Read and React: Mocking the rough draft

Apparently, we are a nation of general managers.

Readers perused our preliminary mock of the first round of the NFL draft and they have already begun making their own revisions. It's been a compete effort – with opinions about how we've botched the No. 1 pick (Aaron Rodgers) and stumbled all the way to the final selection in the first round (No. 32 Odell Thurman).

Everyone has a favorite, not to mention a gripe about who's getting the shaft, whether it's Cal's J.J. Arrington, Georgia's David Greene or Arkansas' Matt Jones. Surely, it's only the beginning of what will be a month-long debate.

We also heard from Minnesota fans who have doubts about whether the defensive upgrades are going to solve the Vikings' woes. One fan even suggested a shocking theory as to why Mike Tice's team falls apart every year. But we'll get to that later.

As always, we love to hear from you. So keep voicing your thoughts and feelings. And if you want your email to be considered for publication, remember to include your first and last name, along with your city and state.

To the mail …

NFL DRAFT ("Submitting his rough draft," March 30, 2005)

Why would the San Francisco 49ers settle on a quarterback with limited experience? There's a wide receiver from Michigan (Braylon Edwards) with four years' experience that has no question marks to his athletic ability and is a proven player.
Jarrod Sampson
Portland, Ore.

I know David Pollack and Thomas Davis will be drafted fairly high, but what about David Greene? It seems to me that the all-time winningest quarterback in NCAA history should get some consideration.
Bill Epps
Gretna, Neb.

Greene will likely be a first-day selection, but concerns about arm strength and downfield accuracy will keep him out of the first-round mix.

With all the discussion regarding Cedric Benson's 40-yard dash time, could you describe how the time is measured, please?
Alun Johns
London, England

OK, here is the thing with 40-yard times, just to placate the hundreds of readers who continue to wonder why there has been a disparity over Benson's times – and whether or not it really matters:

First off, times are measured electronically at the combine and by hand (stopwatch) at private workouts. What those times mean is often subjective. Some NFL people say they aren't all that important, while others believe they are. To say they don't affect the draft is simply untrue.

In 2003, Baltimore's Terrell Suggs went from a top three or four pick to being the 10th choice almost entirely because he ran a slow 40. Based on his play since arriving in the NFL, it was obviously a poor barometer.

As for why there are disparities between times, it all depends on a margin of human error. Some people can handle a stopwatch better than others. Politics can play a huge role in the equation. For example, some scouts have faster trigger fingers for players they really like, and slower fingers for prospects they don't like. Some scouts may have a relationship with a school's head coach, so they are generous with their assessments. And some colleges release "fast" pro day times to the media, because they know it is good publicity for their programs.

For journalists, the trick is to dig through the mess and find a consensus, which is typically done by talking to a minimum of three or four scouts. In Benson's case, the consensus some journalists found was that he ran slower than the 4.51 seconds that NFL draft guru Gil Brandt reported. Does that mean he won't be a great NFL player? No. Does it affect the perception of him leading up to the draft? For some teams, absolutely.

For readers, my advice is to take pro-day opinions with a grain of salt, and judge it by Benson's performance in the NFL. No matter what scouts say or journalists report, the long-term results tell the most accurate story.

Braylon Edwards is getting lots of pre-draft press. Some even say he is the top prospect overall in the upcoming draft. What is it about him that makes him any different than David Terrell?
Jim Graber
Kingman, Kan.

Work ethic and attitude sets the two apart in evaluations. The fact that both players played the same position for the same college means nothing in this case.

I was just wondering what you thought about Arkansas' Matt Jones with his 40-yard dash time and his all-around athleticism.
Jason Scruggs
Center Ridge, Ark.

Jones has most definitely intrigued a lot of teams, though it remains to be seen whether someone is willing to spend a first-round pick on a player with so many question marks. While there is a healthy buzz about Jones being the draft's best athlete, the debate is whether he can make the transition from quarterback to tight end or wide receiver. Clearly, it is going to take him some time to develop at a higher level and at a new position. But most teams agree that he has plenty of enticing raw tools.

Why would the 49ers pass up Mike Williams for a QB in the first round? If they plan on playing today, they need to shop in the free-agent market and get a quarterback and then get the best receiver in the draft.
Jeff Scott
Seattle, Wash.

I remember all the publicity about Carnell Williams when USC went to Auburn in 2003. He was a complete non-factor and looked inept. How can this guy be considered better than Cal's J.J. Arrington?
Michael Sharrett
Los Angeles, Calif.

On your projection of Odell Thurman being selected by the New England Patriots in the first round, you said, "He has had some off-the-field issues and was punished a handful of times while at Georgia for violating team and academic standards." Doesn't this describe the "anti-Patriot?" Matt Belliveau
Saugus, Mass.

It does seem to go against the grain, but I don't know everything the Patriots know. Thurman has had a tough life, losing both of his parents and going through some personal issues himself. But the Patriots have spent extra time with him, so they are definitely interested. Perhaps they see something about his character that we don't.

Why do you so called "draft experts" think the Cleveland Browns are going to select a quarterback with the third pick? The Browns already have two young quarterbacks behind Trent Dilfer to groom, and if they did select a quarterback it wouldn't be that high in the draft. If the Browns draft a quarterback it will be Charlie Frye out of Akron, if he's available in the second round.
Chad Henderson
Cleveland, Ohio

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers will take Mike Williams with their first pick to pair up with Michael Clayton. Jon Gruden believes running backs grow on trees in later rounds. And he'll take Adrian McPherson in the second round if he is still available.
Jim Rapp
Safety Harbor, Fla.

Although Khalif Barnes could be a good fit for the Philadelphia Eagles, I think they are better off drafting Matt Jones, the Arkansas WR/QB with their first-round or early second-round pick. He is the steal of the draft.
Jack Kuhlenschmidt
Los Angeles, Calif.

I see you predicted a linebacker for the Green Bay Packers in the first round. Don't you think it would be a better choice to pick up a much-needed quarterback to groom before Brett Favre retires?
Ronald E. West
East Orange, N.J.

The clock has been ticking on this issue for two years. It's almost certain Green Bay will try to address Favre's successor somewhere in this draft.

Your mock draft is incorrect. The Minnesota Vikings traded the No. 7 pick to the New York Jets for linebacker Sam Cowart. A lot of people have missed this in their drafts so I thought I'd let you know.
AJ Brown
Grand Rapids, Mich.

No, Minnesota traded a seventh-round pick for Cowart, not the seventh choice overall.

Where did you get your info on Heath Miller? Everywhere I look it says he is an above-average blocker.
Bob Endres
Duansburgh, N.Y.

That's absolutely contrary to what several personnel people said about Miller at the combine. While I'm sure some might think Miller can become an adequate blocker, I highly doubt anyone is currently describing him as above average.

MINNESOTA VIKINGS ("Offseason notebook: Vikings' gut check time," March 28, 2005)

Your article about the Vikings led me to believe you have a very simple, obtuse understanding of their offseason and football in general. Most notably you said, "That's a scheme that should only enhance blossoming defensive ends Kevin Williams, Lance Johnstone and Kenechi Udeze." Only one of those players could be argued to be a blossoming defensive end. Kevin Williams is a starting defensive tackle – the position where he was voted into the Pro Bowl. Lance Johnstone is widely regarded as a wily veteran around the league, having been born in 1973. And finally, Kenechi Udeze IS a defensive end and he IS young, but it is debatable whether he is blossoming yet.
Andrew Thell
Arlington, Va.

The word "blossoming" doesn't have to refer to age. Johnstone may be a veteran, but he clearly is just hitting his stride in Minnesota's scheme – thus, he is blossoming in that respect. As for Williams, the Vikings want to rotate him a little more this season at defensive end to take advantage of his pass-rushing skills, so it's not a stretch to label him as an end (though I would have been more accurate by saying that he can play both positions). As for Udeze, you are right … it is too early for him to be referred to as "blossoming."

Mike Tice can't seem to figure out why his defense slumps in the middle of the season? How about the fact that by then he's never playing with the 11 guys he started with in September? He should spend more time beating the bushes looking for quality backups.
Tom Lacey
Plainville, Mass.

The Vikings should also look at their offensive line. There were big problems there last year with injuries, and it was a concern even before that.
Devery Fairbanks
Ames, Iowa

You were saying that the Vikings now have a lot of leadership on the defensive side of the ball, and part of that was due to the signing of Darren Sharper. I think you are wrong about Sharper. He used to be a good safety but the last few years he was mediocre at best. The last few years Al Harris has been the leader of the Packers' secondary, not Sharper.
Jesse Elmer
New Glarus, Wis.

I just read your article about the much-needed gut check for the Vikings' defense. While there is no question that the defense has held them back, there are a few of us diehard Vikings fans who feel that the Vikings will never take the next step until they address a very carefully hidden problem. Daunte Culpepper is the most overrated quarterback in the history of the NFL.
Vincent Gresham
South Bend, Ind.

I'm speechless.

ETC., ETC., ETC.

I am glad to see Andy Reid isn't as upset about losing the Super Bowl as he was when he lost the NFC championship game last year. The Eagles are starting to look like the Buffalo Bills of the early 90s.
Theo Hamer
Baltimore, Md.

When the Patriots lost to the Packers in the Super Bowl, it just killed me because of the incredible opportunity lost. To have Andy Reid be fine with losing the Super Bowl makes me glad I'm not an Eagles fan.
Tom Lacey
Plainville, Mass.

It's not accurate to say that Reid is "fine" with losing the Super Bowl. I think he simply has a sense of relief over finally clearing the next-to-last hurdle. In Reid's mind, the Eagles are naturally progressing into a Super Bowl winner. He is very aware that there is one more step left.

This is for New Orleans Saints coach Jim Haslett, who recently accused the Pittsburgh Steelers of using steroids in the 70s. You are an embarrassment to the league. You think that deflecting blame to someone else will make you any less of a cheater?
Christopher Ladd
Pittsburgh, Pa.

So Haslett comes out this week and says the 70s Steelers were responsible for steroid use, and that's why they were so dominant in the old days. You could really tell they were juicing the way those monsters Franco Harris, Lynn Swann and John Stallworth bulged out of their jerseys. This is obviously another guy with sour grapes and an axe to grind, smearing someone's legacy for a little attention.
Tony Maf
Burlington, N.J.