The majority of "analysts" on TV, etc. that put out rookie rankings are hardly experts at talent evaluation (not that I am, either). I'd wager that most of them have seen a couple games of a player, but mostly base their personal rankings on 1) how the player is perceived by the community as a whole (ie. Gurley being ranked 1st by damn near everyone) 2) 40 times 3) raw statistics on their college production 4) how closely the player matches the "prototype" of the position. Actually, I should probably put the "prototype" comparison higher in importance, as that is a limitation that even real NFL scouts face. When your job depends on your ability to predict the future success of a guy you've probably never met, you're going to be inclined to not stray too far from things like the "prototype" for a particular position. If you fight for a QB that's 6'5" 240lbs and has a rocket arm and he flames out, the blame generally falls on the player for not meeting their potential. If you fought for a 6' 200lb guy that doesn't pan out, you're more likely to get blamed for going against the "prototype" and the norm. That's how guys like Russell Wilson fall to the third round when anyone with eyes, a brain, game film, and no job to lose could see all of the characteristics you want in a starting QB. So, to summarize, "why don't they have this guy in the top 3?": 1) Group think/laziness 2) Obsession with 40 times 4) Focusing on total #'s rather than trends re: statistics. Most write ups that complain about his fumbling fail to mention his significant improvement. 3) He's on the smaller side of the spectrum of historically successful body types for NFL RBs (though by no means a complete outlier to the norm like a Russell Wilson) I don't "go to the mat" for very many players here on FBGs. The only other one I can think of is Russell Wilson. For most players I haven't seen enough film to feel like I can contradict the conventional wisdom. I try to take in as many different opinions as I can, watch at least a little tape on all of the top prospects and just do my best hoping that things pan out. For Abdullah, though, I have to stick my neck out. I'm virtually certain he will outproduce his draft position and I think he has the potential to be the best fantasy RB in this class. So the analysts in this List suffer from group think/laziness, 40-time obsession, etc, with the exception of Matt Waldman who just so happens to have the same opinion as you. We've already identified Homerism Bias. May I show the court Exhibit B, Confirmation Bias as it relates to your opinion of analysts?