Category Wide Receiver

Browns WR Travis Benjamin: A 2012 RSP Excerpt

Travis Benjamin will start for the Browns in lieu of Josh Gordon's two-game suspension. Learn why. Photo by Erik Daniel Drost.
Travis Benjamin will start for the Browns in lieu of Josh Gordon’s two-game suspension. Learn why. Photo by Erik Daniel Drost.

The Browns announced today that second-year receiver Travis Benjamin will likely earn the starting job while Josh Gordon serves his two-game suspension. Benjamin was my No.17 receiver in the pre-draft rankings of the 2012 Rookie Scouting Portfolio publication. I like what Benjamin has to offer the Browns long-term and it’s telling that despite the addition of veterans Davone Bess and David Nelson that it the former Miami Hurricane who is the front-runner to start.

Here is my scouting summary on Benjamin from the 2012 RSP.

[youtube=http://youtu.be/hz5P2aaekaM]

There are a lot of good slot receivers in this draft and many of them are more talented than the potential flankers and split ends. Although it would be safer to rank the bigger receivers ahead of these slot players, it would not properly portray the talent spread of this class. Travis Benjamin is one of these slot players.

Benjamin has game-breaking speed and good hands, but one of the better aspects of his play is route running. He does a good job of coming out of breaks on a path that doesn’t veer away from the ball. he often takes strong angles back to the ball while maintaining good route depth and he attacks the football after the break.

He demonstrates skill making adjustments on the football both in tight coverage and vertical routes where the ball is thrown over his head. His route skills make him a versatile threat because he can be used outside as well as in the slot. Although his height and weight is considered small for an outside receiver, DeSean Jackson has similar dimensions.

Benjamin is an experienced return specialist and he’s capable of generating big plays. One of Benjamin’s issues is that he can try too hard to make big plays and not take what’s in front of him in the open field. As a result, he’ll dance too much and not work down hill.

His small frame makes him ineffective as a runner against contact; he won’t break many tackles down field. He also doesn’t generate much pop as a blocker even when demonstrating good technique. He’s a finesse player and he’s best suited for the slot where he won’t have to deal with a lot of press coverage.

Despite the obvious negatives of Benjamin’s size, his game-breaking ability, good-to-great hands, and strong route skills are too much to ignore if matched with an NFL team seeking a slot receiver with game-breaking versatility.

For more analysis of Benjamin, including play-by-play notes, buy the 2012 Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95, which also includes the 2012 Post-Draft Add-On. For analysis of  analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Early `14 Takes: Rutgers WR Brandon Coleman

Who knew? Photo by Eamonn.
Who knew? Photo by Eamonn.

Patriots rookie Mark Harrison might have been the best wide receiver on the 2013 Rutgers squad, but I’m not sure he was the most promising. That title may belong to Brandon Coleman, a 6’6″, 220-pound rising senior. Even if Coleman’s listed height gets exposed as SID-speak (Sports Information Department – also known as athletic department PR) for a true height of 6’4″, the Scarlet Knight receiver has the type of physical skills and raw technical grasp of the position to earn attention from the NFL. Some are already projecting that attention will translate to an early round pick.

I see the reasons why, but I have the luxury that many working for media corporations do not: I don’t have to deliver rankings for the 2014 class before I’ve seen enough of the class to make an informed decision. Next time you think about asking a draft analyst why a certain player was ranked so well heading into a season but by March he has a late-round grade, keep what I said in mind. It won’t always be the case, but it does pay to think critically about the nature of the business and not just about the nature of the player.

I think Coleman is the type of player whose stock could fluctuate greatly in either direction. I have studied two games of Coleman’s thus far and I can tell you that I don’t have enough information to feel comfortable saying where he stacks up. However, I enjoy writing about these murky situations. There’s often something worth sharing that the clear-cut, bottom-line answer doesn’t reveal.

What I see from Coleman that could elevate him to the first round of the 2014 NFL Draft is height, weight, speed, and the ability to adjust to the football and make these adjustments with his hands well away from the football. This 1st-and-10 target with 9:47 in the first quarter from the Rutgers seven is a good example. Coleman is the outside receiver on the twin side of an 11 personnel, 2×1 receiver set.

The Syracuse corner assigned to Coleman is a yard off the line of scrimmage and shaded outside the receiver. Coleman works outside the corner and out runs the defender, earning a step of separation at the 25 and extending his arms to make the catch on a fade route.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc8QWAVE0Nc?start=7rel=0&w=560&h=315]

Watch the replay that follows. Coleman uses his inside arm early in the route to ward off the defender’s attempt to jam him before making a nice adjustment to the ball, fading to the sideline late as the ball arrives. I especially like how Coleman secured the football. He does a nice job of using his hands and fingertips to stab the ball with his outside arm as it arrives over his inside shoulder and then secure the pass to his body with his inside arm.

This is good coordination and fluid athleticism while in the act of veering away from the defender at the last moment. This late move to achieve horizontal separation is a less-discussed aspect of getting open because the emphasis is always about getting behind the defender and that is only part of the equation. Overall, it’s a nice adjustment for a 26-yard gain.

It’s the type of play that falls into Coleman’s wheelhouse as a tall, fast, long-armed receiver. What I want to see Coleman do in 2014 is run routes with hard breaks and make catches after contact when the defender is able to lower his pads and drive through the contact as Coleman is attacking the football. If he can exhibit good technique and consistent production in these two facets of his game, Coleman will earn that high ranking.

Another thing that clouds the draft-day picture for Coleman is quarterback play at Rutgers. Coleman earned nine targets against Syracuse and all but three of those targets were to some degree errant throws that required an adjustment. None of the adjustments I categorized as difficult targets, but they were closer to that end of the spectrum than they should have been:

  • Under thrown deep targets
  • Passes thrown hard and behind the receiver’s break on short routes
  • Late throws that prevent the receiver from running under the ball and away from the defender

An example of what Coleman is missing from the quarterback position is this deep post with 6:46 in the first quarter on 2nd-and-five from a 12 personnel twin right formation.  Coleman is the inside the receiver in this twin set and has a corner at the line of scrimmage shading the receiver to the outside.

The free safety is at the hash about eight yards deep and the strong safety and linebackers are five-six yards off the line of scrimmage in the middle of he field. The strong safety’s depth is the key for Coleman and his quarterback to know that a deep post that breaks right to left will come open behind the strong safety. Watch from 0:25-0:31 below:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc8QWAVE0Nc?start=25rel=0&w=560&h=315]

At first glance, it appears that Coleman runs a deep post but cannot catch up to the pass as the ball lands near the Syracuse 10. Because we only see Coleman’s initial release and then him chasing the ball, one might conclude with this limited information that the receiver could not work past the corner and failed to get separation early enough to run under the ball. Watch the replay focused on the receiver’s route:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc8QWAVE0Nc?start=34rel=0&w=560&h=315]

Coleman does face contact from the corner and he’s also in the path of the free safety over top, but the Rutgers receiver does a nice job of using his outside arm to keep the defender away from his body and at the same time reduces his inside shoulder to avoid contact from the free safety. It’s a nice release against two defenders aiming to slow him down.

I don’t think they do. If you freeze the frame at 0:38 in the video, you’ll see Coleman break inside the hash and have a solid yard of separation inside the corner. If the quarterback leads Coleman across the field, this target has a great chance of resulting in a touchdown. Instead, the quarterback throws the ball over Coleman’s right shoulder and forces an immediate adjustment from the receiver to straighten his break and veer back to the right hash.

Coleman’s adjustment is immediate, but it’s still too late for him to reach the pass. If he quarterback places the ball in the direction of the break, I have little doubt Coleman fails to reach it. One angle indicates the possibility of poor separation against two defenders, another reveals a nice route with a poor throw.

An element of Coleman’s game that requires immediate improvement is ball security. If there’s a takeaway from this Syracuse contest, it’s that Coleman’s long arms are both an asset and liability at this point in his career. This screen pass does a fine job of covering the spectrum of good and bad.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc8QWAVE0Nc?start=65rel=0&w=560&h=315]

The play is a 12 personnel weak side twin set and Coleman is the outside receiver at the Rutgers 35. The beginning of the play is a good example of how Coleman uses is long arms to win the ball and beat an opponent.  He turns to the quarterback, squares his body to the target, and leaps for the ball placed over his head. This target requires good arm extension from Coleman and he makes the catch with both hands.

He secures the ball to his body and turns outside the oncoming corner who is hoping to blow up the play behind the line of scrimmage. Coleman squares the defender and makes a good, quick turn, tucking the ball to his left side and uses his use his right arm to shove the defender away. This move leaves the defender flailing for air. Coleman’s height and strength should make this a common even in his game tape, but thus far I have seen less of it than I thought.

I also like who Coleman looks to the second defensive back inside the lead blocker in the flat. Coleman does a good job working outside and then stopping and turning inside to set up the lead block as they reach the line of scrimmage. But the next decision as a ball carrier is not as clear-cut good or bad. After gaining three yards to the inside, Coleman sees the safety flash over top five yards away and opts to change direction back to the outside behind his lead blocker.

I think for this play it was a bad decision and he should have continued up the flat towards the inside. He had room to squeeze ahead of the trailing defensive end untouched and then take on the safety. This decision probably gets him close to the first down marker.

Instead, Coleman works outside, the corner beats the block, and hits the receiver over top. At the same time, the corner Coleman left on the ground earlier in the play, regains his feet, chases the receiver and delivers a hit  from behind.

Like many long-limb receivers,  ball carriage can be loose at the elbow for Coleman and on this play his elbow is not tight enough to his body. The cornerback hitting Coleman over top punches it loose.  Although Coleman is able to turn back and pounce on the ball, it’s an indication of deficient ball security natural to his body type.

Back to the ball carrying decision in the open field. While I thought it was a bad decision, it’s the type of hindsight analysis that is difficult use when judging the player’s vision. I understand why Coleman reacted to the safety flashing across the field and opted to use his lead block a second time.

At the same time, I see many college receivers try too hard to change direction and allow the pursuit to catch them. I’d rather see more commitment to the intended path and finish with the pads low. I think the best NFL receivers tend to commit down field and keep the momentum forward. Coleman has enough strength to work through glancing blows and run through arm tackles. I’d rather see him use his size to his advantage.

Overall, I see a receiver with similar physical skill sets and limited football environment as Demaryius Thomas and Calvin Johnson when they were at Georgia Tech. I still have more to watch before I can say where he compares along that spectrum of talent, but the stylistic comparisons are evident.

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio.The 2014 RSP will available April 1 and if you pre-order before February 10, you get a 10 percent discount. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2012 – 2014 RSPs at no additional charge and available for download within a week after the NFL Draft. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Camp Watch List: Lions WR Patrick Edwards

Calvin Johnson needs a complement with big-play ability in Detroit. Patrick Edwards has the ability and the opportunity, but does he have the physicality?

Lions veteran Nate Burleson told the media yesterday that second-year receiver Patrick Edwards is poised to emerge as a play maker in Detroit. Edwards entered the league as a 5’9″, 175-pound prospect from the University of Houston with excellent speed, but returning from a freakish injury that he sustained earlier in his college career when he collided with a cart in the back of the end zone at Marshall.

[youtube=http://youtu.be/6MXXki4TtGQ]

I did not rank Edwards in the 2012 RSP because I didn’t want to project him without seeing more as an intermediate and short route runner. More important, players of his dimensions are often overlooked by the NFL or view him in a limited role. I studied Edwards’ 10-catch, 162-yard 3-touchdown performance against Central Florida in 2010 and I was impressed with him.

To underscore this point, I had Edwards in a fantasy league where rosters allowances exceed 55 players over the summer and I acquired Edwards again this morning. I still only recommend looking at Edwards as a summer consideration in larger leagues, but I do understand why Burleson and the Lions like what they see.

The reason I acquired Edwards is a mix of what I saw from him as a Houston Cougar and the fact that Lions seem open to using a diminutive player.  Here’s what football fans should know about this intriguing receiver courtesy of my RSP Scouting Checklist and play-by-play study of the young receiver.

Patrick Edwards’ Report 

Game Info

  • Date: 11/5/2010
  • Opponent: UCF
  • Location: Houston
  • Surface: Grass
  • Climate/Temp: Night-Temperate
  • Score: 33-40
  • Year: Junior

Game Production

  • Targets: 14
  • Missed Targets: 2
  • Drops: 1
  • Catches: 10
  • Receptions After Contact: 2
  • Receptions Yards: 162
  • Yards After Catch: 31
  • TDs: 3

Overall Score: 74.5

Score Explanation: A player scoring in the range of 70-79 points is a rookie with NFL-caliber talent, but likely falls under one of these categories:

  1. He is new to the position and has a wealth of physical talent.
  2. He lacked great coaching and his technical skills detract from his physical talent.
  3. He has strong technical skills, but he’s lacking the NFL-caliber physical talent to develop into a long-term productive starter.
  4. Injuries depressed his overall score.

Players in the upper half of this range often become starters – sometimes stars – but the rate of development is often slower than their peers. A player in the lower half is more likely to develop into a career backup with the ability to produce in spot situations. Fantasy owners will not want to draft these players in traditional leagues, but they do have nice value as mid-to-late round picks in dynasty leagues with deeper rosters.

Even if not drafted to a fantasy roster in his first year, a savvy owner will be aware of this player and acquire him off waivers at the opportune time. Some of these players I didn’t see produce one or two key skills that depressed their scores and I didn’t feel comfortable ranking them. Quality WR and TE prospects tend to score in this range on my checklists because the position has a tougher learning curve than running back and a tendency to lack the caliber of detailed coaching and development from college programs.

Edwards’ Strengths:  Edwards is a smaller receiver with a good burst and consistent hands. He has the burst to get behind cornerbacks and gain yardage in chunks once he’s in the open field. He makes the effort as a blocker and demonstrates good technique with his punch, feet, and hands to sustain blocks as long as his size and strength will allow.

I’m impressed with how he adjusts his vertical routes to use the sideline in coverage. He also understands how work turn contact against the defender during the route to gain additional separation. He’s a downhill runner after the catch. I think his potential is a little higher than his grade because I didn’t see him have to set up routes, work back to the quarterback, or attempt a difficult catch.

Edwards’ Weaknesses: Edwards is a short and light player for the position by NFL standards. Although he makes the effort as a blocker he doesn’t have the strength to consistently sustain blocks. He isn’t a huge factor after the catch in tight coverage because he lacks the strength to generate a push after the initial contact.

Edwards catches the ball with his hands, but he didn’t consistently get his hands away from his body to make plays at the first window of opportunity to snare the football. His tendency to catch the ball at the later windows of opportunity rather than the earlier windows is a concern. He dropped a sideline curl late in the game that could have put Houston in scoring position, because he didn’t use his hands to attack the football.

I thought Edwards was too tentative of a decision maker in the open field and on designed runs. If his first option isn’t available he doesn’t use enough of his quickness and lateral agility to create openings and he doesn’t take away angles of defenders when they are close to him.

Although there were some route techniques I didn’t get to see due to the flow of the game, even if Edwards is adept at these things I don’t see him becoming anything more than a complementary receiver in multiple receiver sets at the NFL level. He simply lacks the physicality and lateral agility to earn a starting role in the NFL.

You can download the rest of the PDF checklist and play-by-play notes here: Patrick Edwards

NFL Outlook: Edwards has the speed and ball-tracking ability to produce in a spread offense like Detroit. I can see how the Lions will primarily use him in the slot opposite the tight end and exploit the middle of a defense on deep seam routes, corner routes, and crosses. Because safeties have to respect Calvin Johnson, there is ample opportunity for Edwards to generate big plays. I also believe Edwards adjusts to the ball well enough to work the perimeter in certain defensive looks.

If Edwards demonstrates improvement with attacking the football, I think he can become a reliable weapon in the Lions offense as the third option in the passing game. He is capable of providing a big-play element in the slot where he won’t face press coverage that often and will eliminate some concerns about his size. However, the size factor remains a concern because the physical nature of the game can wear down a 175-pound player.

Until there’s more to see, I have to project Edwards as a boom-bust producer if he sees the field. However, there are factors to watch that could elevate his potential:

  • Additional muscle/weight to handle the NFL game inside the hash marks 
  • Sharp route recognition and rapport with Matthew Stafford
  • Decisive and effective skill shedding press coverage if used outside

Skill-wise, Edwards is worth the intrigue. Stay tuned to see if physically he can make the cut.

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Futures: WR Cordarrelle Patterson, Playmaker

Patterson may not be a Playmaker according to Football Outsider's score, but he is one in my book. Photo by Nashville Corps.
Photo by Nashville Corps.

Cordarrelle Patterson may not be a playmaker according to Football Outsider’s Playmaker Score, but the elusive receiver with skills as a receiver that many top prospects-turned-busts lacked is worth the risk in my book. Find out where I think the Combine, production, and film study have a place in this discussion of this versatile, athletic, wildcard.

When it comes to evaluating football talent, I believe analytics can be a part of the conversation. The Playmaker Score is a good example.

I think the Playmaker Score is a nice attempt at data mining where Vince Verhei has reverse-engineered a formula with the hope of developing a successful model to predict future results. The score does enough to have value in discussions about specific wide receiver prospects, but Playmaker is not the entire conversation.

I believe player evaluation can be likened to a three-legged, wooden table:

  • Technical skill
  • College production
  • Athleticism

If one of these legs is missing or not factored into an evaluation enough, the table doesn’t function as it should. The fourth factor is character, but I think it’s best considered as liquid -– either it enhances, like a wood stain, or degrades, like water spot.

Scouting is such a hit-or-miss process because no one has figured out a way to consistently make all three legs of the table functional for every player evaluation. Nor can they predict if the player’s character will enhance or ruin the “table.”

The Playmaker Score has a grim outlook for this group of wide receivers. In contrast, many scouts and analysts tout the position as deep and talented. Before going any further, here is Vince’s overview of Playmaker:

When we first devised our Playmaker Score projection system to predict NFL success for wide receivers, we looked at individual collegiate production only. A second version added team statistics to account for players who might have seen their numbers inflated by prolific passing offenses. This year, with Playmaker Score 3.0, we’ve added Combine data for the first time. Now we’re measuring not just football skills, but raw physical talent.

We’ve made one other fundamental change to Playmaker Score, and it involves the way collegiate data is handled. In the past, using career totals considerably underrated those players who were so spectacular that they skipped their senior seasons and entered the draft early, while using per-game numbers depressed the ratings for guys who had lots of one- and zero-catch games as freshmen and sophomores before exploding as juniors and seniors. We tried to get around this by using a mix of career totals and per-game data, but the results were a little confusing and somewhat illogical. So we’ve gone back to the drawing board, and we’re now using the numbers from each player’s best season. This makes the most sense because it rewards the biggest stars at the expense of more mediocre players who pad their statistics with multiple starting seasons. Obviously, there’s now a danger of overestimating one-year wonders, but we’re working on some methods to correct for that in the future.

We checked the numbers for every receiver drafted from 2005 to 2009, a group of 149 players. That gave us five years’ worth of recent history, while giving every player at least three years to break out in the NFL. For each player, we determined their NFL success by dividing their career receiving yardage by the number of seasons that had passed since, whether they were still in the league or not. We also compared their Combine numbers to their NFL statistics and checked which were most accurate when it came to predicting NFL success.

Playmaker Score addresses the basic question of how good the quarterback is when it comes to giving his receiver opportunities for production. However, I think zeroing in on passes per game as a factor makes Playmaker Score a slave to a specific kind of receiver production that doesn’t tell the entire story.

Problems Endemic to Football Evaluation

Playmaker does not fully address all the dimensions of production that can make a wide receiver a playmaker. Yards after catch is a significant example, although not a purposeful oversight. The staff here at Football Outsiders would love to have this data, but the college game does not supply it in an easily available format.

However, this is part of the reason why I think the revised 2011 Playmaker Scores missed on A.J. Green (227 points) and Randall Cobb (136 points), but it liked Jonathan Baldwin (464 points) and Torrey Smith (448 points). I think Baldwin and Smith played in offenses that were suited to what Playmaker Score rewards players for: red-zone production and longer plays from pitch-to-catch. It doesn’t factor in ball carrying of any sort, and that’s part of what it missed about Green and Cobb.

I liked Smith’s prospects, but I wasn’t high on Baldwin. One of the reasons reflects what is missing from Playmaker: it is a formula based on production and athleticism (as measured by certain sprints and jumps, at least) but it doesn’t account for technical skill.

However, I’m jumping the gun on technique. The athleticism factor also requires more discussion.

The way Playmaker uses Combine data is a problem endemic to the area of football evaluation. I believe the primary function of the Combine should first be to determine which players have the baseline speed, strength, quickness, and size to perform at an NFL level. Instead, there is too much emphasis placed on stronger-faster-higher-longer.

Playmaker’s inclusion of Combine measurements assumes that the better (certain) Combine numbers, the better the player. I think most people make this assumption, and it’s easy to do: Some people believe Calvin Johnson is a better player than Dez Bryant because he jumps higher, runs faster, and does it in a bigger body.

Athleticism is a baseline requirement, but there is a point where a player’s value can be inaccurately inflated or depressed because technical skill or capacity to learn the game isn’t properly accounted for. To give examples, we have A.J. Green on one hand, and Robert Meachem on the other.

Green had actually scored high in the previous version of Playmaker (v2.0) but does not fare well in the current version because of the Combine metrics. His NFL Combine metrics were NFL-quality, but not stellar. Yet what the formula misses, game observation catches: aplayer who gets the most from his athleticism because he integrates his physical and technical skill sets at a high level to make plays.

Meachem, on the other hand, was a fast prospect, but he couldn’t catch the ball with his hands away from his body. I admired his efforts as a senior at Tennessee to extend his arms to the football, but he often had to revert to a trap technique.

One example I recall was a game in Tennessee against LSU. Meachem dropped three passes in the first quarter alone while trying to use proper hands technique. He then reverted to a trap technique for the rest of the game.

While I admired Meachem for trying, some technical skills are more difficult to learn at this stage of football than others. Receivers who don’t make receptions with their hands away from their frames are unlikely to acquire these skills when they transition to the pro game.

This issue is what I would term a fatal error. Difficulty securing the ball after contact from a defender during the act of the reception can also be a fatal error when it comes to evaluating the technical skill potential of a prospect.

Although Meachem eventually made some strides to improve this skill, he has never been comfortable enough to make a complete transition. He has not become the impact player commensurate with his first-round grade. These two flaws were why I didn’t like Meachem’s chances of doing that, and he proved me right.

As for other examples from 2011, I loved Green (my No. 1 rated receiver in 2011), Randall Cobb (No. 3) and Torrey Smith (No. 5). In contrast, Jonathan Baldwin (No.13) was an overrated commodity in my book. Green, Cobb and Smith demonstrated excellent skill versus contact and both Green and Cobb were strong players after the catch. Baldwin’s hands techniques were spotty and his technique and conceptual execution of routes were inconsistentat best.

I think a better way to view measures of athleticism is to, as I said, first assess if it meets the baseline requirements to play in the NFL. Then assess if that player also meets baselines for skill level/capacity to learn the skills.

Once an evaluator establishes that the prospect has the basic tools, I think the fast-stronger-longer-higher quality of the Combine measurements become a refining characteristic to the evaluation process. The same goes for productivity metrics.

The problem is that we want to throw these tools into the evaluation process at a premature stage. As a result, the data can often overestimate (or underestimate) the value of players.

Cordarrelle Patterson is a good example . . .  Read the rest at Football Outsiders

Boiler Room Series: USC WR Robert Woods

Woods game has a quiet intensity. See below.
Woods game has a quiet intensity. See below.

Compared to his peers in this 2013 wide receiver draft class, Robert Woods has a “quiet game.” The USC Trojan is an average-sized receiver with good quickness, but his measurements as an athlete is nothing special. Yet, Woods is one of the best prospects at his position – a wide receiver class that I contend is a deep one.

I think where we often miss with prospect evaluation – whether you’re a scout, media, proponent of data mining/analytics , or a fan – is the notion that stronger-faster-quicker-taller is better. I have been gradually arriving at the perspective that Combine measurements are best used as a baseline: Does the player have the minimum strength-speed-quickness-size to compete in the NFL?

The level of these qualities only come into play once you can feel comfortable with the conceptual and technical promise of this player at his position. Otherwise, you just have a tall, strong, fast, and quick player trying to play his position and failing in dramatic fashion.

Robert Woods may have a quiet game as an athlete but just like music, some of the most stirring moments are the quietest.

A series I started this year at the RSP blog is The Boiler RoomOne of the challenges involved with player analysis is to be succinct with delivering the goods. As the author of an annual tome, I’m often a spectacular failure in this respect.

Even so, I will study a prospect and see a play unfold that does a great job of encapsulating that player’s skills. When I witness these moments, I try to imagine if I would include this play as part of a cut-up of highlights for a draft show at a major network or if I was working for an NFL organization creating cut-ups for a personnel director. Unlike the No-Huddle Series, The Boiler Room is focused on prospects I expect to be drafted, and often before the fourth round.

It’s incredibly difficult to boil down any player with just one play. Yet, if I need a play to add to the highlight reel that will help a team make a decision where to slot Robert Woods on its board, this is my nomination. Watch just the first five seconds and pause it.

[youtube=http://youtu.be/TiihTyOR9VU]

At first glance, this is garden-variety hitch under a defender’s cushion, which Woods breaks in conjunction with Matt Barkley’s throw based on a presnap read of the defender’s position. Woods does a good job driving off the line with his pads over his knees to force the cornerback to account for a deeper route before the receiver stops his route well under the defender at the first-down marker. The makes the catch falling towards the boundary after taking a hit from the defender.

It’s a good play, but it’s quietly a far more impressive display of athleticism than a tape measure or stopwatch can capture.

WoodsA1

Woods takes an outside release and drives off the line as the cornerback peeks into the backfield. Woods stops and turns back to the quarterback once he gets depth beyond the first-down marker, but he could have made a more dramatic change of direction by sinking his hips and making a more violent plant of the front leg at the top of his stem.

WoodsA2

Although his break isn’t one that will earn high marks from the Russian, Chinese, Japanese, French, British, Polish-Philadelphian (Jaworski), or the Fort Lauderdale (Irvin) judges, playing wide receiver is only like figure skating in the respect that both range of athlete own their share of drama. In football, there are times where it doesn’t matter if technique is sloppy; if the job gets done then everybody is happy.

WoodsA3

Woods makes his break and rather than breaking to the ball, he retreats a step to the sideline. If Matt Barkley intends to throw the ball to Woods’ outside shoulder, this is an effective break to gain horizontal separation on the corner and maintain the depth of his route.

WoodsA4

I may not love his body positioning as he waits for the ball, but a common thing Woods does well is get his shoulders square to the ball and his hands away from his body to make the catch. I believe many coaches would prefer to see Woods attack this ball from his break rather than wait for it so he can avoid any possibility of the corner jumping the route. In this case, Woods’ body does not provide a good barrier to the football if the corner got a better jump.

Another common aspect to Woods’ game as a pass catcher is that he’ll often make a slight adjustment as he makes the catch to turn his body to shield the defender as he’s making the reception.

WoodsA5

WoodsA6

Just before Woods gets hit, the receiver turns his hip towards the oncoming defender. The contact from the defender is hard enough that Woods cannot secure the ball to his chest. This is where the first angle of the video doesn’t reveal the difficulty of this reception.

WoodsA7

As Woods falls towards the sideline, he manages to plant his left arm on the ground while holding the ball behind his head.

WoodsA8

Woods finishes the play with his right arm pinning the ball behind his head, turning to the side to maintain possession of the ball. Also note the side that Woods turns to after he hits the ground.

WoodsA9

Why would Woods turn to this side? Was it luck or quick thinking? I believe Woods turned to this side because if he turned to the opposite gravity sends the ball away from his finger tips and if he loses his grip there’s nothing else he can do to secure the ball. But the direction Woods turns allows him to us his forearm as support if the ball has any movement before he reaches the sideline. He also does a good job of producing the ball with control after the catch to sell the reception.

WoodsA10

Some of you may note that if the ball moves in the NFL at this point, it’s not a catch. This is true, but the fact that Woods reacts this quickly and intelligently to an unusual situation is something we commonly see with good NFL starters and I would advise not to write it off as luck.

This play alone is not an indicator of Woods becoming a good NFL starter, but you know I have trouble just showing one play – take a look at this highlight package of plays as a freshman against Stanford. Many of them are against No.9 – a cornerback by the name of Richard Sherman.

[youtube=http://youtu.be/JGDr-e3E_iE]

There are enough plays like this one from the Boiler Room and games like the YouTube package above that Woods’ portfolio shows a knack for making adjustments in tight coverage. Plays like these are more routine for starters in the professional ranks. Woods’ hand-eye coordination, spatial awareness, and comfort with physical play may not broadcast at a high volume, but the intensity of the message is as strong as any receiver in this class.

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge a week after the NFL Draft. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

No-Huddle Series: Iowa WR Keenan Davis

If Davis can hold onto the ball after the catch as well as he holds onto after contact in the act of the reception, he could have a nice NFL career. Photo by Go Iowa State.
If Davis can hold onto the ball after the catch as well as he holds onto after contact in the act of the reception, he could have a nice NFL career. Photo by Go Iowa State.

What if I told you Keenan Davis is a safer pick than Tavon Austin? I know, I can’t even say it with a straight face. Although an attention-getting joke, don’t laugh off Davis’ game. The 6’2″, 216-pound Iowa receiver is a skillful player whose game fits with a greater variety of NFL offensive styles than the West Virginia hybrid.

Austin is a scheme-dependent player at this stage of the NFL’s evolutionary cycle. This is not a knock on his skills as it is a statement about smaller players with diverse skill sets. At this point, an NFL team will have to use him from the slot or the backfield to maximize his statistical upside. I think it is unlikely that Austin has the physical dimensions to become a full-time outside receiver – the most important being a decent, but not fantastic vertical leap of 32 inches.

If Austin had Davis’ 38-inch vertical I’d be more inclined to say the West Virginia star has Steve Smith-like potential. Of course, no one is Steve Smith. If there was one guy I wanted to take for the RSPWP2 to pair with Carson Palmer it was the Carolina receiver. He’s nearing the final years of his career, but he’s as ferocious a receiver as I have seen play.

Davis is some ferocity to his game. Combine that with 4.48-speed (40-yard dash), and I think we’re looking at a player who not only can make an NFL team and contribute in four- or five-receiver sets early in his career, but he has the upside to develop into a  starter on the outside.

Like Connecticut tight end Ryan Griffin, Davis is a good player in a draft class stocked with talent at his position who can thrive in most NFL systems because he plays a physical brand of football.

Over the Middle

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGBVbPgaGgY&start=13rel=0&w=560&h=315]

On this 3rd-and-seven play against Pittsburgh, Davis is the outside receiver on the twin side of the formation working off press coverage to the middle of the field. Many receivers get distracted with contact on quick-hitting passes, but not Davis. The replay shows Davis using his outside arm to ward off the corner before turning to make a nice adjustment on a high throw in the middle of the field.

Best yet, Davis makes a money catch, taking a shoulder from a linebacker after he exposes his body to the interior defender and still hangs onto the ball.  These are must-plays for offenses to sustain drives. They are also difficult plays to make, which is one of the reasons why spreading the field and going to smaller, quicker athletes is a trend – if you can’t find one of these tough guys you better find receivers defenders have difficulty laying a finger on.

On the Perimeter

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGBVbPgaGgY&start=83rel=0&w=560&h=315]

What I like about this catch is that Davis doesn’t make his best leap towards the ball, which gives the cornerback a chance to play the ball. Although the defender misses his attempt to swat the pass, Davis still manages to snare the ball in traffic while airborne and falling towards the boundary. Focus is a consistent theme in Davis’ game and I value this from a receiver because tight coverage, impending hits, leaving one’s feet for the ball, or working routes near the boundary present a lot of distractions from the primary mission: catching the football.

A bonus is the hand strength to maintain possession despite the cornerback’s attempts to pry the ball loose on the way to the ground. There’s a toughness to Davis’ game that I think will earn him a roster spot and give him a chance to refine his game.

“Bad-Ball” Receiver

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGBVbPgaGgY&start=213 rel=0&w=560&h=315]

The replay of his slant reveals how Davis has to reach to his back shoulder in tight coverage to make a play on the ball before taking another hit. This isn’t a dramatic adjustment, but I see wide receivers at every level drop this kind minor adjustment all the time.

Vertical Route

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Gg22Y28AjQ&start=141rel=0&w=560&h=315]

This 2nd-and-26 go-route against single, press coverage is another nice example of Davis’ skill at adjusting to the ball while working off contact. Although I have seen Davis drop his share of passes after contact, there are generally two types of plays where this happens:

  1. High passes where the defender has position to knock the ball loose as Davis extends for the target (and generally bad ball location).
  2. Just after Davis makes the reception and he’s running down field without the ball secured to his body.

Play No.2 is better defined as a fumble and I predict if Davis doesn’t make a squad it will have to do with him continuing to display poor ball security (a product of effort you like to see, but not to the detriment of losing possession for the offense).

On this play, Davis manages to work outside the corner and maintain his balance after some hand fighting with the ball in the air to make a diving play with his back to the quarterback.  As you see, focus and skill after contact is the line that connects these plays. Davis isn’t an exciting prospect compared to most of the receivers I have in my top 20 at the position, but he’s a workmanlike player whose quarterback wasn’t adept at pinpoint ball location.

If Davis shores up the ball security issues and continues to demonstrate skill after contact, he has a chance to become a good pro.

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Boiler Room: Oregon St. WR Markus Wheaton

My best three skill players at the Senior Bowl? Markus Wheaton, Quinton Patton, and Tyler Wilson would have earned my votes. Photo by John Martinez Pavliga.
NFL.com/Rotoworld’s Josh Norris had me pegged when he said last fall that Markus Wheaton was my kind of player. Photo by John Martinez Pavliga.

Wheaton is my favorite wide receiver in this draft. There are dozens of plays I’d like to show you and then there’s another dozen of one-on-one moments where he shined against a good class of corners at the Senior Bowl practices. He might not be the best receiver in this class, but I think he’s up there and I’m going to show you why.

A series I started this year at the RSP blog is The Boiler RoomOne of the challenges involved with player analysis is to be succinct with delivering the goods. As the author of an annual tome, I’m often a spectacular failure in this respect.

Even so, I will study a prospect and see a play unfold that does a great job of encapsulating that player’s skills. When I witness these moments, I try to imagine if I would include this play as part of a cut-up of highlights for a draft show at a major network or if I was working for an NFL organization creating cut-ups for a personnel director. Unlike the No-Huddle Series, The Boiler Room is focused on prospects I expect to be drafted, and often before the fourth round.

It’s incredibly difficult to boil down any player with just one play. Yet, if I need a play to add to the highlight reel that will help a team make a decision where to slot Markus Wheaton on its board, this is my nomination despite the play after this one on the video is a beautiful touchdown just inside the end line (make sure to watch it).

Wheaton vs. UCLA 

This target displays just about everything you want to see from a vertical threat because it begins with single coverage and ends with safety help that was good enough to derail a reception, but didn’t. I like physical players – it’s my old, AFC Central roots – and “physical” play is as much about taking the licks and making the play as dishing them out. Wheaton is small, but he plays like he owns you.

Oregon State is in a standard 11 personnel, 1×2 receiver set with Wheaton at the top of the screen with a cornerback pressing the line of scrimmage. The UCLA defense has both corners tight and seven defenders at the line threatening blitz. The strong safety is in the flat and accounting for the slot receiver on the twin side of the Oregon State formation. Here is the play in its entirety and then I’ll break it down with stills.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIs0pFOkR74&start=79rel=0&w=560&h=315]

It’s a nice, garden-variety NFL catch that a player like Domenik Hixon makes all the time.  So why choose it if a reserve NFL wide receiver can make it? For starters, Hixon is a deceptive player. Not all receivers make this play – especially vertical talents with Wheaton’s speed. Many of these players are one-dimensional and get drafted on the promise that they can become fully formed weapons. While not completely one-dimensional, Marquise Goodwin is closer to this negative characterization of his game than Wheaton.

The first thing I like about this play is Wheaton’s willingness to use his hands as the aggressor and to own his space. He doesn’t get jammed at the beginning of the play, but once the receiver works outside the corner that is when the physical play begins.

MWA1Wheaton’s competition turns outside to use his hands, but it is Wheaton who establishes first contact with his inside arm. The intent of this contact is to maintain his space between the flat at the sideline. A receiver who allows the defender to bump him outside creates a narrower target for the quarterback to throw the fade. While I could have shown you some nice hand work from Wheaton in other highlights, I think this aspect of vertical routes is the one that holds back many fast, strong, and stick-fingered prospects.

Wheaton may get bumped off course early in his NFL career because an NFL veteran throws something at him that he didn’t anticipate, but at least I know he understands what he’s supposed to do and how to execute it on the field. If a players illustrates these skills at the college game and has the physical prowess to hang with NFL athletes then I’m optimistic of his chances of making a successful transition.

MWA2Despite some hand fighting, Wheaton has given up little if any horizontal space, but his speed is good enough to gain separation even while engaged in contact and unable to pump both arms or drive down field with his shoulders over his knees.

MWA3As Wheaton lengthens his vertical separation, I especially like that his hands remain low as he uses his eyes to track the ball. Despite having a step on the defender his hands are tipping off how close the ball in its trajectory to the receiver. This is another trick of the trade the separates that raw speedster who impresses fans enamored with stopwatch times from true NFL vertical threats with real potential for a lasting career as a starter.

MWA4

Not two steps later, Wheaton turns to the ball and extends his arms. Although he catches the ball with his hands on most targets, I have heard some criticisms that Wheaton should extend his arms more to attack the ball. This play is a good example. However, I believe the fact that he’s good at hiding his intentions to make a play on the ball until the last moment often compensates. It doesn’t mean this criticism is invalid, but I do believe in many cases it’s less of a concern.

MWA5Note how Wheaton has the luxury of horizontal space to bend away from the defender to make the catch. I cannot emphasize enough how important it is for a receiver to leave space between him and the sideline to make these adjustments. Most games involve establishing and maintaining position and this is just one of countless examples in football.

MW A6Wheaton brings the ball from his helmet to his side and demonstrates good ball security as the cornerback has nothing to grab but the receiver’s forearm. The best hope for UCLA’s defense to dislodge the football is from the safety’s impending hit.

MWA7

No dice. It doesn’t appear this photo reveals much, but take a closer look at the receiver’s feet. The way Wheaton’s feet are pointed you can see that he has turned his body away from the incoming contact so the hit arrives at the receiver’s back rather than his arm. To demonstrate the skill to protect his body and the ball after making an athletic adjustment on a vertical route like this takes awareness and fluidity.

I value these little things about Wheaton’s game and it’s these small details that could make a big difference when he gets to the NFL.

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

The Elusiveness Factor: Patterson-Austin-Woods By Nick Whalen

Who is more elusive, Cordarrelle Patterson or Tavon Austin? Photo by Nashville Corps.
Who is more elusive, Cordarrelle Patterson or Tavon Austin? Photo by Nashville Corps.

If you’re an NFL Draft junkie, this time of year feels like the weeks of anticipation leading to Christmas Day.  When I was a kid, recordings of previous NFL Drafts were my “cartoons before bedtime,” before this blessed event that always brought a sense of euphoria when it finally arrived.

I’m not normal.

But I seek solace in the fact that many of you know what I mean.  The 2013 NFL Draft has two bright, shiny toys in Cordarrelle Patterson and Tavon Austin. Yet like some of the most popular toys kids want for Christmas, they present some risks that are polarizing.

I’m not the Consumer Reports of college prospects. If you want a safety assessment regarding the risk of investing in them, go somewhere else. I want to explore what they do best: making collegiate defenders look silly trying to corral them in when they had the ball.

So for the past few weeks, I dove into film study that took more time than I feel comfortable divulging.  My fiancé literally thinks I’m nuts, but this is her first NFL Draft with me – so better she know now what she’s getting into. This piece has enough data collection on the back end that it could blow Mel Kiper so far back that he’d have no more product left in his hair.

Since Patterson and Austin are so good at making defenders miss, I wanted a third prospect to study that is considered an elusive receiver in the normal sense of the word. I chose Robert Woods. Here are the number of games and plays I watched of each player.*

  • Cordarrelle Patterson: 12 games/67 plays
  • Tavon Austin: 12 games/172 plays
  • Robert Woods: 15 games/138 plays

*Patterson and Austin’s games are from the 2012 season. Woods’ games were from 2011 and 2012 to match Austin’s sample size.

Plays like this one, where Woods has to make a diving effort and drops to the ground were among those discounted in Whalen's analysis. Photo by Neon Tommy.
Plays like this one, where Woods has to make a diving effort and drops to the ground were among those discounted in Whalen’s analysis. Photo by Neon Tommy.

In order to get as accurate of an assessment as I could, I opted to dismiss plays from my sample that put the player in a situation where he had no chance to make a defender miss.  These six types of plays didn’t count in my study (abbreviations in parenthesis for tables below):

  • Catching a touchdown in the end zone (TD-End).
  • Untouched/easy path to the end zone (TD-Easy).
  • Tackled by the defender upon making a reception (T/Rec).
  • Falling catch (F/Rec)
  • Falling out of bounds, slipping, or diving to the ground while making the catch near sideline (Side).
  • Exiting the boundary to preserve the clock in the appropriate game situation (Exit).
  • Designed runs from the backfield between the tackles (Int).

I also opted to dismiss Tavon Austin’s interior running plays when used from the backfield.  This way I could focus on all three players as ball carriers from the receiver position (jet sweeps, end-arounds, and reverses). “Total D” in the table is the number of plays dismissed from the analysis, which is subtracted from the “Watched” column to generate the Adjusted Total.

Name

TD-End

TD-Easy

T/Rec

F/Rec

Side

Exit

Int.

Total D

Watched

Adj. Total

Patterson

6

1

5

1

11

1

0

25

67

42

Austin

4

1

18

5

1

0

38

67

172

105

Woods

20

1

31

13

7

0

0

72

138

66

Woods has a very high number of catches where he was tackled during the catch reception or he fell upon making the catch.  This has to do with his combination of athleticism, the type of targets thrown his way and his lack of separation from defenders in some of these situations.

I counted players that were within a three-yard radius with a legitimate chance of making a tackle.

Clearly there is some subjectivity to how I did this, but I was as uniform with my process as I could:

  • If the defender was three yards behind the ball carrier, he’s not counted as a tackle attempt.
  • If the defender was three yards ahead and with no blocker in his way, I counted it as an attempt.
  • If a defender is being blocked, it had to be a distance of less than half a man and he had to have a true shot to attempt an arm on the ball carrier.

I used this data to calculate elusiveness on pass plays, run plays, punt returns, kick returns, and total plays.

Pass Plays

Name

Eluded

Receptions

Pct.

Patterson

27

16

169%

Austin

25

44

57%

Woods

24

66

36%

I didn’t expect Woods to be on par with Patterson or Austin, but for Patterson to have eluded more defenders on a fraction of the receptions that either Austin or Woods had is a fascinating number to see. It leaves one to wonder how much these numbers reflect the style or location of the play or if Patterson’s style of running after the catch is that much more efficient at making defenders miss.

Run Plays

Name

Eluded

Runs

Pct.

Patterson

23

17

135%

Austin

20

29

69%

Woods

3

2

150%

The number of Patterson’s defenders who missed him equals the total of Austin and Woods combined. Not much of a sample for Woods. For those of you interested in the outcome of Austin’s interior running plays, the Mountaineer made 24 defenders miss on 38 runs between the tackles that qualified.

Punt Returns

Name

Eluded

Returns

Pct.

Patterson

7

2

350%

Austin

27

8

338%

Woods

8

7

114%

Punt returns have been regarded as one of the easiest situations where a ball carrier can make a defender miss and the numbers across the board appear to reflect this notion.

Kick Returns

Name

Eluded

Returns

Pct.

Patterson

15

7

214%

Austin

17

24

71%

Woods

3

2

150%

 The sample size for Woods is too small to draw any reasonable conclusions. It is fascinating how much higher Patterson scores compared to Austin.

Total Plays

Name

Eluded

Eluded/Play

Pct.

Patterson

72

42

171%

Austin

89

105

85%

Woods

38

77

45%

The difference in how efficient these three players are with making defenders miss is startling. It’s hard to believe Austin and Woods combined still made fewer defenders miss than Patterson on a percentage-per-play basis.

Next let’s examine how these receivers made defenders miss.

  • Pressure cut: Fake one way and goes another while maintaining forward momentum.
  • Jump cut: Jumps to a side to avoid defender, but no forward momentum.
  • Speed:  Runs by a defender, outruns pursuit angle, or runs around defender.
  • Power: Runs through a contact tackle attempt by moving forward through defender.
  • Spin: Runs through contact or no-contact tackle attempt by spinning around defender.
  • Hurdle: Jumps over a defenders tackle attempt

On many plays I watched, these receivers used multiple methods in combination to make a defender miss them.  I selected the one method each used that was the biggest factor.

“Power,” may seem like it shouldn’t belong on this list, but I think it’s important to note plays where the ball carrier diminished a defender’s position to reduce the contact to a glancing blow, an arm tackle, or the runner attacked first and made contact with an off-balance defender.

Here are the types of moves this trio of receivers used to make defenders miss tackles.

Pass

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

6

5

3

2

1

10

27

Austin

6

5

7

3

0

4

25

Woods

4

4

7

2

0

7

24

The number of plays where Patterson and Woods bounced off a glancing blow from a defender matches what one might expect from their size compared to Austin. However, Patterson’s repertoire and frequency of other moves is as prolific in every way with the exception of the speed route.

This just speculation, but from what I have seen, Patterson was often targeted in tighter coverage than the likes of Austin. The slot receiver was a frequent target on crossing routes where the speed component of elusiveness would come into play. In contrast, Patterson played in a system where he ran slants, fades, and other perimeter routes breaking back to the quarterback, which forced him to run through glancing shots. Woods, a receiver in a west coast offense, ran a lot of crosses, fades, and slants and the variety of moves falls between Austin and Patterson.

Run

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

7

9

4

0

0

3

23

Austin

3

7

6

0

0

4

20

Woods

3

0

0

0

0

0

3

The use of power in the run game was slightly in favor of Austin. This might be explained by the frequency the West Virginia used Austin as a runner, making the plays a common part of every series so defenses were in better position to force contact.

Punt

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

2

5

0

0

0

0

7

Austin

5

3

15

3

0

1

27

Woods

0

4

3

1

0

0

8

Kick

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

9

2

3

0

0

1

15

Austin

5

1

8

0

0

3

17

Woods

1

0

1

0

1

0

3

It’s no surprise that the nature of a punt return would allow for more jump cuts and spin moves than a kick off.

Total Touches

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

24

16

10

2

1

19

72

Austin

19

16

36

6

0

12

89

Woods

8

8

11

3

1

7

38

Considering what I speculated about the type of moves these players use, I also examined the depth of the zone where these players made receptions:

  • Short: Anything caught from behind the line of scrimmage to 7 yards.
  • Intermediate: Receptions greater than 7 yards but less than 20 yards.
  • Deep: 20 yards or more.

For example, if a player advances a reception from the 5 yard line to the 40 yard line, it will still be counted as a short reception.

Range of Field Where Plays Began

Name

Short

Int.

Deep

Total

Patterson

10

6

0

16

Austin

42

3

1

46

Woods

58

3

2

63

Nothing unexpected thus far, the most opportunity to elude a defender after the catch occurs in the zones of the field with the highest concentration of defenders.

Types of Moves by Range of Field – Short Zone

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

3

4

1

0

0

4

12

Austin

6

5

5

3

0

3

22

Woods

4

4

6

1

0

7

22

The sample for Patterson is roughly half that of his peers, but it appears he leans more on power and jump cuts than Austin in the short range of the field. Again, is this due to style or play? A screen pass or slant would call for more jump cuts than a crossing route. It would also include more power moves.

Types of Moves by Range of Field – Intermediate Zone

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

3

1

2

2

1

6

15

Austin

0

0

2

0

0

0

2

Woods

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

One of the reasons for the difference in elusiveness appears to be use. Austin’s opportunity to make plays in the open field on intermediate routes was limited in this 12-game sample. Woods’ was non-existent. Based on observation, Woods’ intermediate plays tend to be outs, comebacks, corner routes, or fades with either tight coverage or the catch hugging the sideline.

Still, Patterson has had some of these style routes and demonstrated a level of athleticism above and beyond Woods to generate additional yards –not enough to make this a definitive explanation for the difference in this sample, but something to think about.

Types of Moves by Range of Field – Deep Zone

Name

Pressure

Jump

Speed

Spin

Hurdle

Power

Total

Patterson

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Austin

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

Woods

0

0

1

1

0

0

2

When successful, deep zone plays offer fewer defenders to beat. At the same time deep plays often require adjustments that either result in an unchallenged run to the end zone or the play is down after the catch due to the adjustment or tight coverage.

Woods may lack the elusiveness factor of Patterson and Austin, but his game translates best to the widest range of NFL teams. Photo by Neon Tommy.
Woods may lack the elusiveness factor of Patterson and Austin, but his game translates best to the widest range of NFL teams. Photo by Neon Tommy.

Takeaway

Patterson has made more defenders miss on fewer plays than Austin and Woods. To the naked eye, the Tennessee wide receiver’s open field skills are at a level above the rest of the wide receiver class. It also appears this way when looking at it from this perspective. However, tracking these players in this fashion has also revealed that the type of plays used have a significant influence on the types of moves these players employ and likely the success.

It also raises questions about the type of moves that will or won’t work against NFL defenses. Patterson’s is neither as polished as Woods nor as versatile as Austin. It means that one of two things will have to happen for Patterson to enjoy similar success in the NFL:

  1. Patterson will need to sharpen his route running.
  2. His seemingly other-worldly, open-field skills at the college level will have to translate to the NFL.

All three receivers are fine NFL prospects. This breakdown goes to show that each player has a stylistic fingerprint. Some of these styles may or may not work in the NFL. Others may work best in a specific scheme. Then there are some that have a chance to work regardless of the offense.

Woods may not make as many players miss as Austin or Patterson, but his skill as a route runner and pass catcher should make him a fit in any NFL system. Woods’ big plays come from the catch itself more often than after it.

Austin might show us a facet of his game that wasn’t used much at West Virginia, but it’s more likely that he’ll be a short-to-intermediate threat whose big plays come after the catch. It means he’ll have to become a high-volume receiver in the NFL with the versatility to contribute as a runner is packages that include screens, draws, toss plays and jet sweeps.

Patterson has the physical dimensions, budding skills, and experience to earn a living like Woods, but his special skill for creating after the catch at a higher level could make him a Pro-Bowl player, but if his skill at making defenders miss diminishes versus the enhanced athleticism of the NFL and he doesn’t compensate by learning the techniques that Woods displays to get open, the Tennessee wunderkind could flop. For Patterson it might come down to how special his elusiveness is and this sample reveals it might be good enough.

You can follow Nick Whalen on Twitter @_NickWhalen

For analysis of skill players in this year’s draft class, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Flashes: OU WR Kenny Stills

Here's the example of Raghib Ismail attacking the football with good hand position. Photo by Joint Base Lewis McCord.
Here’s the example of Raghib Ismail attacking the football with good hand position. Photo by Joint Base Lewis McCord.

Sometimes the difference between a touchdown and a drop of a wide-open pass comes down to the difference between an active and passive approach, the space between the fingertips and the palm, and understanding why even good technique isn’t good in the wrong situation. 

Kenny Stills is a big-play wide receiver. Watch enough of his games and you’ll see a player capable of getting behind cornerbacks or winning 50/50 balls on any variety of fades in tight coverage that you can imagine. There will be plenty of positives to list about Stills’ game in the coming months.

I believe the Oklahoma star has the potential to become a long-term starter within a few years. I also believe that like any good prospect, Stills has areas to address in his game. Sometimes an issue can be such a fine point of detail that it can go unnoticed as a lack of concentration.

This 1st-and-goal pass from the eight with 2:20 in the half against Texas A&M in the Cotton Bowl is a good example the differences between decent and optimal pass catching:

  • Passive and active catching.
  • Catching the ball with the palms instead of the tips of the fingers.
  • Good and better hand position.

The play begins from 20 personnel with receivers 2×1 and the backfield configured in an offset pistol.

StillsA1

Stills was the outside receiver on the twin side with a corner playing three yards from the line of scrimmage and shading Stills to the inside. The route was a fade to the left sideline. Stills does a fantastic job working open on this route.

StillsA2

Fade routes tend to be simple patterns where the emphasis is on the pure athleticism of speed, quickness, hand-eye coordination, and leaping ability. What I love about Stills here is that the junior receiver turns this simple route into an elegant pattern. Stills begins his fade to the outside, angling his outside shoulder and drifting to the boundary while looking over his inside shoulder. The A&M cornerback reacting to this route understandably sees this as the break to the football when in fact it’s Stills’ opening move. If you read this blog regularly, then you know I have a deep appreciation for receivers who can tell a story that puts them a step ahead of the defender.

With the ball in the air, Stills continues to bait the corner by continuing to drift outside while turning his head over his inside shoulder.

StillsA3

Stills takes one more step towards the outside, plants his outside foot, and pivots to his right, turning inside out.

StillsA4

This outside turn helps Stills keep his eye on the ball and at the same time turning his back to the defender and shield the pass. This is nice route technique and it places Stills in position to make a play on the ball with plenty of room inside the boundary in position where the defender cannot play the ball. The problem begins as the ball arrives within a few feet of Stills.

StillsA5

This looks like good technique. Stills’ hands are away from his body, palms up, fingers extended, and he’s looking the ball into his hands. Nine out of 10 times, this is a technique that no one would question – perhaps 9.9 out of 10 times. However, Stills could have extended his arms for the ball with his elbows and backs of his forearms pointed towards the ball – a more active technique for acting the football in this situation.

Whenever there is a chance to take an active approach to attack to football rather than a passive one, you take it. If Stills extended as recommended, his fingers are in a better position to make first contact with the ball. Instead, Stills’ hands are in a position where the ball could just as likely strike the receiver’s palms – a part of the hand where the receiver doesn’t have the same ability to stop the spin of the ball as easily as the fingers.

StillsA6

The tip of the ball arrives directly to the palm of Stills’ right hand. If Stills has both hands positioned so both sets of fingers touch the front of the ball at either side, there’s little chance that the ball rebounds off his hand because the fingers stop the spin. Instead, the ball rebounds off Still’s right palm as the left hands is a good six inches away from the ball.

StillsA7

When the ball bounces off Stills’ right palm, the receiver raises his left hand towards the ball. At this point his hands are simply reacting to the ball and not in a good position to control the pass. This passive hand position leads to more passive reactions.

StillsA8

The ball rebounds off the palm of Stills’ left hand and begins its trajectory towards the receiver’s face mask. Meanwhile, the A&M cornerback now has a free pass to make contact with Stills and disrupt the receiver’s chance to control the football. The ball then rebounds off the face mask and his hands are too close to his chest to re-extend as the ball flies off Stills’ helmet.

StillsA9

The rebounding ball flies beyond Stills’ reach, just grazing his fingertips of his left hand.

StillsA10

The pass falls incomplete, and what should have been an easy touchdown as a product of a great route is a dropped ball. As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, Stills demonstrates good hands and excellent skills adjusting to the football. However, even good prospects have areas to improve. I believe the best receivers tend to attack the ball with aggressive hand position. This is something Stills can do with greater consistency.

For more analysis of skill players like this post, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.

Senior Bowl: Day Two Skill Player Notables

Day Two of the Senior Bowl was packed with observations from both practices. This morning’s report covers wide receivers, quarterbacks, running backs, and tight ends. There are also some thoughts about drills and the Senior Bowl selection process.

A Senior Bowl tradition worth keeping is a writing roundtable at The Brick Pit. We'll have our own below. BYOB(BQ). Photo by MRak75.
A Senior Bowl tradition worth keeping is a writers roundtable at The Brick Pit. We’ll have our own below. BYOB(BQ). Photo by MRak75.

Plenty of highlights today, most notably a football roundtable with Rotoworld’s Josh Norris, CBS’s Rob Rang, Football Outsiders-Fifth Down contributor Andy Benoit, Yahoo!-Outsider’s alum Doug Farrar, and Footballguys-RSP guest writer Jene Bramel. The conversation was better than the barbeque and the `cue was no slouch. If you aren’t reading these guys, then you probably aren’t looking at this page. If you’re one of the lone exceptions, I highly recommend you start checking out their work.

Quick Thoughts

The more I watch pass protection drills between backs and linebackers the less I’m impressed by the design of these exercises. I have no coaching experience, but it fascinates me that teams don’t employ more diagnostic elements into the drills – especially for the pass protectors. Why not have a 3 (defenders)-on-1 (blocker) drill where the blocker has two or three possible options he has to read before the snap and then get into position after the snap to execute the assignment? At this point, I watch running backs in these traditional drills and often the only thing they really learn is to game the system of the drill rather than develop real pass protection skills.

The Senior Bowl has a tradition of inviting at least two players from a prominent Alabama institution. This year I believe the two players were Auburn back/return specialist Onterrio McCalebb and Alabama eight end Michael Williams. Both players have the skills to be in Mobile this week, but there have been times I thought some of the past players were a gesture of goodwill to attract in-state interest. From a marketing standpoint I get it. However, the changes Phil Savage is instituting with the structure of the week, scouting players, decreasing the turn-down rate of initial invitees, and even the limitations of field access to the general media to give the NFL Network room to roam, indicates that the Senior Bowl wants to increase its national prominence. Right now, having Alabama and Auburn players is often a no-brainer, but Alabama football doesn’t need to be thrown a bone to get here and one day this practice might prevent more deserving talents from participating.

North Squad Receivers

The Raiders dispensed with a few of Day 1’s drills and went right to the 5×10 cone drill versus cornerbacks. Today, the corners gained the upper hand and were far more successful with knocking the receivers outside the five-yard-wide boundary before they reached the second set of cones 10 yards down field. Unlike yesterday, no receiver from the North squad dominated this exercise against press.  However, some of these receivers who struggled in this drill turned the tables in scrimmages or one-on-one matchups.

Markus Wheaton: Wheaton had initial trouble getting on top of the defender with his first two reps in the cone drill. He also was a little rough through his breaks on an out-and-up, but earned separation with his speed up the boundary. Unlike several of the receivers on either squad, Wheaton has a knack for getting position on a defender after his break. He made a nice catch on a slant, got strong position on a hook after his break, and for the second time in two days, displayed good technique on a deep fade where he caught the ball over his shoulder at the boundary. On five-on-sevens, Wheaton engaged in some trash talking with Washington corner Desmond Trufant, who asked the coaches to allow him to cut in line and take on the receiver. Wheaton promptly spanked Trufant on a deep streak up the right sideline with a nice move early in the route to slide outside and then buy position. Mike Glennon made the deep throw, hitting Wheaton in stride.

Marquise Goodwin: Goodwin began the 5×10 cone drill with some success. When he can use his quickness to avoid the reach of a corner, he wins easily. However, the Longhorns receiver progressively allowed defenders to get the best of him with each rep because he didn’t flash the coordination or strength to keep hands off his body. Once the corners jammed Goodwin, he could never shake them from a position over the top and they rode the receiver down field. One thing Wheaton does well that Goodwin has to learn is to duck through contact. Goodwin gets too upright and presents a great target for his opponent. In the scrimmage parts of practice, Goodwin was up and down. He ran a nice curl and then a good out. Speed is sometimes a wonderful eraser of bad technique – he failed to execute a swim move against press but managed to  a sharp turn under the defender and get separation on an out. He still has to learn how to generate good position after his breaks. He was undercut on one target and then got open on a cross only to drop a good pass from Ryan Nassib.

Chris Harper: Harper got tied up on all three of his reps in the 5×10 cone drill. On two of the three reps, he managed to work free after an initial struggle, but the third rep was a complete failure – but he was far from the only receiver to have a failed rep in this morning’s drill. In scrimmage situations or one-on-ones, Harper looks good in the first half of his routes and will fight for the ball after his break, but actual breaks need improvement. I don’t see the speed to win the ball at the end of vertical routes and I’m not as impressed with him as some of my compatriots this week. I don’t know if anyone is comparing him with Juron Criner due to his build, but I’d much rather have Criner.

Aaron Mellette:  The receiver from Elon struggled yesterday in drills, but he improved today. Mellette won his matchups in two of his three reps in this 5×10 cone drill. Although he encountered some resistance that he couldn’t beat immediately on the third rep, he eventually got on top of the defender. It was good to see him make progress from one day to the next. I’m looking forward to seeing if that progress continues on Wednesday. He carried over that ability to gain separation into one-on-one’s, but dropped multiple passes. He managed to get deep at the one of the one-on-one portion. Unlike Brian Quick last year, there’s more football savvy to the way Mellette uses his body.  He also did a good job working back to the football today. Perhaps he has a fighting chance to develop into an NFL contributor. The athleticism is there.

Aaron Dobson: I love Dobson’s ability to adjust to the football with a defender on him, but he still needs to improve his techniques off the line of scrimmage. He had one bad rep, improved upon it with the next turn, and then failed to get separation on the third rep. He’s at his best when he’s a little more physical with the corners. The finesse moves just aren’t working for him right now. In one-on-one’s he got a quick release early and once again did a nice job of adjusting to the football just like he flashed on Monday. He didn’t see a lot of targets on five-on-seven or 11-on-11s today.

Denard Robinson: Robinson continues to wear the yellow, no-contact jersey and today the biggest takeaway was the amount of extra attention the Raiders receiver coach spent on the Michigan athlete’s stride. Robinson dropped several passes today in drills and one-on-ones. Still, there was a reminder of what Robinson could do if he can assimilate the techniques of playing receiver. The rep was an out-and-up versus a corner playing off-man technique. Robinson slipped during his initial out-cut, but his athleticism clicked into gear and he managed to stay upright and turn the corner on the defensive back swooping in for the kill on the initial break. Robinson shot up the sideline and beat the defender handily for a long play. It was an example of how athleticism can erase errors. Just understand that the eraser isn’t nearly as large at the NFL level.

Alec Lemon: Lemon was a late substitute for the North Squad. The Syracuse receiver made a sneaky-good impression today. Despite failing to win any rep in 5×10 cone drills versus the defensive backs, when Lemon was asked to run routes, he turned lemons into…okay, I won’t go there. Lemon demonstrated the savvy to turn a defender’s jam into his favor, consistently getting late separation and making catch after catch in tight quarters. He was smooth, in control, and unfazed by decent coverage.  I still have questions about his athleticism for the NFL level, but I he did a good job today.

South Practice Wide Receivers

Ryan Swope was on the sideline today and the Lions practice was far more equipment-focused for receivers than the Raiders. This was the case when they were here a couple of years ago. Detroit’s drills were different than the last time the team coached here. The staff employed trash cans and blocking dummies to emphasize angles of breaks and control with turns. The coaches used the dummies to emphasis intensity with strikes during the release phase of routes. If I were to compare the staffs, the Raiders focused more on releases during their drills and the Lions emphasized breaks. If I were a receiver at the Senior Bowl I felt the Lions staff had a more comprehensive approach to coaching the receivers on the field.

Quinton Patton: The receiver from Louisiana Tech was one of those cases where I saw more from him in practice than I saw from him in his games. Patton was really quick running through the gauntlet of cans and made tight turns on breaks. He practices fast.  In one-on-one’s Patton made a tough catch on a deep streak up the right sideline, fighting through contact late in the route. The defensive back pushed Patton late and the receiver managed to control his balance enough to get additional separation as he turned back to the ball and made the catch while falling backwards, losing his helmet in the process – one of the most impressive athletic displays among the receivers this week. Patton earned praise form the coaching staff in scrimmages for working back to the football and taking good position on a slant. He also was the on the receiving end of the most impressive throw I saw today (from Tyler Wilson – more on that later), catching a dig in stride.

Cobi Hamilton: Hamilton’s play wasn’t as consistent as Patton’s, but he had noticeable bright moments in practice. He has sharp with his breaks during drills, which earned him praise for improving during his reps. He dropped a dig route in 11-on-11 drills because he waited for the ball to arrive. He failed to extend his arms to the ball a few times on catchable passes and it’s a habit I’d like to see him address. One thing he did well was work back to the quarterback. If he can do a better job extending his arms, he’ll make more plays – especially in the face of contact. Hamilton blew by a corner on one deep target, but he failed to make the proper adjustment to the ball. Hamilton’s NFL athleticism is easy to see, but he needs to address the details of his craft or he’ll tease an NFL team. Think Mohammed Massoquoi or Reggie Brown.

Conner Vernon: The Duke receiver earned praise for his tight turns in drills, especially the angle of his breaks. Although he didn’t achieve strong separation versus man coverage, he was often in good position to make a play on the football. Vernon dropped two passes after encountering contact from tight coverage. He did make a nice catch at the sideline on an out after he was pushed in the chest while airborne to make the reception of an E.J. Manuel pass in 11-on-11 drills. It was too quick to call whether he was inbounds, but the effort was good. Vernon, like Alec Lemon, has to make up for his lack of top-end speed by catching everything in sight versus tight coverage. He didn’t do it today.

Terrance Williams: Williams had an up and down day. During route drills, he’d have a strong rep followed by a weaker one. When he put it all together on a rep, he drew a lot of encouragement from the Lions staff. You can see flashes of a pro receiver when those moments of technique and athleticism converge. It didn’t happen often enough today. Williams failed to get position or come back to the football in scrimmages and dropped a pass after contact from a defender. Like Hamilton, he’s an NFL athlete but not yet an NFL receiver.

Tavarres King: King wasn’t as athletic as Patton, Hamilton, or Williams, but he was more consistent than the last two. I liked his ability to break on the ball and he had a route up the left sideline where he told a good story with a couple of fluid moves to set up his break back to the quarterback at the left sideline in tight coverage. One of the better catches of the day was a dig route where he had to make a strong extension on a pass at shoulder level well away from his body, displaying the ability to “play long.” He had one drop on a low, but catchable throw during five-on-sevens with Landry Jones at quarterback.

North and South Squad Running Backs

Oregon running back Kenjon Barner has his fans here. Doug Farrar and Josh Norris believe he's a better prospect than LaMichael James. Photo by Wade Rackley.
Oregon running back Kenjon Barner has his fans here. Doug Farrar and Josh Norris believe he’s a better prospect than LaMichael James. Photo by Wade Rackley.

The only notable observations I have of North running backs came from pass protection drills. Before I give my takes on each player, I think it’s important to state that diagnosis is a key component of pass protection that these drills did not simulate. Personally, I’d love to see drills that send multiple defenders off an edge or flash three potential blitz types pre snap and force the running back to make a read based on what he sees from the opposition. This would tell me more than many of the drills I see in practices like these. I did see some runs in 11-on-11s from the South squad backs – worth noting, but nothing new from what I’ve seen from them this year in real games.

Kenjon Barner: Quickness abounds with Barner and I liked his ability to get into position and square-up the defender. He doesn’t deliver a punch and this is a key component to good pass protection. Otherwise, the blocker is more passive than active and he’s likely to be controlled rather than control.

Johnathan Franklin: Franklin got into position and stood his ground against pressure coming down hill at a good pace, but like Barner, he didn’t deliver a punch. Unlike the Oregon back, Franklin was just big enough and demonstrated good enough technique to anchor his legs and hold his ground on more of these reps. Once, again, it comes down to Franklin learning to punch.

Mike Gillislee: The Florida runner got duped on swim moves multiple times in running back versus linebacker pass protection drills. He’s quick enough and will punch and turn a defender if he gets good position, but he can telegraph his intentions. In 11-on-11’s he flashed his quick feet, side-stepping penetration up the middle to slip to an open lane off left guard for a nice gain. He caught the ball well on swing passes and he’s a player who should grow into a contributor. The better he gets at pass protection, the bigger the contributor he can be.

Stepfan Taylor: I profiled Taylor before the Senior Bowl, praising his leverage as a runner. He’s always running in a crouched position that gives him an advantage versus impending contact. He’s the most decisive, physical runner on Mobile this week. As much as I like Johnathan Franklin’s smarts and versatility, I think Taylor is the most NFL-ready of the Senior Bowl backs. I’d like to see him do a better job of delivering a punch in pass drills, but he also has the size to anchor against linebackers. It’s important to note that Taylor won’t get away with “catching” defenders in the NFL like he has in drills here. He has to shore up this deficiency.

North Squad Quarterbacks

According to former NC State Head Coach Tom O'Brien, Mike Glennon was the guy burning a hole in the bench behind Russell Wilson. Perhaps if his play involved matches, because he's not setting the Senior Bowl on fire. Photo by Football Schedule.
According to former NC State Head Coach Tom O’Brien, Mike Glennon was the guy burning a hole in the bench behind Russell Wilson. Perhaps if his play involved matches, because he’s not setting the Senior Bowl on fire. Photo by Football Schedule.

None of these quarterbacks pique my interest. I can offer a logical explanation as to why each one will succeed or fail at the next level, but there are far more possibilities why they won’t make a successful transition than I see from recent quarterback classes. The scrimmage drills highlighted more flaws than strengths for this North depth chart.

Zac Dysert: The Miami, Ohio quarterback is the most aggressive of the trio, but also the most reckless. He stares down his primary receiver too often – he threw an interception on an out doing exactly what I described. He’s the only quarterback I’ve seen on either roster attempt a shoulder fake to bait a defender down field. Dysert also floated the ball down field a couple of times on targets where I think more velocity was required for the pass to reach its receiver on-time. One his deep outs also sailed too high with too much air under the ball. I haven’t seen him really drive the ball yet.

Mike Glennon: The N.C. State quarterback got to show off a pretty deep arm on a sideline fade to Markus Wheaton in five-on-seven drills. He also stuck a slant to Chris Harper in traffic that drew an ooh from the crowd in 11-on-11s. This is Glennon’s appeal: big arm and tall frame to see over the defense without getting on his toes. To be nice, he’s everything Russell Wilson isn’t. To be accurate, everything is only one thing: tall.

Ryan Nassib: Optimum Scouting writer Eric Galko asked me what I thought about Nassib. I can see the case for him developing into an NFL starter one day, but I have reservations about his arm strength. I don’t put a ton of weight into arm strength when it comes to evaluating quarterbacks. But if arm strength is missing from a quarterback’s game there have to compensatory factors that mitigate its absence: mobility, great anticipation, or hyper-accuracy. Nassib doesn’t have great arm strength, but I was encouraged to see an opposite hash throw where he drilled the ball to his receiver. However, his deep throws continue to lack either anticipation or distance and velocity. More anticipation would lessen the need for the other two qualities, but at this point he’s forced to try deep throws without this enhanced timing and he isn’t hitting the mark on time. Some of the plays I enjoyed most today where seam routes Nassib dropped into tight ends with excellent placement – even those his tight end’s dropped. He is clearly the best of the North trio of passers and probably the safest quarterback prospect in Mobile. It still doesn’t mean I would touch him in the first three rounds of the draft. I don’t care what the need is for a quarterback, if I have to pay him franchise money or show franchise patience then I’m throwing away two to three years and a shot at a better option. I think he’s a better prospect in theory than on the field.

South Quarterbacks

E.J. Manuel: Physically, he’s everything you want from a quarterback. Fundamentally, he needs work with his throwing motion and decision making. He can make every throw, but he has to learn better judgment. In scrimmages, he wasn’t pressed into a situation where he had to make a throw any more demanding than an out. The game is going to be the time where Manuel likely flashes the best and worst attributes. Stay tuned.

Landry Jones: He threw a nice swing pass to his full back early and got some help on a sliding catch of a crossing route by Cobi Hamilton in five-on-sevens. He was a little too wide for his receiver Tavarres King on an out, but King should have caught the ball inbounds despite the tight margin of error when not necessary. He did hit Terrance Williams on the move and the receiver worked back to the ball for once.

Tyler Wilson: He threw a pass intended for Mychal Rivera that was placed too far inside and the linebacker over top cut off the throw, tipping it, and a teammate made the interception. This was one of a few players where Wilson wasn’t especially sharp but didn’t get much help from his teammates, either. But here’s the kicker:  After this bad play, Wilson comes back and drills Quinton Patton on a dig route in stride with a laser beam while a defender is bearing down on Wilson from an already constricted pocket – the best throw of the week thus far. This aggressive, resilient nature is what separates Wilson from every quarterback in this class – junior or senior. This wasn’t the only good throw of the day from Wilson. He found Vance McDonald on a seam route 15-20 yards down field with good placement to the tight end’s back shoulder. Scott Linehan also praised Wilson for three quick reads in succession ending with a strong decision to hit Conner Vernon on a crossing route. He’s the only quarterback here I’d draft in the first three rounds and feel I got my money’s worth.

Tight Ends

Jack Doyle: The Western Kentucky prospect dropped multiple passes in five-on-seven and 11-on-11s today. There was a sequence where he dropped two in a row. He’s just fast enough to get down the seam and demonstrates just enough fluid athleticism to reach for a throw over his head or to his back shoulder. What he hasn’t done is hold onto the ball after contact or secures the ball on these adjustments. The Ravens Dennis Pitta is a great example of a less than stellar athlete with great ball skills and smarts in zone. Doyle is proving that he lacks the consistency to earn this kind of comparison.

Nick Kasa: The big Colorado tight end has been the best receiver and blocker of the North’s depth chart. He’s just fast enough to work the seam and big enough to get physical when needed. He catches the ball without fanfare and he’ll rumble through the open field for a bit if a defender isn’t disciplined with his tackling technique. He’s not an exciting prospect for the average fan, but as my colleague Josh Norris or Rob Ryan would say, Kasa will have a chance to playing the league for a while.

Michael Williams: Alabama’s tight end can block and he has soft hands. He’s a big, slow earth mover who welcomes contact from defenders in order to create separation as a receiver. As Doug Farrar and Josh Norris said tonight at dinner, he’ll have a long career as a No.3 tight end in the NFL.

Mychal Rivera: The Tennessee tight end is the smallest tight end in Mobile, but he’s one of the most athletic. He makes plays between defenders, extends well for the football and can make a move after the catch to create space. I didn’t get to see much from him as a blocker, but he projects as an H-Back.

Vance McDonald: One of the better catches of the day came from McDonald, who beat a safety with a nice move during his stem and then took the correct angle down field as he bent the route just enough to the outside to gain separation and run under a deep fade towards the pylon, making the catch with his hands over his inside shoulder in full gallop. He’s fluid like a wide receiver and because he’s so well put together as an athlete he doesn’t strike me as a 260-pound player. In terms of players with potential to be a consistent mismatch on every down, McDonald is the only tight end in this game that fits this description.

For more analysis of skill players, download the 2013 Rookie Scouting Portfolio available April 1. Prepayment is available now. Better yet, if you’re a fantasy owner the 56-page Post-Draft Add-on comes with the 2013 RSP at no additional charge. Best, yet, 10 percent of every sale is donated to Darkness to Light to combat sexual abuse. You can purchase past editions of the Rookie Scouting Portfolio for just $9.95 apiece.