• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

2015 My Biggest Disagreements on Prospects

deljzc

deljzc

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2014
Messages
5,307
Reaction score
4,795
Points
113
So I'm pretty much done with my Big Board and scouting of all the positions (except QB's).

As I also track where Draft Scout (CBS Sports) and Sports Illustrated ranks their prospects I thought I would highlight the biggest difference I have on my board vs. theirs.

1. Cedric Ogbuehi, OT
I have him the 20th overall non-QB prospect on my list and think his film is arguably the best pure LT film out there. He has ideal size and length. Good feet. All he needs is to mature physically, gain some weight and strength and he should be a long-term pro that will start for a team at LT. That's worth a lot to me in my rankings. Draft Scout has him a 2-3 round prospect. SI has him #60 overall.

2. Marcus Hardison, DT/DE
I might have an issue with over-inflating defensive lineman (they have the fewest warts as the draft rolls around and I might lower people around them), but I'm surprised Hardison isn't getting more attention. His film is really good. He was playing DE and beating OT's around the edge as a 300 lbs. player. That is rare. His short area quickness is very good and unless their some off-field issues I'm not aware of or he's a real knucklehead, I see top-50 talent. Draft Scout has him 3rd round. SI has him #130 overall.

3. Ibraheim Campbell, S
Another player where the film I watched is just really, really good. Campbell does exactly what you want from a free safety - he protects the big play. He is good in coverage, has 4.50 speed and is one of the surest open-field tacklers I saw on tape this spring. Maybe there is nothing "wow" about his ability to generate turnovers, but I think he's a really good FS prospect that can play a long time in this league and not be a liability. I have him in my top-50 prospects. Draft Scout has him round 2-3. SI has him #161 overall.

4. Cameron Artis-Payne, RB
When I first watched his film, I thought he was a very good all-around back that could play all 3 downs and not be a liability anywhere. He's big enough and physical enough to pass block. He a very good runner. He can run routes and catch. For some reason, during the process he has fallen out of favor with the draftnik community. Maybe there isn't anything really "special" about his tape. Maybe he wasn't productive enough at Auburn. I don't know. I've lowered him some since my film review but I still have him at #67 overall. Draft Scout has him a 4th rounder. SI has him #144 overall.

5. Jesse James, TE
You read in my recent TE post that I think James is easily the 2nd best TE prospect in this draft. His physical skills and youth (entering as a junior) are just too much upside to ignore in this very weak TE class. The guy is 6'-7" and has a 37.5" vertical leap. If a team can't find a way to bulk this guy up into a very good blocker and use that height, reach and jumping ability to improve their red zone, shame on them.

6. Mark Glowinski, OG
Every time I've watch WVU tape (on another prospect) and I glance to see what Glowinski is doing, he's doing it right. I know he was a nobody coming out of high school but he has turned himself into a prototypical guard prospect. He has good size, body shape, quicks, length and strength. He is very good fundamentally. I just don't really see much negative on the guy. I am completely confused how this guy is a 4th/5th round rated prospect and SI's 207th overall. His film is good.

7. Jordan Hicks, LB
I would love for a professional scout to sit down with me and we watch 3 games of Hicks and 3 games of Eric Kendricks and him explain why Kendricks would be a borderline 1st round pick and Hicks would be a 4th rounder. From the tape I saw, Hicks is more physical, is just as athletic, longer, bigger and is more involved in the action than Kendricks. Sometimes I just don't understand scouting. I have Hicks at around #60 overall. SI has him #124.

8. Laurence Gibson, OT
8a. Darryl Baldwin, OT
I am putting these guys together because I have both ranked almost identically as 4th round prospects. I guess I would rather draft a guy with elite athletic skills and length than a slow and fat offensive lineman that was successful at the college level but I KNOW will struggle at the NFL level and never amount to much more than a backup. Both of these guys are over 6'-5". Both have arm lengths around 35". Both run around 5.00 in the 40-yard dash can can move in the 3-cone. Both have decent weight room ethic. How is that not draftable? Draft Scout has them as 5-7 rounders and SI didn't rank either in their top-300.
 
I am thinking some draftniks just read and don't watch tape, which would explain a lot Del.

I know sometimes three people could watch a tape and come away with three different opinions.

Anyway you slice it always interesting to read our draftniks material. As I know they put in the work.

I don't do as much tape watching as I used to. So I go on more of what I read.

Always fun to compare and see how the players develop...........
 
Guys I like more than what I have seen.

David Johnson RB Northern Iowa
I personally have him as my 3rd RB in this draft behind Gordon and Gurley. He has the size, speed, and strength you look for physical. And has nice production, albeit at Northern Iowa. I see him ranked at a 3rd-5th so if he's on the board with our 4th I'd jump at the opportunity.

Nick O'Leary TE FSU
Dude is too short, too slow, with small hands. But you watch him and he is a football player. He does whatever the coaches ask of him and he gives 100% every snap. He puts his all into blocking and in the passing game always seems to be open. I have him behind Williams and Funchess for TE's on my board. Yes I feel Funchess as a TE.

Chris Bonner QB Colorado State-Pueblo
I personally see Winston and Mariota as the sure first round talented QB. Winston is off my board because of character but talent wise I have him as the best QB. Then you have Petty, Hundley, and Grayson as your "second tier" guys. I look at them and look at Bonner and I just don't see him being that far off from them if any. Talent wise from an arm strength is there but I feel poor mechanics makes him lose velocity. Footwork is pretty sloppy. But those are very correctable. He has the size, vision, and pocket awareness you can't teach. I feel he is a solid 4th round pick.
*disclaimer I have VERY limited film to work with. But the very little I saw I liked.

Miles Dieffenbach OG Penn St
I see he's an UDFA rated player. Personally I feel he's a solid 5th-6th round prospect and will be a quality depth guy with starter potential. I think being injured really hurt him and if we are looking to ad a practice squad guy who will make the 53 man in 2016 he'd be a good 6th or 7th round pick. He is not pretty but solid technique, used hands well, needs to get stronger and hold the point of attack better. But feel he has good speed and for a zone scheme he would fit well.

Anthony Harris S Virginia
I think he is a very instinctive football player. He can cover, play the run, he wraps up and tackles. The more I have been watching him the more I like him. I think they have him rated as a 4th-6th and I think he is a solid 2nd round pick.

Max Valles OLB Virginia
This guy has a ton of upside. When he plays up to his potential he dominates but at this point is very hot cold. Still, I feel his potential warrants a 3rd round pick and I see him listed as a 6th rounder. He has length, size, strength, and functional football speed.
 
deljzc said:
So I'm pretty much done with my Big Board and scouting of all the positions (except QB's).

As I also track where Draft Scout (CBS Sports) and Sports Illustrated ranks their prospects I thought I would highlight the biggest difference I have on my board vs. theirs.

1. Cedric Ogbuehi, OT
I have him the 20th overall non-QB prospect on my list and think his film is arguably the best pure LT film out there. He has ideal size and length. Good feet. All he needs is to mature physically, gain some weight and strength and he should be a long-term pro that will start for a team at LT. That's worth a lot to me in my rankings. Draft Scout has him a 2-3 round prospect. SI has him #60 overall.

2. Marcus Hardison, DT/DE
I might have an issue with over-inflating defensive lineman (they have the fewest warts as the draft rolls around and I might lower people around them), but I'm surprised Hardison isn't getting more attention. His film is really good. He was playing DE and beating OT's around the edge as a 300 lbs. player. That is rare. His short area quickness is very good and unless their some off-field issues I'm not aware of or he's a real knucklehead, I see top-50 talent. Draft Scout has him 3rd round. SI has him #130 overall.

3. Ibraheim Campbell, S
Another player where the film I watched is just really, really good. Campbell does exactly what you want from a free safety - he protects the big play. He is good in coverage, has 4.50 speed and is one of the surest open-field tacklers I saw on tape this spring. Maybe there is nothing "wow" about his ability to generate turnovers, but I think he's a really good FS prospect that can play a long time in this league and not be a liability. I have him in my top-50 prospects. Draft Scout has him round 2-3. SI has him #161 overall.

4. Cameron Artis-Payne, RB
When I first watched his film, I thought he was a very good all-around back that could play all 3 downs and not be a liability anywhere. He's big enough and physical enough to pass block. He a very good runner. He can run routes and catch. For some reason, during the process he has fallen out of favor with the draftnik community. Maybe there isn't anything really "special" about his tape. Maybe he wasn't productive enough at Auburn. I don't know. I've lowered him some since my film review but I still have him at #67 overall. Draft Scout has him a 4th rounder. SI has him #144 overall.

5. Jesse James, TE
You read in my recent TE post that I think James is easily the 2nd best TE prospect in this draft. His physical skills and youth (entering as a junior) are just too much upside to ignore in this very weak TE class. The guy is 6'-7" and has a 37.5" vertical leap. If a team can't find a way to bulk this guy up into a very good blocker and use that height, reach and jumping ability to improve their red zone, shame on them.

6. Mark Glowinski, OG
Every time I've watch WVU tape (on another prospect) and I glance to see what Glowinski is doing, he's doing it right. I know he was a nobody coming out of high school but he has turned himself into a prototypical guard prospect. He has good size, body shape, quicks, length and strength. He is very good fundamentally. I just don't really see much negative on the guy. I am completely confused how this guy is a 4th/5th round rated prospect and SI's 207th overall. His film is good.

7. Jordan Hicks, LB
I would love for a professional scout to sit down with me and we watch 3 games of Hicks and 3 games of Eric Kendricks and him explain why Kendricks would be a borderline 1st round pick and Hicks would be a 4th rounder. From the tape I saw, Hicks is more physical, is just as athletic, longer, bigger and is more involved in the action than Kendricks. Sometimes I just don't understand scouting. I have Hicks at around #60 overall. SI has him #124.

8. Laurence Gibson, OT
8a. Darryl Baldwin, OT
I am putting these guys together because I have both ranked almost identically as 4th round prospects. I guess I would rather draft a guy with elite athletic skills and length than a slow and fat offensive lineman that was successful at the college level but I KNOW will struggle at the NFL level and never amount to much more than a backup. Both of these guys are over 6'-5". Both have arm lengths around 35". Both run around 5.00 in the 40-yard dash can can move in the 3-cone. Both have decent weight room ethic. How is that not draftable? Draft Scout has them as 5-7 rounders and SI didn't rank either in their top-300.
Click to expand...

Del it might be a lot of typing or maybe cutting and pasting but I think it would be very interesting to see how you have the players ranked overall, with the write ups like you have above. I do not always agree with your thoughts on the talent but enjoy them and find them informative never the less. I also suspect there might be lots of other folks that would enjoy reading your rankings as well. It says I can't hit you with karma for a while which is unfair, I'm blaming goodell and kraft on this one, might not be their fault but i'm doing it anyway.
 
Last edited:
Wingman said:
Del it might be a lot of typing or maybe cutting and pasting but I think it would be very interesting to see how you have the players ranked overall, with the write ups like you have above. I do not always agree with your thoughts on the talent but enjoy them and find them informative never the less. I also suspect there might be lots of other folks that would enjoy reading your rankings as well. It says I can't hit you with karma for a while which is unfair, I'm blaming goodell and kraft on this one, might not be their fault but i'm doing it anyway.
Click to expand...

I will provide links to the Google.Docs before the draft early next week.

I have all the write ups that I have posted here (with recent edits) and an excel spread sheet with all the players overall.
 
Last edited:
Great analysis Del. I agree w you in regards to most all of the underrated players.

Cedric is going to be a good pick at #3 if he is there. He should be gone in Early #2.

Hardison is an anomaly...and someone will pick up on his production/hand use from the edge. If he were still at his HS weight (260), he would be talked about as a DE/LOLB. At his present 307#, he is compared with DTs. He is not a DT. Looks like a good DE (though too short for scouts) and IF he were lighter, he would make a good LOLB. He has the moves, hand use and would even be quicker if he played at 275-280. He thought he would run under 4.7, which to me means, thats what he used to run when lighter. He still had COD better than Jarvis though. I would draft him and put him out there on 3rd downs for sure. He needs to decide if he can lose the weight or he might have to go to WSDE in a 4-3, IMO.

Jordan Hicks might be as good as CJ Mosley but has the same injury concerns coming out. He lost time w hip, knee and achilles injuries at Tx.

Jesse James might not be a prototypical Steeler TE but he is a better prospect than Jace Amaro was last year. I would consider him a good value as a 4th rounder. 3rd if he had more work/production.
 
I agree with 100% with you on Cedric Ogbuehi, OT. One reason he might not be rated as high: isnt he coming off of a major injury? I put more value on the opinions posted on this board than i do on what most of the experts say. I just went through nfl.com's 7 round mock and it was pretty pathetic. They have the steelers taking safetys and and dt's while passing up on edge rushers until late in the draft. Its like they didnt even pay any attention to what has been going on in Pittsburgh all off season.
 
Because I am basing my evaluation on film only, I lack credible medical, historic context and off field issues.

I know about Oghuebi knee and I know that's why he's 60th on SI's list. I was not aware of Hicks injury past nor Hardison getting fat. Those are red flags.
 
Hicks had a run of bad luck with injuries but played all year this year and led the team in tackles. He is a good player and IMO a very underrated one. Hardison is different. I don't know if weight is an issue with him. He played QB in high school and apparently can throw a ball 80 yards or more and was running under 4.7 at 260#. Problem was, he wasn't very accurate and switched to DL. At just over 6-2, he is heavy at 307# and IMO, is NOT a NT or even a DT (occupier). He plays like a 4-3 end and is really good with his hand fighting. I think he could be a sub-package guy on the DL for us on 3rd downs and get after the QB a bit. I think he could even be a faster, more explosive specimen if he lost 20-30# and play on the outside. He has those kind of moves. He is just a tweener to most draftniks because he is 1 1/2-2inches shorter than an ideal player prospect at the DE position. I don't care about measurables when a guy can consistently beat his man. That's why I am NOT as high on some of these elite size speed prospects that look good til you watch them play. They might have potential BUT they haven't figured out how to be football players yet.
 
I really want to tell people it's not that hard to watch film.

If you're 30+ years old and have been watching pro football since you were kid on TV, you can do it. You can tell when you see good film and bad. I tell all my friends, just say whatever pops into your head while you're watching a guy.

The biggest scam going is that people that watch film are some mystic guru's that know 100 times more than you or me. What scouts are really used for is not film, it's getting inside information from friends of friends in at all these schools about what a guy is like off the field. How hard he works. How he treats people. What do the trainers say...

As film gets better and better, there is practically no reason for what we think of as old school scouts travelling from school to school living in motels. I can't tell you how archaic it will be looked at in 20 years. What scouts really are is private investigators. Old guys that rub elbows with certain programs, coaches and trainers to get inside information.

The problem with that type of "inside information" is it's not unbiased. Scouts make relationships by playing favorites. They'll bump a guy up on a list to gain favor into a program. In a lot of ways I think the way NFL drafts fail is a lot like how politics fail. People trying to make people happy instead of just doing what is right.

I sometimes wonder if a team never used a scout and just watched film, would they draft worse or better? If you had no biases, no favors to cash in, no differences in access, no more/less inside information, would you scout better or worse? If everything was JUST BASED ON TAPE, how bad could you get it, over the long haul?
 
I want to follow up on my last post.

I've sometimes wondered how I would experiment with scouting and draft analysis. What if I got rid of area scouts? What if I instead concentrated on positional scouts? Guys that were just really good, historically at certain positions? What if I made Kevin Colbert my permanent WR scout? What if I found scouts like that for every position? Wouldn't that be better?

Why not send film of every offensive linemen to the best offensive line scout? Why have regions? Why have a guy in California tell me about offensive linemen when his skill is pass rushers?

What if I turned over the "private investigation" work and "psychological work" to real private investigators and real psychologists? Why do we have scouts doing those things when they are neither trained nor educated in those aspects of human nature?

Wouldn't it be cheaper for an organization to hire private investigators, that know about fact checking and how to look through bullshit, actually dig up dirt on these kids correctly, have PhD psychologists study their interviews/history on that end and have scouts only study film?

Why do we make scouts perform all three duties when they aren't qualified?

This is a company that generates $250 to $300 million a year in revenue. We can't afford this? We can't streamline this process? It kind of makes no sense to me.
 
Not sure Del I may have missed it but did you scout Davis Tull? If not what do you think of him? Im really warming up to him. Think he could be a player in a year after starting out on special teams.
 
del are you keeping track of hits and misses? I know that could be fun

also could you throw a couple film links up, where to go to view them.......


thanks ahead of time
 
Maybe it's me, but I'm bored with this draft class...
 
deljzc said:
I want to follow up on my last post.

I've sometimes wondered how I would experiment with scouting and draft analysis. What if I got rid of area scouts? What if I instead concentrated on positional scouts? Guys that were just really good, historically at certain positions? What if I made Kevin Colbert my permanent WR scout? What if I found scouts like that for every position? Wouldn't that be better?

Why not send film of every offensive linemen to the best offensive line scout? Why have regions? Why have a guy in California tell me about offensive linemen when his skill is pass rushers?

What if I turned over the "private investigation" work and "psychological work" to real private investigators and real psychologists? Why do we have scouts doing those things when they are neither trained nor educated in those aspects of human nature?

Wouldn't it be cheaper for an organization to hire private investigators, that know about fact checking and how to look through bullshit, actually dig up dirt on these kids correctly, have PhD psychologists study their interviews/history on that end and have scouts only study film?

Why do we make scouts perform all three duties when they aren't qualified?

This is a company that generates $250 to $300 million a year in revenue. We can't afford this? We can't streamline this process? It kind of makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...

Good post Del...I agree, a lot of it makes no sense at all.

Positional scouts make sense to me BUT why have them leave the facility at all? Is it necessary? Pretty much ANY past discretions can be looked into IF the player is on our board, AFTER qualifying him as a prospective target. Almost anything he's done will most likely already be known by this time and less effort ($) will be needed to follow up.

I would do 2 things. I would have positional scouts given a set of metrics (based on what we are looking for in a player) and have them JUST watch tape. Tape can be sent by local facilities cheaper than flying guys all over the country. Once they see and like a prospect, he collects his notes and tape and goes over his thoughts with the Scouting Manager (who, ideally is a mensa with an interest in football scouting with a photographic memory- Ernie Adams type) I hate that the Pats have this guy and think it is unfair BUT legal. Can't beat them? Join 'em.

Like a Siskel and Ebert (yin/yang) model, I would have the scout explain WHY he likes the prospect and how he fits. Likewise, the 'yang' element would either concur or demonstrate why he wouldn't fit based on misevaluation, statistical analysis, failure rates, etc.

For instance, I read an article years ago which stated that "no elite Edge rusher has emerged from the Draft with a Short Shuttle over 4.42 since 1999." Interesting disqualifier here. This disqualifier would have eliminated J. Jones from our board based on over 10 years of track record for the position.

Here is an excerpt:

Here's what FO had to say about the short shuttle and the vertical leap in the 2010 Football Outsiders Almanac, with the vertical leap part taken from the FO website:

The vertical leap's importance is based on simple physics. If a 270-pound defensive end has the leg strength to jump 40 inches in the air from a standing position, it is very likely that he will be able to employ that same functional strength to burst quickly and powerfully off the line of scrimmage.

...

SackSEER’s other workout metric is the short shuttle run. The drill measures change-of-direction speed, burst, and hip flexibility, which are understandably important to rushing the passer. DeMarcus Ware had a jaw-dropping short shuttle of 4.07 seconds, Aaron Schobel ran the shuttle in 4.03 seconds, and Kyle Vanden Bosch ran the shuttle in 4.08 seconds. No elite edge rusher has emerged from any round of the NFL Draft since at least 1999 with a short shuttle slower than 4.42 seconds.

The importance of the short shuttle appears to be a well-kept secret. There is no significant correlation between draft position and the short shuttle, which suggests that teams basically ignore it. In contrast, research suggests that teams put a fair amount of weight on 40- yard dash times when drafting edge rushers - more weight than any other workout number. Although there is some relationship between the 40-yard dash and pass rushing success, the 40-yard dash is collinear with both the vertical leap and the short shuttle and does not materially increase the strength of the regression when introduced into the model. Stated more simply, the 40- yard dash is only useful in projecting edge rushers to the extent that it identifies prospects who already have good vertical leaps and short shuttle times.

A great example of the short shuttle’s predictive power relative to the 40-yard dash is Terrell Suggs. Suggs had a phenomenal collegiate sack record, but ran a number of 40-yard dashes at his pro day and only managed to score a poor average of 4.88 seconds. Suggs’ poor 40 time was widely reported (as well as his attendant drop in "draft stock") and it was a mere footnote that Suggs had, on the same day, logged a respectable 4.33-second short shuttle time. Ultimately, the Baltimore Ravens were rewarded handsomely for not overly relying on Suggs’ 40-yard dash.

Scouts can easily 'fall' for a prospect based on, 1. production, 2. big program, 3. size, speed etc. These prospects could be therefore eliminated by an un-biased review of 1. what really matters (tape) 2. Individual competition level, and 3. past history of 'like' prospects working out in the NFL
 
Very interesting concept. It would really revolutionize the scouting process. I really like the idea of positional scouts, let them be experts in one area rather than many.
 
I like the idea of positional scouts most because:

As former positional players they not only know what to look for BUT they have been around position coaches their entire careers. They've seen and heard things that may not apply to them (as players) but applied to other players at their positions who needed to correct certain things in their game. Along with this, they have seen what types of player 'traits' (good and bad) are most correctable with coaching. Examples being aggressiveness vs tight hips. One might be more coachable while the other is less likely.

The Siskel and Ebert thing is merely a commonsensical approach to player evaluation. We all fall for certain players' strengths sometimes BUT like here on this board, we have a group of knowledgeable fans who can 'see the other side' of a player because they aren't infatuated with the positives going in. (i.e.- your friends can always see the faults in your wife/girlfriend where you may not because of that 'one thing' that keeps you distracted)
 
It's funny because a team that does do more positional scouting is Cincinnati.

Now, Mike Brown does it because he's a cheap *******. He actually makes his positional coaches scouts and makes each positional coach write up draft reports on everyone at that position.

But Mike Brown shortchanges other aspects (spends little on area scouts) and obviously doesn't have a full time GM (he's that). I think of all the teams that JUST JUDGE TAPE, Cincinnati does it the most, which is why they have run into issues with off-field and character flaws in the past. Their private investigator and psych profile work is lacking.

I think you see Cincinnati often take the best film on the board and that has led to some nice successes in the past, but it's led to some issues as well.
 
FordFairLane said:
Guys I like more than what I have seen.

David Johnson RB Northern Iowa
I personally have him as my 3rd RB in this draft behind Gordon and Gurley. He has the size, speed, and strength you look for physical. And has nice production, albeit at Northern Iowa. I see him ranked at a 3rd-5th so if he's on the board with our 4th I'd jump at the opportunity.

Nick O'Leary TE FSU
Dude is too short, too slow, with small hands. But you watch him and he is a football player. He does whatever the coaches ask of him and he gives 100% every snap. He puts his all into blocking and in the passing game always seems to be open. I have him behind Williams and Funchess for TE's on my board. Yes I feel Funchess as a TE.

Chris Bonner QB Colorado State-Pueblo
I personally see Winston and Mariota as the sure first round talented QB. Winston is off my board because of character but talent wise I have him as the best QB. Then you have Petty, Hundley, and Grayson as your "second tier" guys. I look at them and look at Bonner and I just don't see him being that far off from them if any. Talent wise from an arm strength is there but I feel poor mechanics makes him lose velocity. Footwork is pretty sloppy. But those are very correctable. He has the size, vision, and pocket awareness you can't teach. I feel he is a solid 4th round pick.
*disclaimer I have VERY limited film to work with. But the very little I saw I liked.

Miles Dieffenbach OG Penn St
I see he's an UDFA rated player. Personally I feel he's a solid 5th-6th round prospect and will be a quality depth guy with starter potential. I think being injured really hurt him and if we are looking to ad a practice squad guy who will make the 53 man in 2016 he'd be a good 6th or 7th round pick. He is not pretty but solid technique, used hands well, needs to get stronger and hold the point of attack better. But feel he has good speed and for a zone scheme he would fit well.

Anthony Harris S Virginia
I think he is a very instinctive football player. He can cover, play the run, he wraps up and tackles. The more I have been watching him the more I like him. I think they have him rated as a 4th-6th and I think he is a solid 2nd round pick.

Max Valles OLB Virginia
This guy has a ton of upside. When he plays up to his potential he dominates but at this point is very hot cold. Still, I feel his potential warrants a 3rd round pick and I see him listed as a 6th rounder. He has length, size, strength, and functional football speed.
Click to expand...

I like Nick O'Leary too - great blocker and an amazing catching radius. He's not very fast; but, neither was Heath - he is, IMO, going to be compared to Dallas Clark. I also think Funchess is a TE; but, he's strictly an pass catching guy. His blocking needs a lot of work...
 
bermudasteel said:
I like Nick O'Leary too - great blocker and an amazing catching radius. He's not very fast; but, neither was Heath - he is, IMO, going to be compared to Dallas Clark. I also think Funchess is a TE; but, he's strictly an pass catching guy. His blocking needs a lot of work...
Click to expand...

I think Dallas Clark is a very good comparison to O'Leary. Doesn't do it flashy but gets the job done. Funchess I would say compares to Jimmy Graham in my opinion. Won't give you more than a body in run blocking and probably is better to be a target in a passing play than to stay back and block.
 
I think it's a bit of a stretch on the Dallas Clark comparison.

Dallas Clark was a superior move athlete. He was a round 1 prospect that had a projected 4.6 to 4.65 40-time. He jumped 37 1/2" and 10'-3". His film had tons of explosion in it. If anything, he was superior to Maxx Williams and would be the #1 TE in this draft if he came out.

That is NOTHING like Nick O'Leary, who is mostly a try hard kid that lacks NFL athleticism for the position and will struggle against elite athletes across from him. I'm not saying he can't find a role in the NFL (plenty of underathletic TE's find roles as #2 or #3 on the depth chart), but O'Leary will never be a #1 TE on a roster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top