|
Riley Reiff OT Iowa #77
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’6″
Wt: 300 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Prototypical height and overall size. Solid fundamentals; does a nice job staying low and using leverage to hold his ground against more physical defensive linemen. Strong lower body allows him to hold his ground against the bull rush. Excellent footwork; uses quick feet to recover when beat off the snap. Nasty run blocker; stays low and consistently drives his man back. Decent athleticism; has the ability to get to the second level. Strong hands/arms; does a nice job fighting off pass rushers with his upper body. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Quickness off the snap could be improved; when he gets beat, it’s often by a faster edge rusher who’s past him before he’s even able to get into his stance – may be viewed as a right tackle by some teams for this reason. Looks much more confident as a run blocker; more assertive in run blocking; seems hesitant and less comfortable dropping into pass protection. Not asked to move around much in Iowa’s offense; limited experience on screens, pulling, trapping, etc. Arrested in 2008 for public in intoxication and avoiding arrest; stopped by police while undressing in an alley and proceeded to lead them on a 20-minute chase on foot. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Reiff has all the physical tools necessary to start at the next level, potentially at left tackle. The only thing holding him back from elite prospect status is his somewhat limited athleticism, which will probably cause some teams to view him as a right tackle. Regardless of where he ends up on the line, he should be plugged into a starting role immediately and left there for the next decade. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Oklahoma (bowl game) 2011 vs Nebraska |
||
Riley Reiff scouting report
David Wilson scouting report
|
David Wilson RB Virginia Tech #4
|
||
 |
Ht: 5’10″
Wt: 205 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Well built for his size. Surprisingly tough to bring down. Great vision; does a nice job squeezing through tight holes between the tackles. Quick feet and impressive athletic ability; tough for defenders to tee him up for a big hit. Experienced as a receiver out of the backfield; good hands. Has experience returning kickoffs. Steady production throughout his career. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Slightly undersized; may struggle with a feature back workload at the next level. Sometimes tries to do too much; needs to be more decisive – pick a hole and hit it hard. Generally ineffective as a blocker; can slow some guys down, but doesn’t stonewall anyone and will occasionally completely whiff. Yards-per-attempt average is somewhat misleading; he’ll rip off a 12 yard run, then get stuffed in the backfield on the next play – isn’t consistently picking up 5 yards per touch. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Wilson definitely has the skill set to be an effective third-down back at the next level, and may be able to play a more significant role in the right system. I would hesitate to bring him aboard with the intent of making him a feature back, but he could be effective in a two-back system in which he gets 10-15 carries per game. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Wake Forest 2011 vs Clemson |
||
Bernard Pierce scouting report
|
Bernard Pierce RB Temple #30
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’0″ Wt: 218 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Good overall size and strength. A strong, tough between-the-tackles runner. Strong legs allow him to consistently fight through arm tackles. Quick feet; surprisingly shifty in tight spaces for a guy his size. Has a nice spin move to avoid head-on collisions. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Not very explosive. Speed is very average. Doesn’t make guys miss; will take a pounding at the next level. Relies heavily on his spin move, to the point where it’s predictable. Rarely used as a receiver out of the backfield. Gives a solid effort as a blocker, but struggles with blitz recognition at times. Missed time with ankle injuries in 2010 and 2011. Missed time with a shoulder injury in 2009. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Pierce has the size and strength to be effective in the NFL and could potentially develop into an adequate starter. However, there are serious concerns about his ability to stay healthy, which are compounded by his physical running style. Pierce definitely has some upside if healthy, but under no circumstances should he be drafted under the assumption that he will be a full-time feature back. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Wyoming (bowl game) 2011 vs Maryland |
||
Kendall Wright scouting report
|
Kendall Wright WR Baylor #1
|
||
 |
Ht: 5’10″
Wt: 190 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Elite speed; can consistently stretch the field. A playmaker with the ball in his hands; quick and shifty; elusive in the open field. Does a nice job adjusting to poorly thrown balls. Experienced and efficient running a variety of routes; can stretch the field with his pure speed, but also uses quickness to get open on other shorter routes. Tough for his size; not afraid to go across the middle. Reliable hands and good technique; catches the ball away from his body and then brings it in. Good fundamentals as a runner; secures the ball. Elite all-around athlete; played basketball at Baylor as a freshman. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Slightly undersized; will struggle against more physical cornerbacks if jammed at the line of scrimmage. Played in a spread offense at Baylor which allowed him to frequently get open in space; rarely forced to make plays in traffic. Limited experience on special teams, where some teams may want to use him. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Wright has the potential to be a game-changer on offense, the only question is his size. Fortunately for Wright, he’s entering the league at the right time. The NFL is continuing to become a more passing-friendly league, and undersized receivers such as Antonio Brown, Mike Wallace and DeSean Jackson are among the most feared receivers in the league. Wright has all the tools necessary to be in that class of receivers if he lands in the right system. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Washington (bowl game) 2011 vs Texas 2011 vs Oklahoma 2011 vs TCU |
||
Mohamed Sanu scouting report
|
Mohamed Sanu WR Rutgers #
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’2″
Wt: 215 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Adequate height and overall size. A playmaker after the catch; does a nice job quickly securing the ball and taking off downfield. A tough receiver; can take a hit and keep moving. An impressive athlete; played quarterback in high school. Will make some acrobatic catches. Experienced lining up in the slot and on the outside; runs a lot of quick slants from the slot and makes plays after the catch. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Plays smaller than his listed height. Not the type of receiver that can consistently go up and fight for a ball in traffic. Wasn’t on the same page as his quarterback at times (e.g. ball lands before he turns to look for it); tough to know who’s to blame in those situations. Catches the ball with his body too often. Speed is average; may not be able to stretch the field at the next level. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| As good as Sanu was at Rutgers, he may have only scratched the surface of his potential. He has the size and athleticism to be a true No. 1 receiver, but Rutgers used him primarily in the slot, running a lot of quick slants. Due to shaky quarterback play, this was the most effective way for Rutgers to get the ball in the hands of their best offensive weapon. Sanu deserves credit for taking on a role that helped the team win, but it definitely hurt his development as a receiver. He’s too big and not quick enough to be an elite playmaker from the slot at the next level, although his experience in that role certainly helps. He’ll need time to develop, as he learns how to use his size to his advantage on the outside, but he has a ton of upside and Rutgers head coach Greg Schiano speaks highly of his work ethic. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Louisville 2011 vs Navy |
||
Alshon Jeffery scouting report
|
Alshon Jeffery WR South Carolina #1
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’4″
Wt: 230 |
|
| Strengths: | ||
| Elite size and strength; a matchup nightmare in the red zone. Excellent hands. Does a nice job going up and plucking the ball out of the air, never even giving defenders a chance to get their hands on it. Has the strength to fight through press coverage. Tough for most defensive backs to bring him down; does a nice job using the stiff arm to keep defenders at bay. Surprisingly elusive for his size. Occasionally will deliver a big hit as a blocker; has the ability to dominate in this area if he wants to put forth the effort. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Fundamentals are lacking in all aspects of the game; route running, blocking, etc. Lacks the speed to consistently get open down the field; won’t outrun many defensive backs. Poor effort as a blocker; has the ability to dominate, but doesn’t even pretend to be interested half the time. Needs to learn how to run with the football; carries it away from his body too often, putting him at risk for fumbles. Gets easily frustrated by physical cornerbacks who jam him at the line of scrimmage. Ejected from 2012 Capitol One Bowl for fighting with Nebraska’s Alfonzo Dennard. Missed spring practices in 2010 due to an “academic issue.” | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Jeffery has the skills to be an elite receiver at the next level, but there are some red flags that should give teams concern about his ability to reach his full potential. South Carolina coaches have publicly praised him for his work ethic and leadership ability, but when you look at his primary flaws it’s tough not to question their sincerity. Given his size, strength and athleticism, it’s tough to find a logical excuse for his struggles with basic fundamentals such as blocking and route running other than a lack of effort. If he wants to be great, there is no doubt that Jeffery can succeed at the next level, but NFL teams should do a great deal of homework on his motivation level before investing a high pick. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Nebraska (bowl game) 2011 vs Auburn 2011 vs Kentucky |
||
Kirk Cousins scouting report
|
Kirk Cousins QB Michigan State #8
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’3″
Wt: 205 |
|
| Strengths: | ||
| Elite intangibles. A team leader that players rally around and coaches respect. Three-year team captain. Will be able to command an NFL huddle, even at a young age. Consistently came up big in clutch moments throughout his college career. Decent athleticism and mobility; capable of moving around in the backfield to buy time. Looks good throwing on the run; maintains his fundamentals and accuracy. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Does everything well, but nothing great. Arm strength is mediocre at best. Accuracy is acceptable, but somewhat inconsistent. Decision making needs to improve. Tries to force the ball into tight spaces too often; although this could be a product of playing without any receivers who have the ability to consistently separate from coverage. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| It’s tough to project Cousins as anything more than a career backup, but I also wouldn’t want to bet against him developing into a quality starter. Had he played at a top-tier program his late-game heroics, leadership and overall intangibles would have received Tebow-like coverage from the media. For a team looking for a quality backup quarterback and someone to be groomed to potentially start three or four years down the road, Cousins will be an attractive mid-round pick. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Ohio State 2010 vs Michigan 2010 vs Notre Dame |
||
Ryan Tannehill scouting report
|
Ryan Tannehill QB Texas A&M #17
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’4″ Wt: 220 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Impressive overall size and strength. Decent mobility; can move around in the pocket to avoid pressure. Looks fairly athletic on roll outs. A threat to take off running when the play breaks down. Adequate accuracy on short and intermediate routes. Took a more active role in offense in senior year, adjusting more plays at line of scrimmage. Team leader on and off the field; well respected by teammates and coaches. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Tends to lock on to a receiver and force the ball into tight coverage. Needs be more patient and go through his progressions. Arm strength is adequate, but nothing special. Accuracy on the deep ball is inconsistent; struggles finding the right trajectory to drop it in over a receiver’s shoulder. Somewhat unorthodox throwing motion (sort of a three-quarters delivery angle); may not be a major issue, but takes away slightly from his height advantage and may contribute to his struggles on deep balls. Struggles under pressure; decision making becomes shaky and starts to rush his delivery which causes further issues with accuracy. Struggles hitting receivers on the move in stride. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Tannehill has the skills to play at the next level and may be able to develop into a starter. He has the size, as well as adequate arm strength and accuracy. Additionally, he appears to have the work ethic and the intelligence necessary to master the intellectual aspect of the game. A team desperate for an upgrade at quarterback may reach for him in the late 1st or 2nd round and throw him into the fire. However, he should really sit and learn for a year or two. His inability to remain patient and read the whole field on a consistent basis will get him in trouble at the next level. Given some time to sit and learn an NFL offensel should allow him to become more comfortable hanging in the pocket longer and making better decisions with the football. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Northwestern (bowl game) 2011 vs Baylor 2011 vs Arkansas |
||
Devon Still scouting report
|
Devon Still DT Penn State #71
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’5″
Wt: 307 |
|
| Strengths: | ||
| Prototypical height and overall size. A strong, physical player. Relies on his bull rush to get into the backfield, which often draws double teams. Long, strong arms are very active when he’s working as a pass rusher. Flashes the ability to dominate; very difficult to block in a one-on-one matchup when he wants to be. NFL bloodlines; cousins Art Still and Levon Kirkland played in the league. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Inconsistent. Gets pushed around too frequently, often by lesser talent. Gets tossed to the ground far too often for a guy his size. Struggles against the run; gets knocked back on his heels and fails to hold his ground at the point of attack. Limited athletically. Doesn’t make plays in pursuit. Isn’t always explosive off the snap. Inconsistent effort; perhaps a conditioning issue? Missed entire 2007 season with torn ACL. Benched for part of a game in 2010 for violation of team rules. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Still has starter potential, and has even shown flashes of Pro Bowl ability, but he is far too inconsistent. He showed some improvement in 2010, but it still looks like he takes plays off – an indication of either an effort or conditioning issue. His lack of quickness and inconsistent explosion off the snap limits his effectiveness as a pass rusher, which makes his uninspired performance against the run that much more concerning. Still is definitely a boom-or-bust prospect. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Alabama 2011 vs Illinois |
||
LaMichael James scouting report
|
LaMichael James RB Oregon #21
|
||
 |
Ht: 5’9″Wt: 185 |  |
| Strengths: | ||
| Elite speed and overall quickness. Exceptional change-of-direction ability. Always a threat to take it the distance. Consistently makes defenders miss; rarely brought down by one man once he’s in the open field. Willing to go between the tackles despite lack of size. Effective receiver out of the backfield; relatively good hands. Gives a decent effort when asked to block. Some experience returning punts. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Vastly undersized. Does not have the build to hold up as a full time starter at the next level. Doesn’t have the strength to shed tackles; once he’s wrapped, he’s down. Has a somewhat reckless running style; doesn’t have great body control once he’s moving at full speed. Skill set doesn’t match what NFL teams want from their feature back. Limited experience on special teams; only 16 career kick/punt returns. Arrested on domestic violence charge in 2010. Missed two games with dislocated right elbow in 2011. Injured left elbow in 2011 regular-season finale. Suffered knee injury in 2010. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| James was an explosive collegiate running back, but he will likely be relegated to the role of specialist in the NFL. There’s always room on an NFL roster for a player who can take it to the house on any given play, but his lack of size and strength limits the situations in which he can useful in an NFL offense. The best recent comparison for James may be Jerome Harrison, who lit up the Pac-10 in 2005 with the Washington State Cougars, but has only been marginally effective in the NFL. In the right offense he can still be a weapon, but will never be the go-to guy. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs LSU 2011 vs Arizona |
||
