aldon Smith and Ryan Kerrigan and cornerback Patrick Peterson. The offense featured A.J. Green, Julio Jones, Tyron Smith, Cam Newton and Mike Pouncey. The only non-Pro Bowlers in the top 16 were defensive tackle Nick Fairley and three quarterbacks — Jake Locker, Christian Ponder and Blaine Gabbert.
This year’s draft offers a batch of pass-rushers (Dante Fowler, Vic Beasley, Shane Ray, Randy Gregory and Bud Dupree), two interior defensive linemen (Leonard Williams and Danny Shelton) and one cornerback (Trae Waynes) who could go in the top 16. Quarterbacks Jameis Winston and Marcus Mariota could go one-two. Three receivers (Amari Cooper, Kevin White and DeVante Parker) could go in the top group. There could be a couple of offensive linemen in the top 16 from a group that includes Brandon Scherff, Andrus Peat and maybe Ereck Flowers. Running back Todd Gurley also could sneak into the top 16.
Let’s assume most of the top 16 selections in this draft are legitimate and will be successful starters for four years. Looking back on the 2011 draft could offer some tips to teams on how to make sure they aren’t in the minority of those who whiff on their high pick.
Don’t reach for a quarterback. Carolina got it right with Cam Newton, but Tennessee (Locker at No. 8), Jacksonville (Gabbert at No. 10) and Minnesota (Ponder at No. 12) made mistakes. The Jaguars and Vikings had to use 2014 first-round picks on quarterbacks to fix their dilemmas. The Titans might take Mariota at No. 2 this year, which wouldn’t be considered a reach even though he’s a spread quarterback. He might be the best of the spread quarterbacks who have come into the league in recent years. The mistake would be investing too high of a pick on Bryce Petty or Brett Hundley. They are spread quarterbacks who need time to develop, which lowers their draft value.
Don’t get trade-crazy. In 2011, two teams traded into the top 16, and both got burned. The Jaguars gave up a second-round pick to move up six spots to take Gabbert. The Atlanta Falcons gave up an extra first-rounder, a second-rounder and a fourth-rounder to jump 21 spots to grab wide receiver Julio Jones at No. 6. As good as Jones has been, the drain of trading away three potential starters and a failure to hit on other draft choices depleted the quality of Atlanta’s roster. The Falcons have gone 10-22 over the past two years even though they have an elite quarterback in Matt Ryan.
The Philadelphia Eagles, San Diego Chargers and Cleveland Browns need to keep the Falcons in mind if they really do trade up to Tennessee’s spot at No. 2 to take Mariota. As the Falcons, New Orleans Saints, New York Giants and Chicago Bears found out last year, it’s great to have a quarterback, but if the roster around that quarterback is thin, a losing season is predictable. Draft choices in the first four rounds are potential starters, so having fewer of those picks lowers the chances of winning.
The increasing number of teams running 3-4 defenses pushes up the value of linebackers. In 2011, only five of the top 16 teams entering the draft were in the 3-4 (including the Browns, who traded out of No. 6 in the Jones deal). This year, eight 3-4 teams are drafting in top 16. It’s a good thing there are at least five pass-rushing linebackers who are top-16 talents.
From the inbox
Q: I get tired of hearing people complain about the sudden-death style of overtime as being “unfair,” that the team that wins the coin-toss has the advantage. What no one ever brings up is the fact that the team that loses the coin toss has the opportunity to play defense. Sudden death was a much more exciting way to play a fifth period, even if it did end on a 45-yard field goal. We might as well start giving all the teams a Super Bowl trophy at the end of the season; that way no one’s feelings will be hurt.
Morgan in Columbus, Ohio
A: Good point. What people tend to forget is overtime was set up to minimize the chances of ties. Adding mandatory possessions slightly increases the chances of finishing in a tie. In overtime, a good team that wins the toss might be able to put together a five- or six-minute drive. Let’s say that team gets a field goal. The other team can eat up another six or seven minutes and do the same. The next thing you know, you have three minutes left and the game is still tied. I can accept ideas that minimize the arbitrary nature of coin tosses, but I can’t accept ideas that increase the chances of ties.
Q: Why doesn’t the NFL put GPS chips at both ends of footballs? That would help with ensuring correct ball placement, especially in goal-line situations. It would even help more than putting cameras in the end zone.
Rick in Newcastle, Washington
A: I bet that five years from now we will all be amazed how technology has changed the way the game is officiated. Dean Blandino, the league’s vice president of officiating, is very proactive in trying to incorporate technology into officiating. Officials can now communicate via wireless devices. Eventually, replay reviews will be totally decided from Blandino’s office in New York. I can see GPS devices being used in the future. I was watching a baseball game the other day and seeing a bunch of pitches landing outside the strike zone on a tracking device, but many of those pitches were called strikes. I wonder if baseball would eventually go to a tracking device.
Q: I can’t imagine the NFL allowing the Chargers, Rams and Raiders to move to Los Angeles. Hypothetically, if all three teams apply to move to L.A. during the January 2016 window at the same time, how would the league determine which ones can move? If they say yes to the Rams, does that automatically rule out the Raiders and Chargers since they are doing their stadium together? All three teams seem to be working hard to get to L.A.
Jason in Fayetteville, Arkansas
A: You are right that there is no way the NFL would allow three teams to move to Los Angeles. The fact that the Carson stadium option could be built for just one team if necessary resolves the issue. Stan Kroenke seems to be set on moving the Rams to Los Angeles because he’s funding the stadium in Inglewood. If the league and the Chargers can work out a Carson deal, that would be it, and the Raiders will be on the outside looking in.
Q: Prior to 1993, there were 12 rounds in the NFL draft spread across 30 teams. Today, the league has a seven-round draft for 32 teams, with 53-man rosters and eight-player practice squads. The league is considering expanding the roster to 55 and the practice squad to 10. With the recent success of late-round draft picks and undrafted players, plus the potential roster size increase, would it make sense to expand the draft to perhaps nine rounds?
Patrick in Seattle
A: I don’t see the NFLPA doing that. Sure, it makes sense for teams. They could control 64 more players on four-year contracts at a very low cost. The union wouldn’t want to restrict 64 potential free agents from finding teams that might give them a better chance of making the roster. There also would be complications in expanding the rookie pool. Any move such as that would put the NFL in position to change the collective bargaining agreement. To get two extra rounds, the NFL would have to trade away something. What the NFL needs to do is get a developmental league started to help the young players on rosters and on the street.
Q: Word on the street is that the Giants are very high on Leonard Williams. I’ve heard that if he slips to the fourth pick — with Winston and Mariota going 1-2 and Jacksonville selecting Fowler at No. 3 — the Giants might trade up with Oakland to “steal” Williams away from Washington, which has the fifth pick. This will be the first time since the Eli Manning trade that the Giants have selected in the top 10. We all know what they did with their pick that year to get the player they really wanted. Seeing as Oakland is most likely looking for WR help, they could still presumably get their guy (Cooper or White) at No. 9 and add a first-rounder in 2016 at the very least.
Aiden in Albany, New York
A: Williams would be a great addition to the Giants’ defensive line, but the cost would be too much. The Giants need the picks. It could cost them at least two quality draft choices to move from No. 9 to No. 3 or 4. I can’t see Jacksonville and Oakland both passing on Williams. They are 4-3 teams, and he would be valuable as a 3-technique tackle for Gus Bradley or Jack Del Rio. To sustain success as a franchise, general managers can’t trade away two or three high draft choices, because those choices should be starters.
Q: Looking at the schedule, Tampa Bay plays zero games against opponents with “extra rest” (teams coming of a bye week or Thursday night game). The Seahawks play four games against opponents with extra rest. Is this done on purpose, a coincidence or a result of TV appearances? Does the extra rest really matter?
Jason in Seattle
A: It does matter, but the league’s computer systems haven’t found a way to balance that issue. Teams coming out of bye weeks or Thursday night games have extra time to get healthy, which is becoming more important because the number of missed starts caused by injuries continues to grow each season. Since 2002, the Buffalo Bills were tied with the Falcons with a league-high 19 times facing teams coming off a bye week. Despite that revelation coming out before the schedule was finalized, the Bills ended up facing three teams coming off bye weeks. Some University at Buffalo engineers ran numbers that determined there was a 3.77 decrease in winning percentage from 2009 to 2013 for teams facing a rested team. The NFL is aware of this, and I’m sure will see if there is a way to minimize the imbalance, but no schedule is going to be perfect.
Short takes
• Billy in Eastchester, New York, wonders if the decisions to by Winston and Mariota not to attend the draft are making the NFL second-guess its move to Chicago this year. Not at all. The NFL had no choice. Radio City Music Hall opted to open scheduling for other events during the time the NFL wanted to hold the draft. The league wasn’t going back to Madison Square Garden. The draft had to move unless the NFL wanted to hold it later every year.
• Paul in Richmond, Virginia, followed up last week’s mailbag lead about the NFL’s problems ahead in trying to incorporate spread quarterbacks. He notes that 18 starting quarterbacks will be 30 years old this year. Of the current group of first- and second-tier quarterbacks, only five are under 30. He worries that this might be the end of a golden age of quarterbacks.
• Craig in Las Vegas concedes that schedules are very difficult to build, but he wonders why the NFL can’t schedule Thursday night games with teams coming off bye weeks so they aren’t getting short weeks. If it were that easy, the league would do it. Networks have holds on some matchups. Stadium availability could be a problem, too. It’s not that simple.
• Glenn in Cumberland, Rhode Island, asks why I put the blame on coaches for the failure rate of spread quarterbacks. The blame now is mostly on the NFL coaches for rushing spread quarterbacks into starting and failing. However, it could become a problem for college coaches who use a pure spread that doesn’t let the quarterback process plays. If spread quarterbacks consistently drop in the draft, it could influence more recruits to consider offenses that better prepare them for the NFL.
This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service – if this is your content and you’re reading it on someone else’s site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.
