Ryan Mallett: Will Admitted Drug Use Mean the End of Mallett's 1st-Round Hopes?

Ryan Mallett's Drug Use Might Cause Him To Tumble Further

A few hours ago I wrote about Ryan Mallett, and how the "unfounded" drug makes him this generation's Dan Marino: a big, strong armed passer with seemingly limitless potential who tumbled on Draft Day because of the drug rumors. 

Now it turns out that those "unfounded rumors" were somewhat true.

According to Pro Football Weekly,

"

"One GM said Mallett was the first quarterback ever to admit his drug usage to him in interviews."

"

While I don't buy into the article's claim that some GMs see "his willingness to be honest about his past and acknowledge issues is viewed as a positive," I still Mallett's "indiscretions" shouldn't send him in a free-fall during the draft, even on Day One.

The concerns are valid. Even though the buzz over Matt Leinart wasn't drugs, his "party-guy" status may have been the reason he flopped in Arizona. And drug use—be it "recreational" or "habitual"—has ruined plenty of promising careers: Matt Jones, Charles Rogers, Joe Gilliam, etc.

And Mallett's admitted use is a reason to be concerned for GMs and so is the public intoxication arrest. But are both reasons to pass on a top talent, even if they think he's capable of being a great NFL passer?

READ MORE: The 50 Most Explosive Players In NFL History

So I can't help but wonder if these "baggage issues" are being over blown just a bit for several players: Mallett, Jimmy Smith, Nick  Fairley, even Cam Newton.

I don't condone Mallett's drug use or Smith's minor possession charges or Fairley being a "dirty player" or whatever Cam Newton has done wrong, whether it was only at Florida or what happened regarding Mississippi State.

But I think those "character issues" are really nothing compared to the "baggage" Lawrence Phillips had or even those that Michael Vick and Ben Roethlisberger now have.

Sure, there is a sense of a pre-emptive strike: "If we draft a player with a bit of baggage, it will only escalate when we give him $10 million."

But I get the feeling that many of the people who say this stuff about  "baggage" are almost trying to rationalize passing on a player, rather than rationalizing on taking the player. Maybe that's the infamous "smoke screens" and "disinformation" that surround the draft. 

Still, after four months of scrutiny—actually much longer than that when you consider that Mel Kiper and Todd McShay are probably working on their 2012 mock drafts right now—some, not all, of the "baggage" claims seem to be nitpicking. There has to be a point of diminishing returns when it comes to viewing every single piece of evidence, on or off the field.

I feel like if Tom Brady or Barry Sanders was in this draft, someone would find something to say "Yea, but..." about.

Every draft choice is a gamble. But there's something to be said about watching a football player play football on film, and trusting in what you see, rather than what you've heard.