That was my big question. When a player falls so far, you have to wonder if teams knew something outsiders didn't. Every shred of evidence I've seen says that he actually just fell for scheme/need reasons of all the teams picking ahead of the vikings (and perhaps each team having a pet cat ranked above him that other teams didn't value as much, e.g. Long to Bears, Hayden to Raiders). I don't think any team had him as a top 3 pick like outsiders said, but from all indications he was top 15 at least on almost every board. Tweet from Ian Rappaport: "Tried to find out from scouts why Sharrif Floyd fell in the draft. Can't find one reason. He just kinda did. So many like him as a player" If there was a reason a player fell, it would come out at this point. No reason for a team to hide why they didn't like a player. You can scheme around a lot of different things without changing the rest of your personnel. If he doesn't work very well the first year, and he looks like he can be dominant in the right scheme (which you never know for any player you draft, maybe he'll just bust), then yes, you change your personnel. Players like Ratliff and Spencer and Hatcher after this year are either free agents or are being paid an unguaranteed salary at what they're worth. If you realize Floyd can be a dominant player in camp...yes, you change your scheme to fit him.