What is the most accurate BUST indicator?

What factor is the best indicator that a productive college player will be a bust as a pro?

I really just don't believe in to many qb's that run spread offenses or option offenses. Just doesn't work in the NFL most of the time.

I went with behavior but I think of it a different way. It's about maturity and work ethic. I don't care what type of system you were in, how healthy you were or your size / talent level, you MUST have a high work ethic and you MUST possess a massive desire to be the best in the league at your position. I think that's the difference.

As an example, Tony Banks had everything you'd want in a franchise QB except that work ethic and drive for success. Alex Barron is the same way. The guy didn't have to work hard in college, it was noted as his negative coming out of the draft and it's shown true through his career. The only thing keeping him from being a hall of famer is his desire to be great and the maturity to do what it takes to get there.

Well, it's definitely NOT behavior. That has absolutely nothing to do with predicting an NFL career.



Sincerely,
Lawrence Phillips

I went with system differences but here are some of the players to provide counter-arguements:

Level of competition: Jason Taylor played for Akron, Ben Roethlisberger for Miami (OH)
Measurables/physique: Drew Brees measures 6 feet tall
Measurables/performance: Jerry Rice ran a 4.7
Injury history: Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson only made 5 starts junior year. Steven Jackson suffered a knee injury his last year at OSU
Behavior: Randy Moss left FSU for weed during probation
College Stats: Eric Wright, CB for the Browns had 29 tackles and 1 int before declaring
Flash in the Pan: Carson Palmer, USC; senior year stats overshadow otherwise above-average career
System player: Wes Welker, Texas Tech; Kevin Kolb, Houston

These are just some of the players that prove how hard it is to scout whether a player can make it in the NFL but for each counter-example there are probably 5-10 players who didn't pan out.

I'd agree with several of those:

1. System - If a player was able to succeed by doing things they won't be able to get away with in the pros, you have to wonder how directly their success will translate. In Jason Smith's case, the change in stance is probably not as huge a difference as say a quarterback who is accustomed to running more than he throws.

2. Behavior - Whatever happened to Maurice Clarett? Does anyone recall whether the Israeli mob ever caught up with him?

3. College Stats/Flash in the Pan - This one varies widely depending on circumstances. The guy might have just changed positions, or might even still be learning the game if he's a converted track guy or basketball player. He might have been behind other stars on the depth chart. He might have played through injury. It might have been a system that didn't take advantage of his talents (e.g. star receiver on a team committed to power running).


I tend to put less stock in measurables unless they're way off from what you would expect. You hear a lot of stories about guys who were said to be too short, too slow--too something--to succeed and still managed to become all-stars. Conversely, you also hear lots of stories about workout wonders who were drafted too high and busted out.

It would be hard to just pick one. When the Rams took Tye Hill I thought he was too small and could not play with the bigger more physical receivers. You would have to beware of players with a lot of off the field issues i.e. Lawrence Phillips.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenfleece

I'd agree with several of those:

1. System - If a player was able to succeed by doing things they won't be able to get away with in the pros, you have to wonder how directly their success will translate. In Jason Smith's case, the change in stance is probably not as huge a difference as say a quarterback who is accustomed to running more than he throws.

2. Behavior - Whatever happened to Maurice Clarett? Does anyone recall whether the Israeli mob ever caught up with him?

3. College Stats/Flash in the Pan - This one varies widely depending on circumstances. The guy might have just changed positions, or might even still be learning the game if he's a converted track guy or basketball player. He might have been behind other stars on the depth chart. He might have played through injury. It might have been a system that didn't take advantage of his talents (e.g. star receiver on a team committed to power running).


I tend to put less stock in measurables unless they're way off from what you would expect. You hear a lot of stories about guys who were said to be too short, too slow--too something--to succeed and still managed to become all-stars. Conversely, you also hear lots of stories about workout wonders who were drafted too high and busted out.

---

OH YEAH!! I remember Maurice Clarett, I remember a couple years ago he was busted for robbing an old lady and I believe he is still in jail.. Someone correct me if i'm wrong? Was he ever drafted?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goldenfleece

I'd agree with several of those:

1. System - If a player was able to succeed by doing things they won't be able to get away with in the pros, you have to wonder how directly their success will translate. In Jason Smith's case, the change in stance is probably not as huge a difference as say a quarterback who is accustomed to running more than he throws.

2. Behavior - Whatever happened to Maurice Clarett? Does anyone recall whether the Israeli mob ever caught up with him?

3. College Stats/Flash in the Pan - This one varies widely depending on circumstances. The guy might have just changed positions, or might even still be learning the game if he's a converted track guy or basketball player. He might have been behind other stars on the depth chart. He might have played through injury. It might have been a system that didn't take advantage of his talents (e.g. star receiver on a team committed to power running).


I tend to put less stock in measurables unless they're way off from what you would expect. You hear a lot of stories about guys who were said to be too short, too slow--too something--to succeed and still managed to become all-stars. Conversely, you also hear lots of stories about workout wonders who were drafted too high and busted out.

---

OH YEAH!! I remember Maurice Clarett, I remember a couple years ago he was busted for robbing an old lady and I believe he is still in jail.. Someone correct me if i'm wrong? Was he ever drafted?

It's a crapshoot. Nothing more than that. That's why I don't believe that you can't take a certain position high because so many say you can't. Like you can't take a Safety high in the draft. BS. I guarantee you that the S from Tennessee is going to be a difference maker.

I think people look waaaayyyyyy too much at 40 times, how high a guy jumps, how many squats he does, how he does in the 3 cone, 5 cone, and ice cream cone drills and not how the dude plays on the field.

I'd say college stats. So many "experts" fall in love with the physique and athleticism of a player and then forge that they weren't near as productive what there atheleticism go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by txramsfan

It's a crapshoot. Nothing more than that. That's why I don't believe that you can't take a certain position high because so many say you can't. Like you can't take a Safety high in the draft. BS. I guarantee you that the S from Tennessee is going to be a difference maker.

I think people look waaaayyyyyy too much at 40 times, how high a guy jumps, how many squats he does, how he does in the 3 cone, 5 cone, and ice cream cone drills and not how the dude plays on the field.

---

You say it's a crapshoot and then guarantee a kid is a difference maker? Maybe we should take a long-snapper in the first round? Or maybe a FB. Afterall, if we can guarantee they'll be successful, it would be rediculous to not pick them right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by txramsfan

It's a crapshoot. Nothing more than that. That's why I don't believe that you can't take a certain position high because so many say you can't.

---

I would have to disagree its more than that, some teams are better than others because of there scouting and personnel department. I think after you get into the middle rounds the talent level, levels off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RebelYell

You say it's a crapshoot and then guarantee a kid is a difference maker? Maybe we should take a long-snapper in the first round? Or maybe a FB. Afterall, if we can guarantee they'll be successful, it would be rediculous to not pick them right?

---

Don't over react to my post like you are some sort of draft guru. What I am saying is that the scientific method (or lack of it) hasn't worked for the Rams this decade. They are relying too much on measurables and not how someone plays on the field.

I'm not saying draft a friggin long snapper or a FB in the first round, but I am saying why not draft a Safety or a WR high when normally you wouldn't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by txramsfan

What I am saying is that the scientific method (or lack of it) hasn't worked for the Rams this decade. They are relying too much on measurables and not how someone plays on the field.

---

According to the guys at the PD, the Rams draft woes are from too much man-love between Zygmunt and agents. (Okay, everybody catch your breath and recompose from that awful visual that just flashed through your mind)

I recall reading that Zygmunt's influence on draft day was based on how well he got along with the player's agent. If they had a good relationship (ie. Zyg felt he could sign the kid relatively easily), he would push for a particular player.

If completely true, not a good way to build a champion.