Talk:NFL draft/Archive 1

Archive 1

Requests for information

Can someone add some information about the supplemental draft, how it works and why they have it? Thanks.

Can someone explain this situation: If9er]] 14:16, 19 Decmber 2005 (EST)

The "record against opposing team" is your answer. Right now, the Texans still holds the 1st overall pick because their opponent's wins/lost percentage is higher than the 49ers according Shannon Sharpe during the CBS postgame show. Here is an example of what I just said. Keep in mind, that draft order page was last updated before the Texans win and 49ers lost. The final regular season game between those two teams probably will determine who would be the first overall pick if the Texans and 49ers lose next week. According to your nick, you just hope the 49ers lose to the Texans on New Year's Day. If I remember correctly, if their percentages are tied and have the same record then during draft day they would have a coin flip. I might be wrong. --J. Nguyen 04:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I did a quick search. I found this old Pro Football Weekly 2002 NFL Draft order and probably it is true that there would be a coin flip on the teams that are both tied on records and opposing team's record percentage. Hope that helps you. --J. Nguyen 04:15, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

How many picks are there in lay-man's terms: Each team initially has 7 picks (1 per round), but they can be traded for other players or picks, and a maximum of 31 compensatory picks for losing players are added each year. CoolKatt number 99999

Can anyone confirm how many players from the University of Miami have been selected in the first round in recent times? I'm fairly certain that they hold the record, but I cannot find the source where I saw it...This would be a good addition to the trivia section.VetteDude 01:20, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

• Heh, if you just type: "University of Miami" "NFL Draft" "First round" on Google. You would have got the answer. In fact, it appeared on Wikipedia's University of Miami article and to verify here is the USA Today article about it. Hope that helps you. I'm too lazy to put in this article. --J. Nguyen 05:36, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Salaries

The paragraph on salaries is useful but actual dollar amounts from the most recent available year would be very enlightening. Tempshill 04:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Untitled

From now on, when editing the page, please sign your name by typing the following: ~~~~. Also, leave a note explaining what you did. Thanks.False Prophet 03:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA

No refs Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 01:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I would like to know why this was failed. It was peer reviewed, and archived as no one had any more editing ideas. Obviously you see something. If you have no ideas for edits, then your failing of the GA canidates is unjustified. False Prophet 02:07, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure how more explicit he could have been. "No refs" means no references. There is neither a reference section, nor any apparent inline citations. Please reference this article. Pepsidrinka 05:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I see that, but I am not sure what needs a citation, could someone add citation needed at the approprite places. Thanks. False Prophet 15:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

What does this mean

Some players that have will soon work out for the first time are JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn. Neither worked out at the combine, as it's believed they would perform better with their own wide recievers.

I don't quite get what the above is trying to say. Also, why give specific examples here? This is supposed to be a general article not about any season in particular Nil Einne 13:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Changes for 2008

Reportedly there will be a few changes made to the draft process this year, including moving round 3 to Sunday, leaving Saturday with rounds 1 and 2. If someone would like to alter the article to include the changes feel free. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barrel-rider (talk • contribs) 22:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

NFL Draft in General

No where in this article does it describe exactly what the NFL Draft is. My friends were talking about it the other day and I wanted to look it up. But its not anywhere on the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.168.198.207 (talk) 01:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Let's look at the perspective of this article

An anon placed the following comment in the middle of the article itself:

What is it? Why is it done? How many players are involved? Why doesn't this article explain it to people not already familiar with the concept?

Admittedly, the way that these questions were posed constituted vandalism, whether he understood that or not. But putting that issue aside, I think his questions are valid. This article would be very unclear to someone who did not follow sports. In particular, the lead section needs to be fixed up. Unschool (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I mean, look at the opening sentence: The NFL Draft is the official selection process of the National Football League. Process to select what? Opposing teams? Schedules? Uniform colors? How would someone unfamiliar with sports and drafts have any idea what this was about? Unschool (talk) 17:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The article still needs a lot of work, but I think that the lede now serves its purpose. Unschool (talk) 17:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Forfeiture

Before my edit, the article stated that the commissioner can force teams to forfeit any pick. My understanding—which, unfortunately, I can't find a source for—is that the Commissioner does not have unlimited authority to force teams to forfeit picks. In particular, with respect to Spygate, I believe that even if he had wanted to, Goodell could not have forced the Pats to give up the pick they acquired from San Francisco.

[On a related note, while the NFL Commissioner has a lot of powers, there are some things he is expressly not allowed to do. For example, a lot of people felt the Patriots should have been forced to forfeit the Week 1 game against the Jets. The NFL rulebook, however, specifically prohibits the commissioner from declaring a forfeit except in very limited circumstances that did not apply in that case.] Samer (talk) 17:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Drafts Pick

The New England Patriots traded the 2010 third round picks and 2011 fifth round picks to the Oakland Raiders How come i don't see that on there --Cjm555 (talk) 13:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

That goes in the article on the 2010 NFL Draft. Samer (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Oakland also traded their 2011 first round pick to New England for Richard Seymour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.28.170.95 (talk) 16:44, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Draft order rules need clarification

It needs to be made clear that the rules specified are for 2010, not for 2009. I don't want to have to go through and undo changes to the 2009 NFL Draft page because someone "saw an error."

Personally, I think it would be better if the page made clear what the new order is, and indicated the changes. I'll have time to do it this weekend, but I hope someone else will get it done before then. Samer (talk) 04:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I think the sentence "... teams with the same record "cycle" picks in each subsequent round, regardless of playoff status or any other factor" is still wrong, though. Teams with the same record and playoff status should cycle their picks. Can somebody verify this? Buck42 (talk) 09:54, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Eligibility

"Most drafted players come directly out of NCAA programs as seniors or juniors, all players entering the draft must have at least three years of college experience, while some players are selected from other professional leagues like the Arena Football League." - this is a run-on sentence, but it also isn't very clear: Do the players drafted from other professional leagues need to have 3 years of college experience? Also - since the sentence says players from other professional leagues can be drafted (not just college players), then the opening sentence of the article is not quite right: "The NFL Draft is an annual event in which the 32 National Football League teams select new eligible college football players." Maybe the sentence should read "The NFL Draft is an annual event in which the 32 National Football League teams select new eligible college football players and players from other professional leagues." 142.36.45.231 (talk) 20:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

A mistake?

I know very little about the NFL draft, but this seems to be incorrect:

"The draft is the first chance each team gets at players who have been out of college for at least three years."

Should it be "high school" instead of "college"?--69.160.25.19 16:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually this is correct. NFL players get drafted out of College or University level not High School. Because the Eligibility rule states the players must be out of their high school 2.5 years before they can get drafted. 207.138.40.66 (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Ambiguity in Supplemental draft section

"In the supplemental draft, a team is not required to use any picks. Instead, if a team wants a player in the supplemental draft, they submit a "bid" to the Commissioner with the round they would pick that player. If no other team places a bid on that player at an earlier spot, the team is awarded the player and has to give up an equivalent pick in the following year's draft. (For example, RB Tony Hollings was taken by the Houston Texans in the second round of the Supplemental Draft in 2003; thus, in the 2004 NFL Draft, the Texans forfeited a second-round pick.)"

It seems as though team is required to use a pick, despite what the first sentence above states.

Actually the first sentence is correct because nobody has to use a pick in the supplemental draft. But it should be made teams instead of a team, it would make more sense. 207.138.40.66 (talk) 14:13, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Possibly the third sentence should read, "If no team in an earlier spot places an equally high bid on that player, and no team in a later spot places a higher bid, then the team is awarded the player and has to give up an equivalent..."

Mr. Irrelevant and Draftnik

I guess what this article is trying to say is that the NFL Draft has become a bit of a cultural phenomena. At some point, the NFL draft started to be carried live on tv in its entirety with all kinds of people showing up in the crowd and booing when there favorite player was not chosen. Right? And then years later, the NBA draft started to be held live on TV, right? 66.234.33.8 (talk) 06:40, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

History of the NFL Draft

I do not see an article on this. Does it exist? If not, this article is going to be getting a new section. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:26, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I put an invisible header in the article. Here's why. When the draft was created during the Great Depression in 1936 it was monopolistic in nature. You had a bunch of private companies saying to players if you do not sign with the team that chooses you then you can not play in our trusted league. So eventually Bell goes before the U.S. Congress over problems with a player's lawsuit about the option cause in the 1950s - at a time when 1/3 of Americans were in unions. So Congress was asking Bell that the NFL is violating the Sherman Antitrust Act with your precious NFL Draft, and you still will not recognize a union - the NFLPA???? So Bell thinks, give up his invention the NFL Draft or recognize the NFLPA? The next day he walks into Congress and says we recognize the NFLPA. The lynch pin is that players that declare, but do not sign by a team that picks them, would be ineligible for the season. And that needs to be explained either here or in the History of the National Football League 66.234.33.8 (talk) 14:08, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I greatly prefer using common sense, or original research, depending on your viewpoint w respect to who was eligible for the first draft. Baldwin writes that it was de jure that only college seniors could be chosen. I sincerely doubt this. I do not remember anything in the NFL constitution of 1957 (which I link to in this article) that mentions anything about the NFL draft. I think, as Willis points out, it was against NFL rules to sign college players to the NFL and since almost all teams in the NFL were bleeding money they simply did not have the reserves capable to supporting selecting players who were college in juniors. That being said, I put in the citation from a notable source, albeit I do not agree with its statement.

No disrespect to Wikipedia, but I generally find Encyclopedia versions of articles to be inaccurate. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:35, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

List heavy 5 years ago

I asked Zhinz and Smith03, whom are both still active, on their talk page if they were still actively involved in this page. When this article was put up for GA review it was criticized as list heavy. IMHO, devoting so much space to the supplemental draft seems to exacerbate the situation. I advocate including a history section, and push/pulling pushing the previous year's notable events into the history section and pulling the new year's draft into whatever section title people can agree upon.

Specifically speaking, I'd like to convert the lists and tables to prose and take a look at what it looks like after that.

Scouting departments of NFL franchises go hand-in-hand with the history of the NFL and the NFL draft on at least 2 levels. Space needs to be made available for that discussion in this article, at least temporarily; i would suggest it will end up being a full fledged article because I am quite confident there must at least one notable scout.

Again, specifically, I want this article to state, unequivocally, and explain why, in a fashion casual observers can understand, that the original version of Bell's draft was ruled unconstitutional. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:47, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Berwanger being traded set precedent

Berwanger being traded set a precedent. There is nothing in the 1957 NFL constitution presented to Congress that says anything about trading draft picks. I know of no source that says a player (in 1936) could be traded even though he was not actually signed to a contract by the team. It has to go with common sense that Berwanger was, ostensibly, an Eagle player the moment he was picked in the draft and therefore he could be traded. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:39, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

something's screwy, Bell made Berwanger an offer, Berwanger rejected it; there is no evidence Bell ever went to Carr for arbitration

Berwanger made an offer to Halas, Halas rejected it; there is no evidence Halas ever want to Carr for arbitration

I know of no evidence of anyone going to Carr for aribtration and almost 3/4 of the NFL draft did not sign with NFL teams, hmmm. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:51, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Image request

Can someone get an image. Surely, there must be one out there for free w Goodell, or Taglyboo, or Rozelle at the podium. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 17:27, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Merge request from Bert Bell

The NFL Draft can be broken up historically in at least 2 ways. One, prior to fulltime coverage of it on TV and after it. Or maybe three ways, the early draft, after the original draft method was ruled unconstitutional in the courts, and commencing with fulltime TV coverage it.

There's lots of fun stuff missing. Missing is Wellington Mara bogarting the 1st draft pick circa 1939. The bonus pick (lottery pick) in the draft that Congress, generally speaking, forced Bell to rescind in 1957. Weeb Eubank stealing all the Cleveland Browns draft picks for the Baltimore Colts months before he went to the Colts as head coach. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 13:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Initiated 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

almost completed, need to rephrase duplicate sentences in Bert Bell66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:56, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

History

Requesting to delete two, off topic, uncited sentences in History w respect to Mr. Irrelevant 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:58, 10 October 2011 (UTC)\

Gone 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

NFL Scouting Combine

Requesting to delete duplicate list in this article that is almost identical to the one in NFL Scouting Combine 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

This is longer than Mr. Irrelevant. I can chill another day. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Supplemental Draft

hey guys im not a regular poster on here but i noticed someone messed around with this section (45 billion players and 1723) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.66.165 (talk) 05:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

The person who originally worked on List of NFL Supplemental Draft Picks looks to have put in a lot of hard work in putting that together. I think that has to be respected. But the article as it stands now is list heavy. I know it would take me at least 16 hours to code it after I gathered all the information. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:07, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I think there is good foundation of info in there to split that off into its own article. I requested a split. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 13:03, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

The list was originally "notable 41 supplemental picks..." I am putting the citations in, but it probably should be all the supplemental picks that ever occurred and the reason they entered the draft. Just checking around (I still don't really know how the sup draft works), it looks like there has only been about 100 ever picks since it went into affect. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

And the citations are half-baked. Some of them don't say the player was a DB or they played for such and such a team. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:38, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Oops, that is the entire list. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 11:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

The supplemental draft section looks alot like strategy. I know next to nothing about strategy in drafting or the supplemental draft. Also, it makes the article list heavy, but there's a whole lot of stuff in there that's interesting and could be useful for other articles on Wikipedia. Everyone likes to come down on NFL players for moral terpitude, but that stuff looks like jaywalking to me. Certainly it can be wiped out and be turned into a pure strategy thingie in a paragraph that would be self-serving to this article; but, I'm not deleting it and I'm not going to convert it to a paragraph at any time soon. Although, I do, absolutely, despise looking up citations to support its statements. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Timeline

Unless, I am reading that U.S. House record wrong. The NFL constitution was created on April 5, 1941. Up until that time, they had rules, but they were kind of winging it. It also dates all ammendments to the constitution since its inception. Maule, in one of his books (I forget which), lists year of change and what change was in the constitution at least from 1945 on; he probably listed all of them. That ends that chase of constructing a timeline. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 11:58, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, the constitution of 1947 stipulates the draft would be held the day before the annual executive meeting. The U.S. house lists the dates of the executive meetings. Now the date of each draft should be determined since 1941. Makes it much, much easier for finding out what happened on draft day and how the pageantry of the draft evolved and the signing of players in the days after the draft.66.234.33.8 (talk) 12:02, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Oops, the Wikipedia articles 19XX NFL Draft already have that in them. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 12:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

An English POV

Just like to say, as an Englishmen reading this page, how crazy is American sport?!! I'd never imagined that anything such as a 'draft', 'combine' or 'mr irrelevant' could ever take place in a professional sport, but it has - very interesting and amusing. Saccerzd 14:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

The NFL is a huge part of American culture. The Draft is only so big because college football is so big. People develop fondness towards certain players, and are excited to find out which team they end up on. The draft itself wass created because it is the fairest way for teams to gain the rights to sign college players. The combine is a hit because it is testing basic athletic skill of the participants, and can impact their "value" in the draft. Amercians also love the underdog. Mr. Irrelevant is the biggest underdog in the NFL. I could imagine how crazt this must seem to you. False Prophet 20:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

In the UK, generally professional sportsmen don't go to college or university, and instead join clubs after leaving school aged 16, leaving them with practically no qualifications if they get injured and their career is over. Also, there is none of the fairness that you see with the Draft - clubs poach players, and the ones with the most money generally get the best players. It is an interesting idea, but can't see it happening over here - feels too articifial. Saccerzd 18:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Read NFL. It will explain how the NFL does everything it can to make it balanced. The NFL has a salary cap like most professional sports leagues do here in America. Most American Football players are not strong enough, fast enough, or are overall talented enough to play professional Football comming out of high school. I Doubt it would work in the UK as I don't believve that the kids that join the clubs have been playing with as much national publicity as college kids do here ---

The NFL draft is, or looks to be completely unique, in sports world-wide. I suggest its uniqueness is not properly revealed in this article, based on comments above. I suggest big American football fans that are editors on Wikipedia should look into this, which seems to be, an undeniable, notable fact. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Title: National Football League Draft

Why is this article not entitled National Football League draft?66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I request someone create a new section title

Clearly there is a pre-scout era and a post-scout era and I don't know anything about combines or things like that. I really know nothing of the modern draft system. I was told by someone off-hand that ESPN started covering the draft full-time in the 1980s, although I have no idea if that's true or not. Why doesn't someone come up with a section title a la Full-time media coverage or something along those lines and then move stuff into there. I think that the popularity of the draft forced media to change their coverage of the draft and I think that is a notable ...change and requires a new section; maybe there is a better way to create a section break. Me personally, I am, with respect to recent years, most interested in how the courts, generally speaking, forced the NFL to change the draft system that was instituted by Bert Bell, so that could cause a problem.

You don't have to provide a citation when you create a new section. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:26, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

1. pre-scout era
2. scout era
3. moneyball era statistical era (I don't wanna associate moneyball w football....yuck), for lack of a better term, which is combines and how high players can jump and stuff like that and franchises pooling resources to draft players
4. full-time media coverage
5. and a contemporary section??? of what the methodology (rules, eligibility) is for the current draft??? 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:41, 15 October 2011 (UTC)66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:44, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia usually wants thing to be placed chronologically, from my limited knowledge. Umm, I think a contemporary section of what the methodology of the draft is (rules, eligibility of draftees, etc.) should come first and history should be deprecated. I tremendously support deprecating history of the nfl draft. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:50, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

I changed my mind. History comes first. The contemporary draft will be shown in the intro and the Table of Contents will point to it at the top of the article for people that want to skip to it. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 08:41, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

ESPN

I don't have espn. But it looks like that this was a turning point in the history of the draft. I can see how this be innocently turned into a advertisement. But their involvement is what it is. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 08:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually the whole article can, and some parts are, innocently be turned into an advertisement. Clearly, the part about the tickets are easy to come by on the 2nd and 3rd day is. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:30, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

History of the draft

This stuff I am writing will prolly end up being spun off. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:53, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

True, I should be run up some citations pretty quickly. Hopefully, what can be gleaned from what I write is:

1. the draft idea by bell was the first draft in the world-wide history of professional sports, a wee bit notable (williams)
2. competitive balance (tons of sources)
3. he sold it as a way to keep salaries in check (one source, I forget which one)
4. technology (blesto-lesto etc. 1960, Williams calls it a turning point)
5. Mackey lawsuit, Yazoo lawsuit affected how many rounds etc. (the judges in one of the lawsuits denigrates the importance of the draft - i have to delete that from bell because it's a totally different era and it's not fair to put that on bell)

After that, supplemental draft Kosar and Bosworth, which I know nothing about.

But then really, sorry for this advertisement, but ESPN's involvement with the draft changed everything, although draftniks were well established by then (at least by May 1, 1977). I would think those events would be included in history of the draft in this article...with a "see main article history of the nfl draft" thingie. I don't live in a big professional football dominated town, but if i did and i turned on talk radio from feb 15 to apr 15, then I would hear "We need to get this guy, and we need to get him right now!!!"66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Paul Brown says the key to success in the NFL was to stockpile #1 draft picks (although he neglects to mention Jack Vanisi) and then bring in a coach like Lombardi. Then you have a federal judge saying, the draft has no impact. That don't belong in this article. There's Eddie Kotal, Wellington Mara, Greasy Neale, etc...those guys don't belong here. Then there's Big Daddy Lipscomb, none of those guys belong here. But they are fun stuff and belong somewhere. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:43, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

How can it not be mentioned that Raymond Berry was stolen from the Cleveland Browns (during the draft) by Weeb Eubank. The coach and architect of the victory in the Greatest Game Ever Played was a thief and a traitor, lol, I mean c'mon that's awesome 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:53, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

A friendly reminder to check an article's history for recent vandalism before editing it further

National Football League Draft was apparently vandalized by 71.176.63.241 on 12:43, 6 December 2011‎. Later editors apparently fixed some but not all of the damage. The more efficient fix would have been to undo the vandalism at that point. Now the article has undergone many further edits by other editors who did not notice the vandalism of 6 December 2011‎. I noticed a problem when reading the National Football League Draft#Precursor and rationale section, which resulted from damage to a ref tag that hides some intervening text, including a paragraph break. --Teratornis (talk) 05:46, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I think I fixed the remaining damage from that particular vandal. --Teratornis (talk) 06:11, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

#1 Picks

So I was looking for a list of how many times a certain team has had the first overall pick and was unable to find it. Anyone have any thoughts about adding a chart like this to this page? Or if not this page another page? It would be interesting to look at, to see what team has had the #1 pick the most times, it can be very telling of what kind of franchise they are and the type of history they have, because if a certain team has had the pick like 10 times, it would obviously indicate they haven't been good very much.Zdawg1029 (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Definitions of "round" and "pick"

On NFL players' articles, the terms "round" and "pick" are used. Could we get clear definitions of these? Thanks.CountMacula (talk) 17:43, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

You want a definition of what round and pick mean on individual players pages? Or just here on this draft page? The first one I can almost assure you won't happen. But we can do it on this page. Zdawg1029 (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The only thing I can think of adding is below, and I think it would go well in the lead.

"The current draft is made up of 7 rounds with 256 individual picks. Rounds 1 and 2 each have 32 individual picks for the 32 teams. Rounds 3, 4, 5 6 and 7 each have 32 picks, but additionally have varying numbers of supplemental picks at the conclusion of each round."Zdawg1029 (talk) 23:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

What is the "Technology" section for?

There are only two pieces of information there, and neither one has anything to do with technology. Marzolian (talk) 06:38, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Definition of "proprietary"

In the "compensatory pick " section, it says:

"The placement of picks is determined by a proprietary formula ..."

That is not the proper use of this word. Something that is proprietary have been created by a particular person or organization, or could be owned by or licensed for use only by such a person. But it does not necessarily mean secret or confidential.

https://wikidiff.com/proprietary/confidential

https://www.stairstepconsulting.com/practical-proprietary-and-confidential-information-handling/

The league wants to keep the formula secret, probably so that different teams will not game the system. Any NFL employee who leaks it would probably get fired. But it's not the same as a trade secret, that someone might steal and sell to a competitor. The formula itself has no monetary value to any other organization.

I realize, this text comes from the NFL website itself. But there's no reason that Wikipedia has to participate in this bastardization of the language. Marzolian (talk) 08:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)