RealGM

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 4:03 pm**

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/n ... id=4087941

Wide receivers Percy Harvin and Brandon Tate tested positive for marijuana during February's NFL scouting combine in Indianapolis, two sources told FOXSports.com.

The news could be potentially damaging to the wide receivers' stock during this weekend's NFL draft.

NFL.com Video

An inside look at wide receiver Percy Harvin from Florida.
Harvin was considered a first-round pick after leaving the University of Florida following his junior season. Tate was considered a possible second- to fourth-round pick after a solid college career at North Carolina.

Joel Segal, the agent who represents both players, didn't return messages from FOXSports.com seeking comment.

NFL teams received the drug-test results earlier this week, according to FOXSports.com.

Sources told FOXSports.com Harvin and Tate were the only two high-profile players to flunk their combine drug tests, and one of the sources said that fewer than a dozen players tested positive for recreational drugs.

Players who failed the tests are subject to entry into the NFL's substance-abuse program.

Harvin finished his college career with 133 receptions for 1,929 yards and 13 touchdowns and 194 carries for 1,852 yards and 19 scores. He averaged 9.5 yards per carry and 11.6 yards every time he touched the ball. He also posted a strong 4.39 seconds in the 40-yard dash at the combine.

He was at his best in big games, earning MVP honors in the 2006 Southeastern Conference championship game and totaling 171 yards and a touchdown in a victory over Oklahoma in the Bowl Championship Series national title game in January.

He lined up at receiver, running back and quarterback for the Gators but expects to do even more at the next level because several teams have already talked to him about returning kickoffs and punts.

Tate finished his career with an NCAA-record 3,523 career combined kick-return yards. Before tearing two knee ligaments midway through his senior year, he averaged 23.5 yards on his 16 receptions.

Tate, still recovering from his injury, didn't work out at the combine.

Just thought this might be something to note, both might fall in the draft into the second round. I'm not sure if they fall too much but they might be there for the Bears.

I'd take Harvin in a heartbeat personally, he's a too little for the outside but would be a big time mismatch in the slot.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 4:29 pm**

I hope he falls to us.

I would take him.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 5:55 pm**

It depends on what other WR is available at #49 before going with Harvin. I think he could be a great mismatch and we could be very creative with him and Hester on the field. That said I'm not sure if he's a great fit on the outside for anything but fly routes.

Tate has been slotted late 2nd/early3rd or even farther due to injury concerns. If we went D or OL with #49, I'd be thrilled if we got him with 99.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:36 pm**

Balance-a-Bull wrote:I hope he falls to us.

I would take him.

Same here. Then draft defense the rest of the way.

This really shouldn't be an issue but the media hypes it up.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 7:07 pm**

I would take Harvin in a heartbeat if he falls to 49. He's a playmaker... if Cutler hits him and he has a little bit of space to operate in, he more than likely is going the distance. Having two threats like that at WR (he and Hester) is an exciting proposition. As far as a classic "possession" receiver... we have great TEs and a solid receiving RB to pick up that role.

My only concern with Harvin is the fact that he lost a strike on the drug policy. If he fails a drug test in the future, it will count as a second failed drug test so his penalties will be one level more advanced than another player starting with a clean slate. I think there would have to be some language in his contract to GREATLY disincentify him from breaking the drug rules.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 7:10 pm**

One more thing... if we are at 49 and Harvin, Robisikie, Britt and Nicks are all off the board... what are your thoughts of trading down in the second round and targeting guys like Ramses Bardin, Juaquin Iglesias and Louis Murphy? Or even another position and targeting a guy like Marko Mitchell in rounds 4 or 5?

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:28 pm**

It wouldnt make sense to trade down if there were no WRs available. We should trade down if there arent any good S, OL, DL or a very good BPA that dropped.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:04 pm**

Nobody cares. If they are thought to be good, they will get picked.

That's my opinion. Like the Reggie Bush 'scandal'. Nobody cared. Can he play? Yes? Okay, draft him.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:13 pm**

kyrv wrote:Nobody cares. If they are thought to be good, they will get picked.

That's my opinion. Like the Reggie Bush 'scandal'. Nobody cared. Can he play? Yes? Okay, draft him.

You know these NFL types, if you don't score a 20 or above on the wonderlic test than your considered a moron and unable to run a simple route in a playbook.

Posted: **Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:31 am**

kyrv wrote:Nobody cares. If they are thought to be good, they will get picked.

That's my opinion. Like the Reggie Bush 'scandal'. Nobody cared. Can he play? Yes? Okay, draft him.

Getting busted for smoking dope is very different than being involved in a recruiting scandal.

Posted: **Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:31 am**

While getting caught smoking pot is indoubtedly "immature". It shouldn't hurt therir performance on the field.. If Harvin falls all the way to 49 (which I doubt he will) you got to take him..If Tate falls, which I thought this was around the area he should go either way, then there's a decision to be made as recovering from injury and making these decisinos really shows where his priorities are at.

Posted: **Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:19 am**

I'd still take both of them.

#49 - Percy Harvin
#99 - Brandon Tate

Throw in a veteran that gets cut, the development of Hester, and maybe something out of Earl Bennett and I like the WR core very much.

Posted: **Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:22 am**

ChronicKerr wrote:While getting caught smoking pot is indoubtedly "immature". It shouldn't hurt therir performance on the field.. If Harvin falls all the way to 49 (which I doubt he will) you got to take him..If Tate falls, which I thought this was around the area he should go either way, then there's a decision to be made as recovering from injury and making these decisinos really shows where his priorities are at.

Except when they get busted one too many times and never get on the field. I think that's the primary concern with people that are stupid enough to smoke when they know they have a drug test at the combine. I mean, wait? drink a lot of water? I'm not sure. Just don't get busted. That just shows a total lack of judgment.

Posted: **Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:54 am**

The Sheik wrote:It wouldnt make sense to trade down if there were no WRs available. We should trade down if there arent any good S, OL, DL or a very good BPA that dropped.

JA does like to trade down, but I agree that if the big 7 aren't there we wouldn't necessarily trade down. If S, OL, and DL that are worth it or much different from the next group of S, OL, and DL available, than we should.

Posted: **Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:45 pm**

Trading down does make sense if the WRs available at 49 are on the same tier as the ones available, say, at 65. I mean... if we are looking at the 8th or 9th WR at 49... you'd have to be convinced that Iglesias or D. Williams are on a different level than Murphy, Bardin or Massaquoi. To me... all of these guys are in the same team picture.

Of course, if a guy like Nicks, Harvin, Britt or Robiskie falls to 49... take him. Or if those guys are gone but a DE like Michael Johnson falls to 49... call it an early birthday present. Otherwise, pick up a few more mid-round picks to get a second WR, an OL and a prospect at just about every defensive position and target a WR like Murphy, Bardin or Massaquoi who should be available later in the second.

RealGM

PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs

Re: PER FOXSPORTS Harvin and Tate test positive for drugs