2007 Mastermind's Madness Rookie Draft Reference Guide: Special Sneak Peek
by Draft Specialist Perry Burr & John Holler
UPDATED - 4/20/2007
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Welcome to a special SNEAK PEEK into Mastermind's Madness: 2007 NFL Rookie Draft Reference Guide. Many people have asked us to see a few samples of our site's primary spring premium product, so we have decided to oblige the masses with a quick look into a few key sections of this 135+ page guide. Below you will find PARTIAL sections of the April Rookie Reference Guide, beginning with a look at the QB prospects. We remind everyone the players listed below are only a PARTIAL list of players included in the guide. Rookie Draft Specialist Perry Burr covers more than 435 player profiles within this guide. If you like what you see and want to see more, don't hesitate to review what Mastermind's Madness is all about in our Premium Subscription Center or ORDER NOW for only $19.95. Your competition may already have gotten the jump on you if you don't!  You can also get our Madness package at a special discount included in our famous 2007 Super Bowl  premium package.

NFL Draft Overview (by Perry Burr):

Rookie success in the NFL is the result of talent and opportunity. Rookie prospects are going to have to be selected by the "right" teams in order to contribute significantly to their NFL teams (and their fantasy football teams) during the 2007 season. But with teams addressing their needs through free agency, opportunities for rookies will be few and far between (barring injuries). Even more troubling was the fact that the 2007 NFL draft was shaping up to be a poor one from a talent perspective… that is until a group of juniors entered the draft. Of the 40+ early entries, 36 were invited to the NFL Combine. LSU junior QB JaMarcus Russell bolstered a quarterback class that sported Notre Dame QB Brady Quinn and a bunch of other guys. If Oklahoma junior RB Adrian Peterson and California junior RB Marshawn Lynch had not entered the draft, the 2007 running back class would have been shut out of the first round. Meanwhile, LSU WR Dwayne Bowe is the only senior wide receiver that is considered a first rounder. Juniors will figure so prominently in this year's draft that six of the top ten picks could be juniors ( Russell, Peterson, WR Calvin Johnson, WR Ted Ginn Jr. [provided he runs] , DE Jamaal Anderson, DT Alan Branch ). Additional skill position juniors such as Lynch , USC WR Dwayne Jarrett , Tennessee WR Robert Meachem , Ohio State WR Anthony Gonzalez , and Miami (Florida) TE Greg Olsen could all be selected before the end of the first round. Junior draft entries also made an impact on the defensive side of the ball. Clemson DE Jamaal Anderson and Michigan DT Alan Branch are top 15 quality defensive linemen. Florida junior DE Jarvis Moss also has first round talent. Meanwhile, junior cornerbacks Darrelle Revis (Pittsburgh) and Chris Houston (Arkansas) help make the position one of the deepest in this year's draft.

Quarterback Pre-Draft Overview: Found exclusively within the NFL Rookie Draft Reference Guide

QUARTERBACK PROFILES (a sampling)

1) JAMARCUS RUSSELL: QB (6-5½, 258, 4.83) | LSU. Positives: Arm strength, size, decision making, patience. Negatives: Anticipation, weight, conditioning. Career Highlights: JaMarcus Russell set an LSU record completing 232-of-342 passes (67.8%) for 3,129 yards. Tied single season touchdown pass record (28) set by QB Matt Mauck in 2003. Threw only eight interceptions in 2006. Rushed 52 times for 142 yards (2.7 average) and a one touchdown. Gained 3,271 yards in total offense. Showed dramatic improvement in the pocket in 2006. Capped 2006 season by throwing for a career-high 332 yards and two touchdowns and running for another score in a 41-14 rout of Notre Dame in the 2007 Sugar Bowl. Ranked No. 3 in the nation in passing efficiency for the 2006 season. Finished LSU career with 6,525 yards and 52 touchdowns in three seasons – two as a full-time starter. Analysis: JaMarcus Russell is a powerfully built, strong-armed signal caller. Built like a defensive end. Drops back and sets up quickly. Makes good reads and can dissect zone coverage. Displays a very strong arm, a compact delivery and a fluid throwing motion. Releases the ball quickly. Shows excellent velocity and can make all the throws. Has plenty of arm strength to complete passes throwing off his back foot. Makes good decisions and shows good accuracy. Hits receivers in stride. Displays considerable mobility for his size. Shows quick feet escaping the pocket and buying time for receivers. Is a threat to run, but keeps his eyes downfield at all times. Can throw on the run. Breaks tackles using strong lower body. Shows intelligence and calls correct audibles. Shows poise, especially when the game is on the line or in the face of a heavy pass rush. Is a team player. Displays patience and focus in the pocket, but fails to check down to safety valve receivers enough. Lacks anticipation. Waits until the receiver comes out of his break before delivering the football. Holds the ball too long at times. Lacks touch on some short and midrange passes at times. Relies on his arm strength too much at times, forcing the ball into coverage. Weight and overall conditioning have been issues in the past. Showed up at the NFL Combine looking out of shape. Lacks change of direction ability and quickness when at 260+ pounds. Fails to make first defender miss consistently. Injury History: Fairly durable, but sat out 2005 Peach Bowl after separating his left shoulder and suffering right wrist ligament damage after he was sacked by Georgia in the 2005 SEC Championship Game. Underwent surgery on right wrist early January 2006 and was limited in spring drills. Bottom Line: JaMarcus Russell is a quick release, strong-armed passer who can be the centerpiece of any vertical offense. Combine that with his ability to keep his eyes glued downfield while going through his progressions makes him a top five draft prospect, who could be selected No. 1 overall.

2) BRADY QUINN: QB (6-3¾, 233, 4.77) | Notre Dame. Positives: Size, arm strength, timing, footwork, mechanics, work ethic, intelligence. Negatives: Consistency, elusiveness, effectiveness in big games. Career Highlights: Brady Quinn won the 2006 Maxwell Award, given to college football’s top player. Completed 289 of 467 passes for 3,426 yards, 37 touchdowns and seven interceptions in 2006. In 2005, completed 17 more passes while throwing three fewer while still passing for almost 500 more yards – 3,919. Threw 32 touchdown passes and seven interceptions in 2005. Analysis: Brady Quinn has good size and arm strength. Sets up quickly in the pocket, displaying good footwork and balance. Shows excellent field awareness and makes good reads. Goes through progressions and looks off his primary receiver. Shows good timing, anticipation and decision making. Displays quick, compact, over-the-top release and good throwing mechanics. Delivers the ball with zip, accuracy and touch. Places the ball were only the receiver can make a play. Athletic and mobile. Can move around and buy time in the pocket and throw on the run. Effective throwing at different levels – over-the-shoulder, three-quarters, sidearm. Demonstrates intelligence and work ethic. But Quinn lacks consistency and fails to anticipate open receivers at times. Varies his release point unnecessarily and misses open receivers too often. Locks on one receiver at times. Fails to square his shoulders when throwing on the run. Will hold the ball too long at times. Lacks consistent throwing mechanics, displaying a long arcing release and failing to follow through on deep outs at times. Fails to protect the ball in the pocket, resulting in fumbles. Lacks elusiveness and fails to consistently secure the ball as a runner. Did not play well against top level competition (Michigan, USC, LSU) in 2006. Injury History: Sat out Senior Bowl with a "minor" knee injury. Bottom Line: Brady Quinn has the classic blend of size, arm strength and tenacity coaches and scouts look for in a franchise quarterback. His ability to learn and execute HC Charlie Weis’ complex pro-style offense bodes well for his future in the NFL. He’s a first-round prospect.

3) DREW STANTON: QB (6-3¼, 226, 4.75) | Michigan State. Positives: Size, arm strength, release, reads, mobility, athleticism, intelligence, competitiveness. Negatives: Consistency, decision making, durability. Career Highlights: Drew Stanton ranks first in Michigan State history in career completions with 543 in 846 attempts for 6,524 yards. Threw 42 touchdowns and 28 interceptions. Rushed for an additional 15 touchdowns. Named team MVP in 2006. Was first Michigan State player to win team MVP honors twice. Analysis: Drew Stanton has good size, arm strength, and athleticism. Drops back quickly, carrying the ball chest high. Displays quick, compact throwing motion, stepping into his throws upon release. Throws an accurate deep pass when given the time and room to step up and uses good footwork and mechanics. Zips the deep out. Demonstrates good touch when appropriate. Accurate on short and intermediate throws, even when rolling out or escaping the pass rush. Anticipates receivers’ breaks well. Effective going through progressions, finding second and third receivers as well as safety valves. Shows good combination of focus downfield and presence to know when to abandon the pocket. Displays good pocket mobility and overall body control to avoid pass rushers. Can roll out and threaten defenses with his arm and legs. Can tuck and run the ball effectively. Elusive. Shows ability to avoid and/or shed some tackles. Intelligent. Stood out during Senior Bowl week. Competitive, but can be pressured into bad mechanics and footwork (throwing off his back foot). Once he’s been hit a couple of times, his accuracy and decision making deteriorate. Forces passes into coverage when pressed and shows questionable decision making on deep passes too often. Struggles mentally… failing to put bad plays behind him. Lacks ideal trajectory at times. Worked primarily out of the shotgun formation in a spread offense. Will have to adjust to taking snaps from center and dropping back while reading defenses. Struggled taking the snap from under center at times during Senior Bowl week. Durability is a big issue. Injury History: Drew Stanton tore his right ACL against Nebraska in the 2003 Alamo Bowl while working as the punter’s personal protector and then sprinting downfield to cover the punt. Underwent knee surgery and missed 2004 spring contact drills/practices and the 2004 regular season opener while rehabbing. Missed the second half against Michigan (10/30/04) and the entire game against Ohio State (11/6/04) due to a separated right shoulder. Suffered an eye injury against Penn State (11/20/04), but played against Hawaii two weeks later. Bruised right thumb against Minnesota (11/12/05), but played the next week. Was injured again against Minnesota the following season. Sustained a concussion against Minnesota (11/11/06) forcing him to sit out the regular season finale against Penn State. Bottom Line: Drew Stanton has good size, arm strength, and mobility, but has shown questionable decision making at times and has a long injury history working behind a suspect offensive line. He also appears to have a long memory when he makes bad plays. His disastrous 2006 campaign dropped his draft stock from the first to the third round.
.

.

.


Wide Receiver Pre-Draft Overview: Found exclusively within the NFL Rookie Draft Reference Guide.

WIDE RECEIVER PROFILES (a sampling)

1) CALVIN JOHNSON: WR (6-5, 239, 4.35) | Georgia Tech. Positives: Size, athleticism, hands, speed, strength, durability. Negatives: Consistency, concentration. Career Highlights: Calvin Johnson recorded 76 receptions for 1,202 yards and 15 touchdowns during the 2006 season. Won 2006 Biletnikoff Award, given to the nation’s top wide receiver. Named to 2006 AP All-American first team. Named Georgia Tech’s MVP in the 2007 Gator Bowl. Analysis: Calvin Johnson has an excellent combination of size, athleticism, and speed. Has long arms, big hands, and a thick frame. Is quick and powerful off the snap. Defeats jams at the line of scrimmage. Jolts defensive backs attempting to jam or press him. Displays excellent route running skills. Is extremely difficult to re-route. Defeats double teams and defensive schemes employed to stop him. Finds open areas in zone coverage. Can track balls in flight and bursts forward to make the catch. Shows tremendous body control and leaping ability. Uses sure hands and excellent hand-eye coordination to catch the ball away from his body. Has never fumbled. Uses body to shield defenders from the ball. Shows good sideline awareness and control. Knows where the first-down marker is. Demonstrates good lower body strength to drag defenders and break tackles. Demonstrates great work ethic. Shows dedication on improving his game, not resting on his physical talents alone. Is a strong and effective blocker. Executes assignments with efficiency and determination. However, Johnson lacks consistency due to lapses of concentration. Fails to play fast at times. Fails to win some jump balls that he’s physically capable of winning. Lacks consistent sharp cuts, taking extra steps at times. Shows inconsistent field awareness, failing to work back to the quarterback in trouble. Can lose concentration at times and can be timid over the middle. Missed the second half of the 2004 Champs Sports Bowl due to a left knee sprain. Missed one half of action in September 2006 due to a thigh contusion. Bottom Line: Calvin Johnson succeeded at Georgia Tech despite double teams and inconsistent QB Reggie Ball, who failed to compete 50 percent of his passes for the third straight year. He has the size, athleticism, hands, and speed to be a top five draft prospect. He’s the closest to a sure thing in the 2007 NFL Draft.

2) ROBERT MEACHEM: WR (6-2, 214, 4.39) | Tennessee. Positives: Size, athleticism, burst, hands, field awareness. Negatives: Career Highlights: Robert Meachem had his best season in 2006. Ranked first in the SEC with 1,298 receiving yards and second in touchdown receptions (11) in 2006. His 1,298 receiving yards in 2006 set a team record. Analysis: Robert Meachem has good athleticism and excellent speed. Displays quickness off the snap and strength and hand placement to defeat jams at the line of scrimmage. Displays good balance and is tough to re-route. Is quick in and out of his cuts. Plants and cuts with ease. Slippery. Shows change of direction agility and quick feet. Demonstrates good field awareness, finding the soft spots in coverage and staying in bounds on sideline patterns. Adjusts to passes in stride, making the most of off-target throws. Shows good leaping ability and hand-eye coordination. Has reliable hands. Displays excellent technique extending his arms and catching the ball at its high point. Is a breakaway threat after the catch. Shows excellent lower-body strength and leg drive to break tackles and gain yards after the catch. Accelerates quickly and displays elusiveness in the open field. Demonstrates strong hand punch initiating contact as a blocker, but lacks leverage and technique to sustain and can be pushed back. Lacks consistency. Loses concentration for stretches, dropping catchable balls. Dislikes traffic and competing for the ball over the middle. Underwent knee surgery in August 2003 to repair a torn meniscus in his right knee and sat out the entire season. Bottom Line: Robert Meachem is a fast, rangy receiver who can get open quickly. An underachiever his first two years at Tennessee, Meachem had a breakout season in 2006. He’s a first round prospect.

3) TED GINN JR+.: WR/KR/PR/CB (5-11¼, 178, 4.39) | Ohio State. Positives: Speed, burst, acceleration, ball skills, field awareness, work ethic. Negatives: Strength, bulk, footwork, technique, route running, concentration. Career Highlights: Ted Ginn Jr. ranks seventh in Ohio State history with 125 career receptions and eighth in career all-purpose yards (4,068). Ranks first in Big 10 history in career punt returns for touchdown and sixth in punt return average (14.1). Named to All-Big 10 first-team in 2006. Analysis: Ted Ginn Jr. has superb speed, quickness, and athleticism. Bursts off the line of scrimmage and eats up cushion quickly if given the room to operate. Shows excellent athleticism and change of direction skills. Gets into and out of his breaks quickly and shows the vision to find the open area instantly. Finds seams quickly and shows explosive speed before and after the catch. Gains separation instantly. Displays quick acceleration. Runs by defensive backs on deep routes and can score from anywhere on the field. Maintains speed regardless of the route. Displays excellent ball skills… tracking the pass in flight, timing his jumps, and extending for and plucking the ball at its highest point. Adjusts to off-target passes and demonstrates excellent awareness along the sideline. Recognizes blitzes, breaking off his route and/or working back to the quarterback to provide an outlet target. Displays quick transition after the catch, making the first defender miss and accelerating to top speed instantly. Versatile. Doubles as an extremely dangerous kickoff and punt returner. Displays excellent vision and varies speed to get the maximum from each return. Is always a threat to score. Has run and thrown for touchdowns. Began his Buckeye career as a top cornerback recruit. Demonstrates good work ethic. Coachable. Is the son of a high school football coach. But Ginn has a thin build and lacks ideal strength and route running skills. Struggles to defeat press coverage. Can be jammed at the line of scrimmage and re-routed. Displays wasted motion attempting to defeat jams and press coverage. Fails to show good hand technique to battle physical cornerbacks. Fails to consistently run precise routes and come out of his breaks crisply due to sloppy footwork. Displays a lack of concentration at times, especially over the middle. Drops passes when running before securing the catch. Lacks ideal lateral agility at times, partly due to poor footwork and technique. Sustained a left midfoot sprain after a celebrating teammate stepped on him after he scored on the opening kickoff of the BCS Championship Game. Sat out of NFL Combine workouts while rehabbing the injury. Bottom Line: Ted Ginn Jr. is a deep threat who doubles as a dangerous return specialist. But he remains somewhat unpolished. He’s a first round prospect.

4) DWAYNE BOWE-: WR (6-2¼, 218, 4.48) | LSU. Positives: Size, strength, quickness, route running, blocking. Negatives: Consistency, concentration. Career Highlights: Dwayne Bowe has his best season in 2006, catching 65 passes for 990 yards and 12 touchdowns. Analysis: Dwayne Bowl has excellent size and long arms. Is a physical receiver who uses his long arms and strength to quickly defeat jams at the line of scrimmage. Runs sharp routes and is difficult to re-route. Gains separation using a combination of strength, quickness, and crisp route running. Finds open areas quickly. Is fearless over the middle and fights for the ball in traffic. Shows good field awareness along the sidelines and near the first down marker. Catches the ball away from his body showing good leaping ability, arm extension, and large hands. Shows good body control, shielding defenders from the ball. Gains yards after the catch, dragging defenders and breaking tackles using strong lower body. Displays adequate acceleration. Is a willing and effective blocker, taking good angles to targets on the second level and sustaining blocks. However, Bowe drops the ball too often. Attempts to run before securing the catch at times. Loses concentration other times. Loses sight of the ball on longer routes at times, especially when attempting to make an over-the-shoulder catch. Underwent Lasik corrective eye surgery in July 2006 and was more consistent catching the ball during the 2006 season. Nevertheless, had some inexplicable drops during Senior Bowl week. Lacks breakaway speed and lacks consistency separating from defensive backs on deep routes. Relies on size and physical style to gain yards after the catch. Was nagged by a right ankle sprain during the final three games of the 2004 season. Missed the 2005 season opener with a sprained right ankle. Bottom Line: Dwayne Bowe has the combination of size, strength, route running, and blocking skills to be a perfect fit into a West Coast style offense. He’s is a first round prospect.
.

.

.

Defensive End Pre-Draft Overview: Found exclusively within the NFL Rookie Draft Reference Guide.

DEFENSIVE END PROFILES (a sampling)

1) GAINES ADAMS: DE (6-4¾, 258, 4.64) | Clemson. Positives: Size, athleticism, burst, pursuit, range. Negatives: Consistency, bulk, patience, drive. Career Highlights: Gaines Adams is tied for first with DE Michael Dean Perry in Clemson history in career sacks (28). Ranks second in Clemson history in single-season sacks (12.5) in 2006. Set Clemson single-season recorded for deflected passes (9) in 2005. Recorded 21 pass deflections for his Clemson career. Analysis: Gaines Adams has good size and athleticism. Shows excellent burst off the snap and has an array of pass rush moves – swim, reverse, club, rip. Uses quick first step to beat opposing offensive tackles off the edge. Drops his hips and shows the knee bend, flexibility, strength and speed to turn the corner. Uses hands well to disengage from blockers. Locates the ball quickly and shows excellent pursuit and tackling skills. Has good range, closing speed and lateral mobility. Shows good balance and body control. Demonstrates good field awareness, knocking down passes at the line of scrimmage. Uses strong hands to control and disengage from offensive tackles. Pursues well, tracking down the ball carrier from behind. Shows adequate motor and leadership ability, but lacks consistency. Fails to play with leverage at times, rising and playing too high as the action unfolds. Struggles against large, mobile offensive tackles. Lacks the bulk and ideal strength to defeat double teams. Can be run on and washed out of plays. Only a marginal bull rusher. Can get frustrated and forget to use good technique. Lunges at targets too often. Lacks patience. Improved his level of play as a senior, showing better motor and work ethic, raising a concern about internal drive and motivation. Bottom Line: Gaines Adams is an explosive edge rusher who shows excellent athleticism and change of direction skills. But he can wear down, especially when offenses repeatedly run at him. Nevertheless, Adams is a first round prospect.

2) ADAM CARRIKER: DE (6-6, 291, 4.79) | Nebraska. Positives: Size, strength, quickness, mobility, pursuit, range, motor, versatility. Negatives: Explosiveness, burst, pass rush moves. Career Highlights: Adam Carriker ranks sixth in Nebraska history with 20.5 career quarterback sacks and fourth in career tackles behind the line of scrimmage (41). Named 2006 Big 12 Defensive Lineman of the Year by Big 12 coaches. Named All-Big 12 Conference first team (2005, 2006), Big 12 Defensive Lineman of the Year (2006), and team Defensive MVP (2005, 2006). Analysis: Adam Carriker has great size and strength. Is quick off the snap. Makes quick reads and locates the ball quickly. Displays better than expected athleticism. Shows balance, body control, and change of direction ability. Plays with excellent leverage, keeping his pads low to gain position. Keeps feet moving. Shows stack and control strength, holding his ground at the point of attack. Uses good footwork, strong hands and long arms effectively to control and disengage from blockers. Demonstrates very strong bull rush. Latches on and tosses offensive tackles away. Shots gaps and splits double teams. Shows good lateral mobility to work down the line or string out plays and force ball carriers to turn inside. Jolts ball carriers upon initial contact, finishing the tackle with good wrap up technique. Dominated all offensive linemen (except for Penn State OT Levi Brown, whom he battled to a draw) during Senior Bowl practice week. Shows excellent work ethic and leadership skills. Displays non-stop motor and toughness. Will play in pain. But Carriker lacks the ideal explosive burst of a speed rusher. Lacks ideal ability to close on the quarterback. Fails to deliver repeated hand punches quickly. Lacks array of pass rush moves – rip, swim, reverse. Missed one game in 2004 due to a high right ankle sprain. Also missed three games in 2003 due to a high ankle sprain. Bottom Line: Adam Carriker, who showed versatility by lining up at defensive tackle for part of Senior Bowl week, is a first round prospect who could excel as a 3-4 defense end.

3) JAMAAL ANDERSON: DE (6-5 3/8, 288, 4.77) | Arkansas. Positives: Size, athleticism, speed, burst. Negatives: Consistency, strength, suddenness. Career Highlights: Jamaal Anderson led the SEC in sacks (13.5 for 95 yards) and led Arkansas with 26 quarterback hurries in 2006. Ranked second in SEC in tackles for a loss (19.5 for 108 yards). Ranks sixth on Arkansas’ career sack list with 17.5 despite starting only 19 of 36 games. Analysis: Jamaal Anderson has an excellent combination of size, athleticism, and speed. Anticipates the snap well and locates the ball quickly. Shows excellent flexibility and knee bend to turn the corner. Generates power playing with leverage, keeping pads low and maintaining balance. Uses good shoulder lean, long arms, active hands (at times), quickness, and spin moves to slip blocks. Displays excellent closing burst to the quarterback. Makes good reads. Shows excellent anticipation and change of direction agility to beat double teams. Demonstrates quick feet and can pursue and close on the ball carrier, reaching out and dragging him down before he turns the corner. Can hold the point of attack when using proper technique and leverage. Chokes running lanes by getting good leverage on blockers and disengaging to reach out and tackle the ball carrier. Effective on stunts and twists. Shows strong effort and plays to the whistle. Tenacious, instinctive, and intelligent. But Anderson lacks ideal strength and suddenness. Struggles to disengage from large offensive linemen at times. Fails to jolt blockers with strong hands. Can be fooled by play action and misdirection at times. Takes wide angles to targets at times, exposing him on draws and screens. Plays too high and fails to use good technique at times. Lacks consistent tackling technique. Appears a bit lethargic at times early in games and needs contact to get revved up. Was switched from right end to left end in 2006, meaning he was lined up opposite the right tackle, usually the lesser of an offense’s pass blockers. Benefited from Arkansas’ frequent use of stunts and blitzes to him free up to pressure the quarterback. Lacks ideal experience at defensive end, having arrived at Arkansas as a wide receiver. Sat out NFL Combine runs and drills due to a hamstring strain but did everything as his March 13 pro day. Bottom Line: Jamaal Anderson is a speed rusher who uses quickness rather than strength to get to the quarterback. Knows sign language (his father is deaf) and shows good overall intelligence. He’s a first round prospect.
.

.

.

WAR ROOMS 2007: WHO MAKES THE CALL
By John Holler

There are 32 teams in the NFL and each has its own way of conducting its business. Some teams stress offensive firepower for year-to-year success like the defending champion Indianapolis Colts, while teams like the NFC champion Chicago Bears have built their franchise around a suffocating defense.

Just as no two teams on the field are alike, so goes it with the draft war rooms. There are 32 different franchises with 32 different ways of doing things. In some cases, a strong-willed head coach runs the show. In other instances, an owner has been known to stick his nose into the business of drafting talent, since he’s the one that will end up paying the big salary. In other cases, a general manager calls the shots. In still others, there is a hybrid of all the previously stated system. Few teams have exactly the same modus operandi but they all have a system unique to their organization.

So who calls the shots? Here’s what you should look for on draft day when teams start making picks. Knowing who has the last word or who has to shut up and accept it can be telling when it comes to who takes on who on draft day. Here’s our list of the 32 teams in the league and who is making the final decision.

Arizona Cardinals – For the last few years, this was a much different situation for the Cardinals that it will be later this month. Dennis Green was hired with the chance to make his own selections, which would explain why he went after wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald and quarterback Matt Leinart. Both have the potential to be Pro Bowlers, but it won’t happen on Green’s watch. One of the first moves the Cards made after firing Green was to extend the contract of Vice President of Football Operations Rod Graves. While Green had the final authority on draft decisions in the past, Graves will have the final word over new coach Ken Whisenhunt. While the Bidwells have some input on draft day, it is primarily to authorize the money if the team is looking to move up in the first round. Luckily for the front office people, the Bidwell family is more meddlesome in free agency than in the war room, where Graves has ascended to the top.

Atlanta Falcons – Another team with a new coach, the hierarchy of power has been more defined with the firing of Jim Mora. General Manager Rich McKay allowed Mora to have a say on players he coveted, but it was still McKay’s will that won out in most situations – the Falcons have been frequent movers both up and down on draft days past. But with Bobby Petrino coming from the college ranks with no previous experience in draft matters, he will likely be much more of an observer in the war room. That will allow McKay to put his stamp on this year’s draft, which became a little more interesting following the trade of Matt Schaub.

Baltimore Ravens – Ozzie Newsome is the general and dictator of the war room for the Ravens. He is provided input, primarily for Director of Scouting Eric DeCosta. He has built a strong reputation of giving deference to the opinions of top scout Lional Vital, who has been with Newsome since the beginning of his tenure. Brian Billick has a limited role in making the decisions, which could explain why his offensive help early on draft day has been limited the last few years. The last three drafts have yielded seven starters for the Ravens and a half dozen key backups. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it and it looks like Newsome does his job extremely well.

Buffalo Bills – Marv Levy is the general manager, but his role has been more in free agency than in specializing in the draft. Despite being one of the longest-tenured and most respected coaches in the league when he was the head coach of the Bills in the 1980s and 1990s, even then he never butted heads with the guys who specialize in analyzing college players. Despite being G.M., expect to see Levy defer to Director of college Scouting Tom Modrak. Levy was brought in primarily to bring a team concept to the franchise instead of a "me first" mentality, which could explain why the team was willing to part with Willis McGahee for a reasonable price. While Levy has the chance to veto a pick if it is a player with a red flag on his character background, he will likely let Modrak and his minions run the show and make the picks.

Carolina Panthers – This is a two-man show when General Manager Marty Hurney and head coach John Fox. They work as a tandem and, to date, have rarely had a disagreement on an important draft pick. Hurney has the final say if push comes to shove, but it hasn’t happened yet and both seem to get along extremely well. The team hired veteran college scout Don Gregory to head up the scouting department, so he will have input, but it will be primarily in the form of ranking players by position and giving Fox and Hurney as much information on potential draftees as they can dig up. But in the end, its John and Marty who make the final call for the Panthers.
.
.
.

If you'd like to read the rest of the 435+ player profiles as well as our 2007 War Room story, please click to ORDER Mastermind's Rookie Madness for 2007!

back to top