Does the NFL Combine Really Work?

The debate about the NFL Combine and the NFL Draft has been going on for years, and will be an ongoing issue each year, as the best college athletes in the sport audition for what is one of the highest paying sports in America.

For those unfamiliar, the NFL here refers to the American National Football League, commonly known as Gridiron outside the US. The selection process for the future multimillion dollar athletes of tomorrow is a combination of meat market and bingo hall when viewed from the outside.

The NFL Combine is a testing ground where top rated college players show off their strength and speed in a variety of tests, both physical and mental. Based on those tests, scouts and coaches from the NFL teams select who they think will best add to their team.

The science of selecting the "right one" each year is very much a guessing game. There are numerous stories of players selected at the top of the draft class based on their college career, and their results at the combine, who turn out to be busts.

The most iconic is Ryan Leaf, the 1998 No. 1 selection by the San Diego Chargers (who traded away players and selection choices for him), who was out of the NFL in a matter of four years. There are others who promised much but delivered little.

At the same time, there are players in the NFL who have won championships but were not even drafted. Hines Ward of the Steelers is the most common example used in the NFL.

Here's my question, then: If selection is such a guessing game in the NFL, why do the combine and physical measurements play such an important role in the draft when clearly empirical data is not the only way of selecting a team player?

What ever happened to the development of a player from the junior ranks, watching his college games and selecting based on how well the player plays in the game?

Now, this is where the outsider comes in. The NFL is a professional contact sport, and there are others like it in the world. Rugby League, Rugby Union, and Australian Rules Football are some examples.

All are professional sports in their respective regions. Looking at the two rugby codes and Aussie Rules, these sports do not have a combine to select new players each year.

The AFL, the professional league of Australian Rules Football, conducts a draft each year where talented young players are selected, much like the NFL, but there is no barrage of televised tests.

Players are selected based on raw ability and skill: the basics of running, passing, and tackling, which transcend all contact sports.

It is the same for rugby (both league and union), as well. Granted, they have a different system of recruiting new players with no draft system.

In those sports the club and school framework is much stronger than in Gridiron and in AFL, but still, the core of selecting the right player remains the same. If he can do the basics well and excel at his current level, he can excel at the next level.

Maybe it's difficult to even judge or compare the NFL. Gridiron at the college level plays a totally different system than in the pros, and as a result emphasizes totally different skills.

For example, the option offense, which saw the likes of Alex Smith and Michael Vick dominate at the college level, but both had subpar seasons as pro, even with Vick having run his way to some spectacular scores in his time with the Falcons.

But does not the same remain? If one tackles well, avoids tacklers with great skill, and can block with perfect technique, will he not be able to do that at the pros in any system?

In the end, do not the coaches make the difference in blending and gelling the team of players together that makes the difference?